And Republican "leaders" are telling us we should focus on fixing the roof.
Wouldn't want to offend their good friends and financiers who are doing the undermining, you know.
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"
Posted on 09/08/2010 11:03:34 AM PDT by julieee
Haley Barbour Tells Pro-Life Republicans to Ditch Social Issues in 2010 Elections
Washington, DC -- Haley Barbour is the latest potential Republican presidential candidate to suggest that social issues like abortion should be taken off the table while making the economy the main focus. Despite the fact that polls show Americans strongly oppose the pro-abortion health care law, Barbour says fiscal issues should take priority.
http://LifeNews.com/nat6683.html
(Excerpt) Read more at LifeNews.com ...
How many social programs and govt jobs has Barbour eliminated?
Reagan was solid pro-life and never backed down form it.
In 1980 he recieved a lot of votes from pro-choice Democrats. Why? Because the economy was in such bad shape that they put aside their views on abortion and voted their economic needs.
We’re in the same boat today. The GOP isn’t going to lose a single vote by being pro-life, but they will pick up tons of votes (including those of pro-choicers) by being pro-economy.
Look to 1980 to see what we need to do.
He’s not pitching pro-choice candidates, he’s pitching an economic message. That’s completely different.
Not quite what he said.
Something I noticed a while ago... not a peep or mention of ‘social’ issues in any of the Tea Party events.
Reagan was solid pro-life and never backed down form it.
In 1980 he recieved a lot of votes from pro-choice Democrats. Why? Because the economy was in such bad shape that they put aside their views on abortion and voted their economic needs.
We’re in the same boat today. The GOP isn’t going to lose a single vote by being pro-life, but they will pick up tons of votes (including those of pro-choicers) by being pro-economy.
Look to 1980 to see what we need to do.
22 posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 1:16:51 PM by Brookhaven
That’s not what he’s saying—’get off the bus’. He’s saying emphasize that part of your message which the voters are already looking for. Jeesh!
My list different. It begins "Without killing babies do such and so".
No Haley. Babies are MORE valuable than winning Elections. Some fights are worth fighting even when one has no apparent chance of winning.
Every "FisCon" I know values VERY HIGHLY the alliance with "Socons" and knows we can not, repeat, can not win without you.
Yes, that means we know we have to either support your core issues or not interfere with your advocacy of them in any way.
We have very dangerous monsters to slay and fighting amongst ourselves risks loss for all of us.
I’m a social conservative, and I don’t think his statement is unreasonable. He never said “ditch,” that was the editors at the source putting that in the headline. IMO the fiscal issues are the correct ones to concentrate on. That doesn’t mean that a candidate should hide or obfuscate his views on social issues. If he’s pro-life, clearly state he’s pro-life. But it doesn’t need to be something that is constantly trumpeted once it’s been stated.
The fiscal issues are the ones that are going to get us the independent voters we need to put conservatives in office. Then, we start working on the independents to show them why our views on the social issues are the right ones.
}:-)4
It’s not called the Stupid Party for nothing.
Is it really all that hard to understand that we need to rebuild the CONSERVATIVE COALITION that Ronald Reagan so successfully appealed to? Reagan was a fiscal conservative AND a social conservative. That infuriated the establishment, but it won him elections against the total opposition of said establishment.
Standing for marriage, family, and innocent life doesn’t require huge federal subsidies. Just the opposite. Stabilize families, and you cut way back on welfare and remove automatic votes for big government Democrats.
Karl Rove indicated in 2006 that he didn’t give a damn about the Evangelical vote, and he got the expected response. Millions of Evangelicals who had turned out for Bush in 2004 stayed home in 2006, and turned congress over to the Dems.
Was that stupid of them to stay home? Sure. But it was even stupider of the Republican Party to betray its base in ways that persuaded them to stay home.
Fiscal and social conservatism are NOT contradictory. They compliment one another, and both are necessary. Without Christian values, you cannot have a free society of citizens willing to discipline themselves. So, sooner or later, you get a police state to discipline them instead.
You’re most likely to get a pro-life majority by having pro-life candidates pitch the economy in this kind of economy-wave year. He’s talking about winning and getting candidates elected—not having candidates turn pro-choice.
He was very specific—he’s talking message to get GOP candidates elected in 2010.
Criste in NJ...nope Pro life. Brown in Mass-nope pro Life. McDonnell in VA...nope Pro life.
The GOP wins elections when it trys standing for things, not trying to be Dem Lite ala McCain 2008.
Criste in NJ...nope Pro life. Brown in Mass-nope pro Life. McDonnell in VA...nope Pro life.
The GOP wins elections when it trys standing for things, not trying to be Dem Lite ala McCain 2008.
Barbour’s not saying the party should be pro-choice. Reagan was very clear about reaching out to those who agree with the majority of your views if not all of them. Reagan never backed down from expressing his pro-life views, but he was also smart about reaching out on the economy when the economy (remember the Carter years?) was the number one issue.
And Republican "leaders" are telling us we should focus on fixing the roof.
Wouldn't want to offend their good friends and financiers who are doing the undermining, you know.
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"
Certainly no one expects the Republican candidates to focus on only 1 issue, or even 2 or 3, but Halley's ranking of priorities leads to the social issues being dropped.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.