Posted on 12/27/2013 7:52:20 AM PST by Rufus2007
I find it intriguing that “smart” people really believe you can have a fat wallet while ignoring moral issues. God will NOT allow it. History has shown that time and time again. A godless society, no matter how wealthy, will not survive.
Well then. Mt. Boortz, the Country will get what the Country deserves. There is historic precedent.
Oh, I don’t argue he doesn’t hawk certain prevailing conservative thoughts often. I listened to him from the time in the early days of his time at WRNG radio, WGST radio, and finally at WSB radio. Knowledge and experience with each of these stints yields a remarkable insight into his progression into wealth.
In my opinion, he is a flagrant opportunist who is petty, misogynistic, scatological, puerile and lecherous all rolled into one stinking bag of bald fat old white man.
The problem with “fiscal conservatives” is that they aren’t really fiscally conservative.
I agree that would be preferable. However, a judge who states honestly he considers Roe to be a bad decision could not be confirmed at this point in time. So he’d have to lie to get onto the court.
“If you are so concerned about ‘taking the Senate’ then why don’t YOU join the social conservatives?”
He’s not any kind of conservative except when it comes to money.
Other than that, he mocks all social issues with this crazy demonic-sounding voice he takes on when he wants to ridicule all things moral, especially anything to do with biblical values.
That is, fairly obviously, because the Left sees these as winning issues for it. We should at least consider the possibility they may be right.
By all means conservatives should back the more social conservative candidate in the GOP primaries. But once nominated that candidate should not take the bait of the Dems and MSM by focusing their campaigns on those issues. The answer out of every GOP candidate’s mouth, no matter the question, should be one of “0bamacare, Benghazi,0bamacare, Corruption, 0bamacare, nuclear Iran, 0bamacare.”
I think that is the wrong take away. Republican like to "keep their powder dry" until the end of the race. This is BS and doesn't work. The Republican has to spend money early on tit for tat. Conservatives will see he/she is fighting and open there check books.
Fixed.
Great comments. The only thing I can admire him for is his work with Angel Flights (I believe that’s the correct name of the organization).
I heard the broadcast yesterday. He was talking to a caller who was trying to convince Neal that Republicans should run on Faith and Social issues. Neal completely disagreed and reccomended to focus more on conservative fiscal, smaller government, Obamacare and constitutional issues. Unfortunately he is 100 percent correct! Until Republicans can convince the degenerate public on gay, abortion, religious, and welfare state issues, they should avoid any conversion at all costs. The liberals always want the Republicans to talk on Social issues because they know they are not well prepared to discuss these issues. It’s always been a trap for them. The Republicans should start practicing their talking points now. My reccomendations is to either avoid these subjects or keep the answers as short as possible.
Examples:
Q: Do you believe in a woman’s right to choose?
A: Yes I believe in woman’s rights but I am also a proponent on the rights of the unborn. I cannot dictate a woman’s decision to do whatever she wants with her body but I also believe that the unborn have the same god given rights as the rest of us.
Q: Do you believe in gay marriage?
A: No. Next question.
Q: Do you believe in separation in church and state?
A: I believe our constitution allows us to freely and openly worship and express our faith. It does not mean that people of faith should have their voices supressed, their symbols hidden from public view and their opinions ridiculed on the mainstream news media.
Rinse and Repeat.
Right On The MONEY
He’s right, in a way.
Social conservatives are great human beings, and, if by some miracle our leaders were social conservatives, our nation would be better off.
But we don’t choose leaders using miracles, we use voting.
And social conservatives, somewhat but not entirely unfairly, have been used by the hard Left to create new leftist voting blocs that did not previously exist.
There are social conservatives here, and elsewhere, that refuse to vote for someone who is only 80% with them. This is, of course, their right and it’s even admirable, in a way.
But to justify that behavior in a system that chooses leaders by voting, they should at least demonstrate the ability to elect one of their own in a statewide or national race, and this they have failed to do.
If the social conservatives I’m describing here want revolution (change the system of picking leaders), I’m OK with that. It’s probably going to come to that anyway.
But when somebody points out that bare naked social conservatism causes electile dysfunction, they shouldn’t complain, because that’s God’s honest truth.
LOL!!..................
Research done after the fact suggests that Ken Cuccinelli would have won the governorship of Virginia if he’d have STRONGLY EMPHASIZED Terry McAuliffe’s radical record on social issues, especially abortion. Mr. Boortz is an idiot.
I got you.
So, he may not have necessarily expressed these views before, but rather he’s an opportunist taking advantage of the success of conservative talk radio.
That is sickening. You would think Sean Hannity would be a little more careful choosing his guest hosts.
I want a conservative victory. I no longer give a rip about the GOP.
I’m not interested in the Republicans taking the Senate if they aren’t conservative!!! Been there done that have no desire to do it again. Will not vote the fat ass blowhard!!!
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.