Posted on 12/27/2013 7:52:20 AM PST by Rufus2007
On Thursday, semi-retired radio talker Neal Boortz predicted the Republican Party will not win control of the U.S. Senate in the 2014 midterm elections, despite all the pitfalls the Democrats and President Barack Obama are facing, particularly with regards to Obamacare. The reason, Boortz said, would be the GOP’s tendency to run on issues related to social conservatism. Boortz explained the importance to the republic for a GOP win next year while guest hosting Sean Hannity’s Thursday radio show:
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Have you stopped cheering for abortions Nealie? Are you sorry you lent your show’s power to killing Teri Schiavo? If not just go away liberaltarian.
He may be right...but...I am a social conservative first and foremost. I care more about the moral state of our country than I do about marginal tax rates. The establishment wing of the Republican Party has left me. If the option is between them and the Democrats, then there is no option left for me. If the Republican Party will not stand for moral values, then let them lose. I hope for a renewal. But I will not sell my soul for a few pieces of silver in the form of electing people who despise my values.
sounds about right in general.
repubs need a way to connect to the hipster generation which is where the demographics are going (like it or otherwise)
I don't think that's supposed to be an either-or choice. One is God's, the other is Caesar's.
And the communists reaction to this was to import muzzies, illegals, put as many people on welfare as possible, and do a good job at making a lot of successful people feel guilty.
There's an article on Drudge about FL overtaking NY. I read the comments - bunch of people complaining about lack of diversity and social programs in FL (although Miami seemed to fare well) - they'd rather pay the taxes and endure the weather to live in the "excitement" of NY. Maybe they'll feel differently if the "diversity" knocks them out and leaves them lying on the sidewalk.
Turned off the radio as soon as I heard that. Boortz ignores history. Reagan won big twice with Social Cons. Mccain & Romney lost by ignoring them.
Has Boortz ever spoken of the Baker penalized for religious freedom? How about taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood??
Libertarians like Boortz are short sighted. Leftists will advance big govt on social issues and Social Conservatives are the ones challenging them not Boortz Libertarians.
They aren't fiscally conservative, because they are immoral.
But they don’t choose leaders using miracles, they use voting Machines.
I quit listening to Kneel “the boor” Bortz back in 2000 when he said George W should concede the hanging chad election to Gore because it would make him admired and he could win next time. The maroon really said that!
Yes, he did, and if being nice to socons, having a liason to listen to them at Justice, and appearing by video at the March for Life were enough in 2016, as they were in 1984, a candidate like that could win again.
No candidate who would nominate a Sandra Day O'Connor or an Anthony Kennedy to the USSC could win overwhelming socon support today. No serving President who did not perform concrete actions to advance social conservatism could be re-elected with their votes today.
The political ambitions of socons have increased, and increased dramatically, since 1980 and 1984.
Let me tell you what I think is going to happen – I don’t think the Republicans are going to take the Senate next year. They’ll keep the House, but they’re not going to get the Senate and I’ll tell you why – because they simply cannot resist the urge, the impulse to get into this social conservatism. The Republicans can’t run on fiscal responsibility. The Republicans, they can’t get out there and say, ‘Look, we are trillions of dollars in debt.’ They can’t stick to that. They can’t say, ‘We need private sector options to ObamaCare that can give people choices in the private marketplace.’ They can’t do that. They can’t stick to fiscal conservatism. They can’t stick to the small government message. The Republicans have this drive, this maniacal, this obsessive drive to get into social conservatism.
This begs several important questions, viz.:
(1) Is Mr. Boortz correct in his assessment that our national survival may be dependent upon our getting our fiscal house in order and throwing off the Democrats' authoritarian tendencies (as regarding which, ObamaCare is certainly emblematic)?
(2) Is social conservatism any less important to the preservation of the republic than these other forms of conservatism are?
(3) Would Republicans' embracing both forms of comservatism likely lead to much less desirable results in the general elevtion next November?
The correct answers to which, I believe, are as follows:
(1) Yes, I believe that Mr. Boortz is correct in his assessment of the enormous importance of our rejecting the authoritarianism of the Democrats and our becoming fiscally responsible.
(2) Although I consider social conservatism to be of some fairly considerable significance, I do not regard it as being equally fundamental to the preservation of the republic, when compared with these other forms of conservatism.
(3) It is probably true that a hardline stance on matters of social conservatism would alienate many independents and libertarians (without whose votes--especially the votes of independents--the prospect of the GOP's prospering on Election Day could be seriously imperiled.
In the end, it strikes me as a rather close call; but I would probably prefer to downplay those issues closely associated with social (or religious) conservatism, in order to enhance the GOP's chances of retaking the Senate and doing especially well in the House.
Hey neal... WHEN WAS THE LAST ELECTION THAT YOU PROGRESSIVE PAJAMA-BOY REPUBLICANS WON ANYTHING???????????????
Well stated my friend... well stated indeed!
He loves sodomy and abortion.
Social conservatives don’t “run” on social issues. It’s part o their DNA, their belief system. It is the media that hammers a candidate about those issues. My recommendation is that every candidate put their “social mission statement/beliefs on their web page and then direct any and ALL questions from the media to that website. End of discussion.
Pendulums swing in two directions and it is swinging back to the right. Articles and polls show that the young have become disillusioned with the marxist way.
Yep, see my post #96.
You can't. Both social and fiscal issues are moral issues. All one has to do is look at the state of our economy and federal budget to understand the damage done by having immoral people in charge.
The RINO’s and moderates are the ones who want to lose in 2014
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.