Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

4 Reasons The GOP Would Be Foolish To Dump Social Issues
Townhall.com ^ | November 24, 2012 | John Hawkins

Posted on 11/24/2012 4:19:03 AM PST by Kaslin

Win, lose or draw, we're always supposedly hitting a tipping point where social issues just no longer work for the Republican Party. At first glance, this would appear to be a rather puzzling sentiment. After all, in 2010, despite the fact that the GOP was just as socially conservative as we were this year, the Republican Party had its best year in half a century. Furthermore, in 2008 and 2012, the GOP lost despite running moderate candidates who were soft on social issues and who barely brought them up at all. If anything, you'd think that seeing two non-social conservatives like McCain and Romney go down in flames should start to make Republicans wonder if we're not pushing social issues enough instead of the reverse, but if people were thinking about it logically in the first place, everyone would realize that it is a terrible idea to dump social issues right off the bat.

1) How would we replace all the votes we lose? It's highly ironic that you hear people claim that social conservatives aren't fiscally conservative, right before they urge us to purge them from the party. After all, if that were true (More on that in a moment) and the GOP abandons social issues, wouldn't those tens of millions of voters migrate over to the Democrats since we'd no longer have anything to offer them? Then, whom would we replace them with? There's already a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party called the Libertarians and they usually collect about 1% of the vote. Telling tens of millions of Christian conservatives that they can drop dead as far you're concerned to try to appeal to a few million wishy-washy independents who change sides based on the last commercial they saw and a million Libertarians who still probably won't vote Republican unless we agree to legalize crack, support open borders and close all of our overseas military bases doesn't seem like such a good deal.

2) Social conservatism is part of the Republican Party’s core: Social conservatism is not some fringe issue that's on the margins of the GOP. To the contrary, as Ronald Reagan used to say, the Republican Party is like a three legged stool comprised of a strong defense, free market policies, and social conservatism. You rip one of those legs off -- as the GOP found out during the Bush years when it started to move towards big government -- and there's a heavy price to be paid. Furthermore, if you think abandoning social conservatism would just mean that Pat Robertson, Rick Santorum, Tony Perkins and Brent Bozell would be hacked off, you should think again. If you're talking about Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Thomas Sowell, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Walter Williams, Laura Ingraham or most of the other big name conservatives in the party, you're talking about people who are pro-life, favor God's definition of marriage and are generally friendly to social conservatism. People get into politics because they want to see their values reflected in the government and if you think are going to shrug their shoulders and do nothing while issues that are near and dear to their heart are tossed into the trash like an old sneaker, you have another think coming.

3) Social conservatism can be a winning issue: The words "can be" are in there because they're certainly not always winning issues. If a candidate comes off as looking down on people who disagree with him or blunders around like Godzilla through Tokyo on a sensitive issue like rape and abortion as Todd Akin did, it can be a killer. Of course, bad messaging can kill you on a lot of issues. That's how Mitt Romney got portrayed as an uncaring, rich jerk even though he's the kind of man who rakes leaves for the elderly and anonymously buys milk for hundreds of needy veterans.

Much has been made of the fact that gay marriage finally won for the first time at the ballot box in Maryland, Maine and Washington. Of course, constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage have passed in 30 states including swing states like Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Michigan and Virginia. Do we really want to turn off voters in those swing states to make ourselves more appealing in a handful of blue states? The GOP did get pummeled on abortion in the 2012 election cycle and most people are blaming it on Todd Akin, but Mitt Romney deserves a lot of the blame, too. Barack Obama made attacking him on social issues a core part of his strategy and Mitt responded with the same tactic George W. Bush used in his second term: letting his opponents hit him in the face as much as they wanted and hoping that their arms got tired. It didn't work for W, it didn't work for Mitt and it won't work if we try it again. If you're up against a man who loves partial birth abortion and voted three times in favor of killing babies born after attempted abortions and you get beaten into the ground on abortion, it isn’t the issue, it’s that you stink as a politician.

4) What about minority outreach? "Keep in mind that just over 78% of Americans are Christians and that number swells to roughly 85% of black and Hispanic voters." When you consider those numbers and the fact that black and Hispanic voters are still on board with Obama after the economic beating they've taken in his first term, it suggests that the GOP has a better opportunity to reach them on social issues than we do on economic issues. If Republican consultants claim we can't sell Christian values to demographic groups we need to improve with that are 85% Christian, then maybe they should get out of politics and go sell shoes.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: abortion; gaymarriage; gop; socialissues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

1 posted on 11/24/2012 4:19:08 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When they dump social issues make sure they also include themselves in that dump


2 posted on 11/24/2012 4:23:24 AM PST by ronnie raygun (bb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The way we win is by drawing our supporters out to vote for us. Campaigns are too late for detailed policy issue debates ~ rather, you use the policies the other side is weak on, or does not wish to discuss, and you beat them about the head and shoulders so their own people lose faith in their candidates and don't show up.

Basically, get your own side whooping it up, and lead the other side to be down in the mouth about it all.

Romney, and before him McCain, and Daddy Bush, Nixon once, Ford, Dewey, Willkie, and some others got the idea you could win over the other side ~

So they left their own peeps stranded on the beach.

Republicans win when they draw out their Socons, Fiscons, Right to Lifers, Traditionalists, TEAPartiers, Defense, and Neocons. They lose when they abandon all the issues those core consituencies wanted acted on.

3 posted on 11/24/2012 4:27:38 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The GOP establishment has been trying to dump social conservatism for some time now. Unfortunately, it won’t matter if the books balance if you live in a sewer- which social liberalism is reducing us to.


4 posted on 11/24/2012 4:32:21 AM PST by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I read recently that there are several million evangelicals who are not even registered to vote. If this is true, no wonder we lost the election. A bit of outreach to them would not come amiss. The Democrats don’t hesitate to launch vigorous voter registration drives, but we tend not to because we assume that Republican voters are so responsible and energized that they’re all registered. Not true!


5 posted on 11/24/2012 4:32:57 AM PST by ottbmare (The OTTB Mare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When Christians believe that taxes are charity, they have traded God for Satan.


6 posted on 11/24/2012 4:34:29 AM PST by WriteOn (Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Telling this to the GOPe is comparable to lecturing Bill Clinton on the tremendous benefits of marital fidelity. He may smile at you and shake his head in agreement, but why would you ever believe he would ever actually do anything about it?

http://www.aprealrepublicans.com/what-is-a-real-republican.html


7 posted on 11/24/2012 4:42:22 AM PST by EternalVigilance (America's creed: Our rights come from God, not men. Governments exist to secure those rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah; Kaslin
Another good point:

When you consider those numbers [85% percentage of Christians among blacks and Hispanics] and the fact that black and Hispanic voters are still on board with Obama after the economic beating they've taken in his first term, it suggests that the GOP has a better opportunity to reach them on social issues than we do on economic issues.

This is very true. Unfortunately, GOP officialdom won't let candidates, even good ones, focus on these isssues with any group, but it could be very persuasive if they did. People at the bottom of the economic heap don't really understand economic policies and the effect they have on their lives, so they're very nervous about any suggestion of changes to those policies, bad as they are. But they all know about their personal and family lives and how they'd like to live them and the environment in which they'd like to live, so this could be an attractive message.

Of course, the GOP made NO effort to reach either blacks or Hispanics. Romney would not let Paul Ryan go to the urban areas (mostly black) and talk to them, even though Ryan had a plan for doing this. And it might have been convincing, if not enough to win this time, at least to get them thinking for next time.

As for Hispanic voters, I read one column by a Hispanic GOP member who said that the Obama workers trolled his neighborhood constantly, had events and appearances...and when he called the GOP to ask about the schedule for GOP activities, he found out there wasn't one. The GOP seems to have limited itself to sending out a round of campaign flyers from national headquarters and did nothing to get out and contact people. And people won't vote for you if they never see you or feel you don't even care enough to tell them about yourself.

Romney's whole strategy depended on writing off large portions of the electorate in the belief that this would convince some mythical white moderate group to vote for him, so he wrote off blacks, Hispanics and white conservatives.

8 posted on 11/24/2012 4:45:59 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The way for a conservative party to win...is to stop nominating liberals as their standard bearer.

Why do we allow the major networks to continue to pick our candidates???

Why????


9 posted on 11/24/2012 4:51:34 AM PST by kjo (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

McCains numbers skyrocketed after announcing Sarah Palin as his running mate. Why? Because she is a real fiscal AND social conservative.

Romney should’ve run away with this election but many stayed home because they really didn’t know what he was on any issue.


10 posted on 11/24/2012 5:07:18 AM PST by bramps (Sarah Palin got more votes in 2008 than Romney did in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjo
Money ~ we have this secret program to go after the very rich ~ mostly for the ease of raising campaign funds from them ~ the rich do, after all, have a lot of money.

When we do that we end up buying into their special view that the world has two classes ~

(1) Themselves ~ and their money, and

(2) The broad masses ~ against whom they need to be protected ~ which leads directly to their belief that the broad masses should be kept happy with bribes by the government.

It's an anti-democratic sort of attitude, but there it is. You heard snippets of it oozing out of the Romney campaign, and from the lips of guys currently wealthy ~ O'Reilly for example, then there was Hannity, some wealthy book writers, investors, and, I'm sure in his private moments with his candidates, the guy with the casinos ~ not that he has such attitudes, but that's what you get from folks brought up by rich Democrats.

I don't advocate doing a French townsmen sort of thing when they'd face an English army at the gates in the Hundred Years war ~ (they'd round up the richest 20 men or so and send them out to the English to be punished), but we really do have to be clear in dealing with the rich that WE DO NOT GIVE UP OUR PRINCIPLES so don't even try it. The campaign will proceed with or without them, but it's gotta' be our campaign ~ not theirs. They want advantageous tax policies, they've gotta' go along to get along, or it's back to the Democrat scullies.

11 posted on 11/24/2012 5:10:23 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: livius

Blacks vote race over policy. They are programmed to for for Democrats to get handouts and that’s what they do. The effort in having black speakers or even black Republicsn candidates produced a 93% Obama voting bloc. What’s the point?

Hispanics are voting for amnesty. Amnesty gives Democrats another non-white 70%+ group of voters. First generation works but after that they are on welfare in same rates as blacks. Generically they are Indian (not Latin-o) and are prone to alcoholism in high rates.

Romney lost even with that because of women voters. Women swung the election his way and the stupid “war on women / legitimate rape” propaganda and gaffes that fed into the propaganda caused it.

Look at the size of the State and social spending since women were given the vote. 65%+ of single women voted for Obama. The “lady parts” etc worked wth them.

Demographics also show socialconservatives getting older and dying off.

As for Republicsns not targeting evangelicals, if Obama wasn’t motivation for them to get out and vote then nothing will be. Romney was blasted as “extreme.” A true social conservative would have had it worse and gotten less votes. i


12 posted on 11/24/2012 5:12:56 AM PST by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ottbmare
Apparently one million evangelicals and at least that many conservatives just decided to ride out the next decade or so since there was no one to represent them. the Democrats dislike bordering on hate both evangelicals and conservatives and the Republicans are embarrassed by them.
I would suggest that at least 2-5 million voters sat out this election on principal. More than just a few due to their prejudice against the Mormon Church. I know we have seen some of them here on Free Republic.
13 posted on 11/24/2012 5:18:16 AM PST by Tupelo (Hunkered down & loading up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I have been charged, not totally unfairly, of being anti-socon on this website. Let me clarify what exactly I believe.

I believe America would be a better place if social conservatives were in charge. I also believe that unless a basic version of the socon belief system replaces secular humanism as our dominant public philosophy, America will be destroyed.

BUT

Since we cannot change idiots voting as the system by which governments come to power here, I want socons to adopt the secular humanist approach to politics, which is to never lose an election by scaring the idiots who vote.

At this last skill, socons are seriously defective.

Abortion could be seriously restricted, RIGHT NOW, but the rape and abortion exception will never be ended by the voters we have now. On this issue, socons are like libertarians who would legalize heroin.

I argued here with the Todd Akin supporters, simply over the obvious fact that as of late August he had become unelectable (and I have yet to hear one say that this was correct). The two basic strains of pro-Akin argument - 1) The Democrats stand by their men and 2) it doesn’t matter if McCaskill gets six more years, it matters what happens at judgement both DECREASE the probability that we will ever come to power (until Jesus comes).

If socons feel called to be Jeremiah, that’s fine. We sure need prophets.

But they should then stop pretending that by participating in elections that they expect to make things better.


14 posted on 11/24/2012 5:22:00 AM PST by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
As for Hispanic voters, I read one column by a Hispanic GOP member who said that the Obama workers trolled his neighborhood constantly, had events and appearances...and when he called the GOP to ask about the schedule for GOP activities, he found out there wasn't one. The GOP seems to have limited itself to sending out a round of campaign flyers from national headquarters and did nothing to get out and contact people. And people won't vote for you if they never see you or feel you don't even care enough to tell them about yourself.

The GOP doesn't represent the working nor poverty class...The GOP represents, big business, big money and it's a toss up with small business...

They are at a loss as to know how to deal with people like me since they don't represent me...I know that...They know that...

The only bond I once had with the GOP is that they appeared (Reagan) to be pro America, pro American...I was blindsided...

I don't know why we see all the talk about how to improve the GOP...I don't believe we'll ever see another Republican President...

What's funny is that after all the bickering and insults and condescension, most of us could have voted 3rd Party and Romney would not have been any further or closer to winning the election...All second place means is that you are the first place loser...

15 posted on 11/24/2012 5:25:01 AM PST by Iscool (You mess with me, you mess with the WHOLE trailerpark...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I tried to post this email but failed. Yur post seems like a good place: Here are views from an Occidental College professor which he pasted in an email from his Huff post. So If he can post it to the world, I should share with FR. I did not get the email but a dem friend in Calif sent it to my my dem wife. From: Peter Dreier Sent: Wed, November 7, 2012 2:18:46 PM Subject: Tuesday's Real Winners and Losers Dear Friends and Colleagues, An occasional message from Peter Dreier In case you haven't had enough post-election analysis, here's my article, "Tuesday's Winners and Losers," from the Huffington Post. I've also pasted the piece below for your convenience. Tuesday’s Real Winners and Losers By Peter Dreier The names at the top of the ballot Tuesday were Obama and Romney, but the real winners and losers are the constituents and causes who did battle on the ground and on the airwaves, and whose lives and livelihoods will be influenced by what happens over the next four years and beyond. The winners include: The Labor Movement: Unions mobilized their members and money in key swing states on behalf of liberal Democrats, including Obama and Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts, Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin, and many others. In California, labor helped bring out more than 40,000 volunteers and scored two major victories in California -- the defeat of the deceptive anti-union corporate power grab, Proposition 32, and the win for progressive tax ballot measure, Proposition 30. Although unions now represent only 12% of American workers, they still remain the most powerful and effective force for liberal issues and Democratic candidates. Union members and their family members turned out in high numbers and voted overwhelmingly for Democrats. Union loyalists also knocked on doors and staffed phone-banks on behalf of candidates and causes that support working families. Thanks to unions and their allies among community groups and faith-based organizations, the lowest-paid workers in Albuquerque, San Jose, and Long Beach will receive pay increases after voters approved ballot proposals Tuesday that will raise the minimum wage for workers in each city. Citywide minimum wage increases were passed in Albuquerque and San Jose, while Long Beach voters approved an ordinance establishing a higher minimum wage for hotel workers in the city. Women:Women voters favored Obama over Romney by a 55% to 43% margin, according to preliminary exit polls. Liberal and progressive women candidates made an incredibly strong showing in the swing Senate and House races, notably Warren in Massachusetts and Baldwin in Wisconsin. Other women Dems -- Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota and Mazie Hirono in Hawaii -- replaced males who decided to retire. All Democratic incumbent female senators up for re-election this year won, including Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Dianne Feinstein of California and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. Currently, 17 women -- a record -- serve in the Senate. Even with two them retiring (Republicans Olympia Snowe of Maine and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas), the overall number will increase when the new Senate takes office in January. Another milestone: In New Hampshire, women now hold every key office: Senators Kelly Ayotte (a Republican) and Jeanne Shaheen (Democrat), newly-elected Gov. Maggie Hassan (a Dem), and Dems Carol Shea-Porter and Ann Kuster, who wrested New Hampshire's two House seats from incumbent Republicans. Obama's victory guarantees that Romney won't have an opportunity to appoint justices to the Supreme Court who would have overturned Roe vs Wade. So, congrats to Emily's List, Planned Parenthood, and (again) the labor movement for helping make this happen. Gays and Lesbians: Voters in Maine, Minnesota, Maryland and Washington approved ballot measures supporting same-sex marriage. Cong. Tammy Baldwin -- who beat former Gov. Tommy Thompson yesterday -- will be the first open lesbian in the Senate. The era in which conservatives can use anti-gay ballot measures and rhetoric as "wedge" issues to mobilize conservative voters is almost over. Voters under 40 are now overwhelmingly in favor of gay rights and many voters over 40 are shifting their views and their voting behavior. Preliminary exit polls reveal that nearly six-in-ten Latino voters (59%) said their state should legally recognize same-sex marriage. All this is a remarkable change in public opinion and voting behavior in less than a decade -- a real tribute to the gay rights movement and to the American people. Latinos: Strong support from Latino votes helped Obama win in key swing states. About 71% of Latinos voted for Obama, roughly the same margin as voted for him four years ago. (This helped compensate for the decline in support for Obama among white men from 41% in 2008 to 36% this year). Obama made a big effort to win the estimated 24 million eligible Hispanic voters. Immigrant rights and Latino political groups worked hard for Obama's election. In Nevada, for example, the Culinary Workers union and Latino groups joined forces to target Latino voters for Obama, who won that key swing state. Even in states that Obama lost, particularly in the South, the growing Latino vote will make a difference in the future. In Texas, for example, Obama won just 40 percent of the total votes but won 57 percent of Latinos, the fastest-growing demographic group in the state. All this makes it likely that comprehensive immigration reform and passage of the federal Dream Act will gain momentum, and that even some Republicans in Congress might feel sufficient pressure to support these initiatives. Enviros: Environmental groups like the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters played a role in forging Democratic victories. Obama's victory and the increase in liberal Dems in the House and Senate means that enviros will have a voice in shaping issues over the next few years. Occupy Wall Street: Let's give Occupy Wall Street a high-five. In September 2011, a handful of activists took over Zuccotti Park in New York, then the movement spread to every city in the country. Although OWS was forced after a few months to disperse physically, its ideas have continued to resonate with the American public. It changed the nation's conversation at dinner tables, workplaces, and newsrooms. It helped frame the political debate in both the Republican and Democratic primaries by focusing public and media attention on the widening disparities of income, wealth, and power. Even in the GOP primaries, Romney's opponents focused on his Bain Capital experience as a job-killing out-sourcing plutocrat. Democrats took advantage of the changing mood to focus attention on corporate power and the billionaires behind the Tea Party and the new right-wing super-PACs. There's no guarantee that this will lead to a new wave of much-needed government regulation of Wall Street and big business, but it sets the table for activists to push that progressive agenda. African Americans and Jews: Ho-hum. Americans elected a Black president for the second time. Let's not forget what an historic milestone that is! African American voters, who comprise 13% of the electorate, showed their loyalty to Obama, giving him 93% of their votes. Jews, who comprise only about 2% of all voters nationwide, were the next most loyal demographic group for Obama. They gave 70% of their votes to the young president. This was a slight decline from four years ago, but Republicans' predictions that Jews would abandon Obama proved to be little more than a fantasy. In key swing states like Ohio and (likely but still-counting) Florida, African Americans and Jews' support for Obama helped lift him over the victory threshold, and also helped Dems and liberals win victories for Congress, State Houses, and city offices around the country. Who were the big losers? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Money can buy TV ads, but it can't you love. The Chamber and its allies in other big business lobby groups poured or directed outrageous sums of money to help Romney and other Republican candidates. For sure, corporate-backed campaign cash helped some GOP candidates prevail, but overall the Big Business lobby took it on the chin on Tuesday. The Tea Party: In the real world of conservative politics, corporations and the rich provide the cash, but groups like the Tea Party and the National Rifle Association provide the ground troops. We can thank the Tea Party (and its major backers like the Koch brothers and former-Congressman-turned-business lobbyist Dick Armey) for pushing the Republican Party so far to the right that its out-of-touch candidates lost races for President and in key swing races for Congress. The Tea Party helped dump veteran GOP Senator Richard Lugar in Indiana, who lost in the GOP primary to a lunatic right-winger named Richard Mourdock, who showed his true feelings when he said in October that pregnancy resulting from rape was "something God intended." On Tuesday, Rep. Joe Donnelly beat Mourdock handily for the Senate seat. The same thing happened in Missouri, where the Tea Party helped Rep. Todd Akin win the GOP nomination for Senate over several less overtly reactionary opponents. We all know what happened then: Akin told the world that some rapes were "legitimate," and incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill, who polls showed was facing a tough uphill battle and was considered the "most endangered" Senate Democrat, beat Akin by a landslide 55% to 39% margin. Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, a Democrat, won a second term by fending off a challenge from Tea Party Republican U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg. Of the 60 members of the Tea Party Caucus, 47 (including Rep Michelle Bachmann) clinched victory and three others are still too close to call. One of those is Florida Rep. Allen West, whowas trailing his Democratic opponent Patrick Murphy by 50.4% to 49.6%, about a 3,000 vote difference, by Wednesday morning. West -- a crazy right-winger -- demanded a recount. Six other Tea Party caucus members were defeated at the polls, plus another seven who retired, lost a primary or sought higher office. In Minnesota, Rep. Michele Bachmann - the founder of the Tea Party caucus in Congress whose delusions of grandeur led her to run for President -- hung onto her suburban seat by a super-slim margin. She beat challenger Jim Graves by just over 3,000 votes out of nearly 350,000 votes cast. It was the nation's most expensive House race. The two candidates raised a total of $22.7 million, but Bachmann outspent Graves by more than 12-to-one to hang on to her seat, revealing how vulnerable she is to defeat. Karl Rove, Charles and David Koch, and Sheldon Adelson: These four guys tried to buy this election but only managed to become symbols of everything that's wrong with American politics. Thanks to the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United ruling, they were able to create super-PACs and so-called "social welfare" organizations (American Crossroads and Americans for Prosperity) that bundled big bucks and directed them to right-wing candidates and causes. Rove (George W. Bush's political guru), the billionaire Koch brothers (libertarian and global-warming deniers who inherited an energy empire from their father, a founder of the John Birth Society), and Adelson (a billionaire casino owner) represent the worst elements of the Republican Party and America's corporate plutocracy. The new campaign finance laws make it possible to hide the names of donors to allegedly independent "issue" groups, so it is impossible to know for sure how much money they spent and which candidates and causes they supported. But we know that Adelson wasted millions of dollars trying to keep Newt Gingrich's candidate alive and then switched his money machine to Romney. The Koch brothers donated big time to many Tea Party candidates, to California's anti-union Proposition 32 (which was defeated), and to the campaign to defeat California's progressive tax measure Proposition 30 (which prevailed). Many candidates with ties to Rove went down to defeat. One was Carl DeMaio, a conservative business-backed San Diego city councilman who lost to liberal Democratic Congressman Bob Filner to become that city's mayor, despite having raised $3.3 million to less than $1 million for Filner, who had the support of the labor movement and other liberal groups. Post-Bush, Rove has tried to carve out a niche for himself as the GOP's go-to political Machiavelli and pundit for Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, but after yesterday's elections, Rove's reputation as a brilliant guru will be seriously damaged. And a final shout-out to Charles Munger Jr., a California libertarian multi-millionaire and Stanford University physicist who inherited his fortune from his dad (Charles Sr., Warren Buffet's business partner) and for a hobby spends it on right-wing causes. The younger Munger spent about $35 million of his own never-earned money to defeat Proposition 30 and enact Proposition 32. Munger's side lost both battles, but he helped enrich lots of political consultants and TV stations who ran the misleading ads he helped pay for, thus stimulating the California economy. Peter Dreier is the E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics, and chair of the Urban & Environmental Policy Department, at Occidental College. His new book, The 100 Greatest Americans of the 20th Century: A Social Justice Hall of Fame, was published in July by Nation Books. The opinions expressed are mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of Occidental College or its employees. Occidental College is not responsible for the content of this communication.
16 posted on 11/24/2012 5:25:01 AM PST by larryjohnson (USAF(Ret))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

McCains numbers skyrocketed after announcing Sarah Palin as his running mate. Why? Because she is a real fiscal AND social conservative.

Romney should’ve run away with this election but many stayed home because they really didn’t know what he was on any issue.


17 posted on 11/24/2012 5:36:36 AM PST by bramps (Sarah Palin got more votes in 2008 than Romney did in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I believe the main failure of the Republican party isn't ideology or even the candidates (with some exceptions - I'm talking to you, Dole and McCain). It's a failure of marketing.

Everyone "knows" that the Republicans are angry, untrustworthy old white men who want to make you shower with your clothes on so that you never see or touch your own naked body, force you to work in retail for the rest of your life for $3 an hour so they can eat champagne and caviar three meals a day, and replace the music on your iPod with multiple copies of "Onward Christian Soldiers".

Everyone "knows" that because the Democrats and their propaganda ministers repeat it every minute of every day. We all know that's not true. In fact Conservatives (not necessarily Republicans, although there is some overlap) want true liberty, not the kind that allows you to sit naked in a restaurant in front of families with small children.

I don't have that answer yet, but somehow we've got to do a better job of marketing the conservative message, and ultimately the Republican party, since we are joined together in a sometimes bad marriage. I do know that their marketing campaign has been constant for the last 40 years. Our marketing is of individual candidates at election time for 3 weeks. No wonder we're not getting our message through and building that brand in the voters' minds.

We need to look at perhaps how the oil or even tobacco companies have marketed their product. They do it in spite of waves of negativity and hate coming from liberals and the media, being immediately attacked and subjected to intense criticism and hateful rhetoric, yet they still succeed.

And admit it - you had a negative gut reaction when I mentioned the oil and tobacco companies, didn't you? That's what we've got to over come.

Again - preliminary thoughts.

18 posted on 11/24/2012 6:03:55 AM PST by Hardastarboard (Bringing children to America without immigration documents is child abuse. Let's end it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

4 reasons they already have

1. Willard Mitt Romney, Liberal
2. Willard Mitt Romney, Liberal
3. Willard Mitt Romney, Liberal
4. Willard Mitt Romney, Liberal


19 posted on 11/24/2012 6:04:46 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher

Actually, in my opinion, the GOP need not worry their empty heads with this. I foresee the “social issues” segment leaving the GOP in herd step. Although the Tea Party’s platform centers around fiscal issues perhaps it may expand its care abouts to include social issues as well. If not, we could see a fourth party emerge. Personally, I would prefer to see the TP expand its agenda and platform to include social issues as I think by splitting the electorate three ways the TP could come in 2nd behind the Dem’s but ahead of the GOP. This would force the GOP to make some hard decisions concerning who to caucas with, etc. at any rate I foresee the 2016 election as the beginning of a new era for the political scene. Anyway, stay tune things are going to get interesting ......


20 posted on 11/24/2012 6:13:56 AM PST by snoringbear (Government is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You and I don’t agree often. But that was an excellent post.


21 posted on 11/24/2012 6:31:31 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: larryjohnson

You want to put paragaph breaks in that and try again?

Nobody’s going to bother trying to read that wall of type.


22 posted on 11/24/2012 6:46:23 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We lost the election because the base stayed home, for the most part. We need to run conservatives for office and stand by our conservative principles in social issues, not abandon them.


23 posted on 11/24/2012 6:46:35 AM PST by FrdmLvr (culture, language, borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Republicans ceded the number one issue this election - Obamacare - back in March. And they are surprised they lost?


24 posted on 11/24/2012 6:46:45 AM PST by JCBreckenridge (They may take our lives... but they'll never take our FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: larryjohnson

Hi there, ya think you could re-post this, this time paragraphs would be nice.


25 posted on 11/24/2012 6:49:54 AM PST by US Navy Vet (Go Packers! Go Rockies! Go Boston Bruins! See, I'm "Diverse"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ottbmare

I am amazed that people keep returning to evangelicals when seeking to place blame for Romney’s loss. Despite being basically shunned and shut out by the Romney campaign, on a percentage basis more evangelicals voted for the guy than any other group, Including Mormons themselves.

So, any post mortem analysis needs to recognize that Romney failed to capture other groups upon which he did focus, yet retained this group even though he made no effort to do so. He still lost Catholics with a Catholic Vice Presidential candidate. Didn’t even carry Wisconsin. Fail.

Try concentrating on outreach failures where there actually was an outreach failure and there might actually be some benefit to be derived.


26 posted on 11/24/2012 6:53:46 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

>>The way we win is by drawing our supporters out to vote for us.>>

I’m in NY State. I very much wanted a Romney sign. There was no listing for a phone for a Repub election office, none for the city. In short, there was no way to get a sign. In past elections, there were Repub offices for volunteers and to hand out signs. Why not this past election?


27 posted on 11/24/2012 7:06:15 AM PST by kitkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“social issues” are in actual fact moral issues

the old saw “you can’t legislate morality” is in actual fact FALSE

you can and you should.

killing, including killing defenseless babies, disabled and elderly is morally wrong
homosexuality is morally wrong
no age of consent for sex is morally wrong
divorce is morally wrong
adultery is morally wrong

the Democrats have reduced everything to equality of dollars and that is a bankrupt perspective


28 posted on 11/24/2012 7:07:14 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When (not if) the GOP dumps socials conservatives, they will lose me and most of their base.

Brand loyality only goes so far.


29 posted on 11/24/2012 7:22:34 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr

I am not sure that the base stayed home. That is a lame excuse to push third parties that have no chance what soever. The fact is 0bama stole the election. They might have skipped the senatorial election. There was no reason that we should not have gotten the majority, if not the super majority back if it hadn’t been for those who skipped it.


30 posted on 11/24/2012 7:47:52 AM PST by Kaslin ( One Big Ass Mistake America (Make that Two))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
killing, including killing defenseless babies, disabled and elderly is morally wrong homosexuality is morally wrong no age of consent for sex is morally wrong divorce is morally wrong adultery is morally wrong

As far as the last two (legislatively), all 50 states legalized divorce at will and decriminalized adultery over 50 years ago.

The reason they did so was because of the incredible popularity of the central organizing principle of the Democratic Party : F*** who you want, when, where, and how you want, and let the taxpayers bear the consequences.

From the two major legislative victories (divorce and adultery), two others, abortion and homosex, follow naturally.

Pedophilia is an accomodation with the inevitable acceptance of homosex+whatever floats your boat, but it isnt necessarily inevitable in the way that abortion and homosex are.

The logical working out of consequence free sex re-elected Barack Obama. It really was his signature issue, and it carried the day.

It's important to recognize, however (diagnosis precedes treatment) that consequence-free heterosexual sex among adults is the keystone, and that it remains enormously popular. The need to kill the babies and to let the homosexuals into the carnival would not exist without the keystone.

Elections won't change any of this.

31 posted on 11/24/2012 8:41:47 AM PST by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
killing, including killing defenseless babies, disabled and elderly is morally wrong homosexuality is morally wrong no age of consent for sex is morally wrong divorce is morally wrong adultery is morally wrong

As far as the last two (legislatively), all 50 states legalized divorce at will and decriminalized adultery over 50 years ago.

The reason they did so was because of the incredible popularity of the central organizing principle of the Democratic Party : F*** who you want, when, where, and how you want, and let the taxpayers bear the consequences.

From the two major legislative victories (divorce and adultery), two others, abortion and homosex, follow naturally.

Pedophilia is an accomodation with the inevitable acceptance of homosex+whatever floats your boat, but it isnt necessarily inevitable in the way that abortion and homosex are.

The logical working out of consequence free sex re-elected Barack Obama. It really was his signature issue, and it carried the day.

It's important to recognize, however (diagnosis precedes treatment) that consequence-free heterosexual sex among adults is the keystone, and that it remains enormously popular. The need to kill the babies and to let the homosexuals into the carnival would not exist without the keystone.

Elections won't change any of this.

32 posted on 11/24/2012 8:42:33 AM PST by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’ve got a better one: Caving to Democrat policies breeds more customers for the social welfare system.


33 posted on 11/24/2012 8:47:37 AM PST by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party: advancing indenture since 1787.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble; sakic; Jim Robinson

Jim Noble....is your best friend on FR “sakic”?

Neither of you belong on Free Republic


34 posted on 11/24/2012 9:11:50 AM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas; Jim Robinson
Jim Noble....is your best friend on FR “sakic”? Neither of you belong on Free Republic

My best friend on Free Republic is Jim Thompson.

I'm not ADVOCATING for free and perverse sex. Can't you READ?

I'm discussing how we got to where we are. The roots of our present crisis go back 50 years, maybe 80 years.

And the roots need to be pulled up - otherwise, we won't get anywhere.

Example: "Traditional" marriage doesn't just mean two men and two women can't pretend to be married and get a few benefits. It ALSO means that it's PERMANENT and that adultery is both a crime and (maybe) grounds for divorce.

There is no "traditional" marriage movement that I'm aware of that would prevent unilateral divorce at will. But as long as the People demand unilateral divorce at will, they will also ACCEPT the pretend marriages among persons of the same sex, because by demanding unilateral divorce at will, THEY HAVE ALREADY OUTLAWED TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE.

Give my post another try. If I've been welcome here for fourteen years, I don't think Mr. Robinson will ban me over this.

35 posted on 11/24/2012 9:29:10 AM PST by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kitkat
New York was simply given up for lost ~ so the money for those signs was diverted to Virginia where Mitt made about 20 visits ~ virtually all of them to small groups of wealthy donors.

His chief backers and staff people seemed to have no understanding of how to win an election when there are a lot of Republicans around.

As we take over the Republican party we need to make a list of those people so we don't end up with any of them in serious positions ~ they can go back and play with Massachusetts or something, but their time on the national stage IS DONE!

36 posted on 11/24/2012 10:39:48 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: livius
Romney's main focus was on the non-existent but otherwise undecided middle with moderate views.

I'm guessing he got all their votes.

Obama sure didn't campaign for them eh!

LMAOROTF

37 posted on 11/24/2012 10:43:01 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
That was an excellent post because I've been working on it for more than 10 years ~ it's getting smoother and smoother, and far closer to the quick as well.

JR ~ this JR ~ lets me do that ~ repeat stuff in different ways over a long period of time. Slowly but surely we are developing a theory for Conservative practice in the world of politics ~ here on FR ~ nowhere else, just here.

Glad you like it though ~ has several ying/yangs in it ~ names the audience ~ ties that to the real world ~ just about everyone can understand it I think. Think Machiavelli

38 posted on 11/24/2012 10:49:24 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Excellent point ~ there was a failure in his primary outreach group ~ the undecided middle grounders ~ they totally failed to show up.


39 posted on 11/24/2012 10:51:16 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

“Romney’s main focus was on the non-existent but otherwise undecided middle with moderate views.”

An excellent post. This election has made clear to me what I understood only vaguely before.

The country is neither “center-right” nor “center-left”. The center, while numerically large, is politically impotent and in the war of ideas insignificant.
On Election Day, they follow the strong horse like the hopeless and weak morons they are.

HW Bush, Dole, Kerry, McCain and now Romney all lost by pleading with this “middle” rather than slapping them hard in the face and saying “follow me”. Obama obviously understood this - my G-d, look what he just sold the nation!

As I’ve said before, Bush was our Clinton (I had a long post on this after he came to our town in July 99). Romney was our Kerry. Sarah Palin is our Obama.


40 posted on 11/24/2012 11:06:14 AM PST by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

“As far as the last two (legislatively), all 50 states legalized divorce at will and decriminalized adultery over 50 years ago.

The reason they did so was because of the incredible popularity of the central organizing principle of the Democratic Party : F*** who you want, when, where, and how you want, and let the taxpayers bear the consequences.

From the two major legislative victories (divorce and adultery), two others, abortion and homosex, follow naturally.”

I completely agree


41 posted on 11/24/2012 11:19:52 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
When it comes to political authority with the ability to win elections nationwide there are only TWO poles ~ the great coalition parties called Democrat and Republican.

Individuals can be whatever they want, but for the most part if they want their votes to count they gotta' go one way or the other.

That's why I am always very careful to differentiate VOTERS from the various broad classes of people we use to discuss politics.

Now, about people who don't vote ~ the last serious discussion of that situation focused on the number of about 90 million adults who are eligible to vote but don't. They are not exactly UNDECIDED ~ they just don't do it. It used to be proportantely larger. They are probably the 35% or thereabouts who never responded to polls of any kind ~ not ever! Check that Pew report discussion at http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/09/30/we-are-the-91-only-9-of-americans-cooperate-with-pollsters/ ~ goes way beyond the original report's parameters, but 53% who can actually be reached by a pollster yet they refuse to deal with the polls.

That's probably a chunk of the 90 million adults who don't vote!

These people may well not have a political bone in their bodies, but we'll never know that because they don't let us know their opinions nor do they vote!

Do they use social media, do they listen to music, do they watch television, do they have babies, do they engage in abortion, do they buy, do they sell, do they drive cars, do they walk down the street, do they live in houses, do they........... whatever ~ we can never know because they won't tell us yet, we do a census on a regular basis that somehow gets them to tell us about how many toilets they have. On the other hand do they know if they have an hispanic surname, or were their people from Cornwall ~ maybe they just don't want to know, nor for you to know what they don't know, or don't care to know. Census may get as far into it as is possible, but seriously, with this dramatic revelation that only 9% of people polled provide any kind of answer, just how accurate and meaningful is our census data?

42 posted on 11/24/2012 11:36:37 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

In short, people vote their own self-interests. Nothing new here.


43 posted on 11/24/2012 11:53:26 AM PST by superloser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws
LBJ had a 97% share of the black vote. Now you're telling us Obama is highly successful in getting black votes because he has a 93% share.

What happened with that 4% loss?

44 posted on 11/24/2012 12:51:52 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
7 million of Obama's original 69 million voters sat this election out.

Were they Evangelicals, or black Mormons perhaps, or maybe people tired of 5 solid years of total unemployment?

When you get a situation like that with massive defections, and you are the opponent, you speak to the question ~ and that was JOBS

I'm still waiting on Romney to start his campaign where he will tell us what he's going to do to get folks employed ~ FAST!

45 posted on 11/24/2012 12:56:01 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You got it! We told them (GOP e) not to, but they did it anyway. It would be funnier if we weren’t stuck with the results, but I’m trying to stay positive and think we’ll have another chance in 4 years...


46 posted on 11/24/2012 2:06:30 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Would have been nice to see this article about 16 years ago, when the neocons at Weekly Standard started bashing Southern conservatives and social conservatives generally as apelike mouth-breathers in pickup trucks and "overhauls". Beer can in hand, dog on seat, Battle Flag sticker on back "winnder" -- an army of Floyd R. Turbo clones with Jerry Reed accents.

Now, the following quote is an example of the kind of garbage -- I call it "Christopher Caldwell's crap" -- that the RiNO elitists have been dining on for 20 years. It's an instance of Caldwell's being quoted and reverenced in a liberal blog article in 2005, seven years after his original article appeared, the key passage being this one:

The Republican Party is increasingly a party of the South and the mountains. The southernness of its congressional leaders .... only heightens the identification. There is a big problem with having a southern, as opposed to a midwestern or a California, base. Southern interests diverge from those of the rest of the country, and the southern presence in the Republican Party has passed a "tipping point," at which it began to alienate voters from other regions.

Source: Digby in Hullabaloo, "Southern Fried", Dec. 2005.

The point of interest here is that Caldwell is a Neoconservative, and neocons are demonstrably, reliably, and quotably visceral detesters of everything Southern, country, Middle Western, outdoorsy, or self-reliant. They despise that stuff -- their idea of relevant is debating, for 55 minutes, the best way, as some Seinfeldian wag once said about New Yorkers, to get from Columbus Circle to Battery Park.

Therefore it would be just as valid to question Caldwell's cultural and policy preferences, as it is for him to derogate Southerners as universal moral and social pariahs. But of course, he's writing the article, and the Atlantic Monthly edited and published it in 1998. (I have a dead-tree copy of the original.)

Notice, too, that Caldwell, like many antisemites, makes it "all about X", that is, none of the many things Democrats did to win the White House in 1992 and 1996 is here discussed -- rather, it was all because of Southerners being let run around loose by the grownups, in Caldwell's structuring of the issue, that the GOP has lost its core, lost many adherents, lost seats and statehouses, lost, lost, lost. Oh, woe betide our country, that has so many Southerners in it!

He does make a reference to loss of focus on shrinking government, and the moral loss the GOP suffered by exposing itself as a party of big government, big budgets, and bigtime crony capitalism after all -- but how that's Bubba's fault, he does not elucidate, nor does he clarify how, if these sins of the "Pigs at the Trough" -- who were the Bush/Yacht Club wing of the GOP -- were so damaging morally to the GOP's message, how it is then that the Party is too Southern and too socially conservative, rather than too Wall Street, too uptown, too banker-ridden, too Porcellian-at-the-trough.

47 posted on 11/24/2012 2:09:38 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul; stevie_d_64; davetex; TexConfederate1861; PeaRidge; x; Colonel Kangaroo; ...

I thought some of you might like this thread.


48 posted on 11/24/2012 2:47:03 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
....maybe [Republican consultants] should get out of politics and go sell shoes.

That's what Prescott Bush did, before he decided he could do better in life by going to Yale to become a facilitator and gofer to legacies and lettermen. It worked -- they made him a U.S. senator.

49 posted on 11/24/2012 2:52:40 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

A Catholic theologian said many years ago that “all heresies begin below the belt.” People try to reshape religious doctrine and social life to justify their thrills and chills.

When you have a democracy where the voters are shaped entirely by an amoral celebrity culture, this presents a major challenge, particularly at a time when the normal moral standard-bearers have fled (although I think the Catholic Church is reviving from her 1968 swoon and the Evangelicals are having a shaking-out).

But note that I used the word “amoral.” This doesn’t mean they are “immoral,” in the sense that they are conflicting with a moral standard, but that they are non-moral. In other words, their decisions are not governed by any standard of personal morality and they don’t even think this is important. They were never taught any moral standard, in most cases, and even for the younger ones, it certainly formed less and less of their natural environment as they grew up.

That said, I think the GOP or conservative side or whatever you want to call it still must cling to the idea of morality, even sexual morality. There will be a turn around because there always is...once the age of consent is lowered to 7 and people’s first-graders are getting molested by the public school teacher and the teacher can’t even be charged. And this will happen, because people are being debased by pornography and even women suddenly seem to be turning up in child porn arrests.

I seriously think one of the appealing things about the GOP is that there is at least the ideal of holding up standards of how human beings treat each other, and if we abandon this, it honestly doesn’t matter which side wins.

All “morality” will be dictated by the government, and the government’s standard is only to facilitate what will enable the cogs in the wheel to keep on producing for the people in the government (in a socialist country, which this is becoming, that would be the governing party, which henceforward will be only the Democrats).

Economics is all dependent on your vision of life and of the individual and individual moral responsibility.


50 posted on 11/24/2012 3:10:52 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson