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

Skip to comments.

Social Conservatives Want More of Their Own to Speak at the G.O.P. Convention
NY Times ^ | July 12, 2004 | DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Posted on 07/12/2004 12:05:47 AM PDT by neverdem

THE REPUBLICANS

Some prominent conservatives say they are upset at the apparent exclusion of the champions of their favorite issues from the limelight of the Republican convention in favor of more moderate members of the party.

Conservatives said they were surprised to see former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Senator John McCain of Arizona - all moderate Republicans who oppose the proposed constitutional amendment blocking same-sex marriage - given high-profile roles at the convention, with few conservative Republicans on the list.

"I hate to say it, but the conservatives, for the most part, are not excited about re-electing the president," warned Paul Weyrich, the longtime Christian conservative organizer, in an e-mail newsletter on Friday. "If the president is embarrassed to be seen with conservatives at the convention, maybe conservatives will be embarrassed to be seen with the president on Election Day."

Pleasing both moderates and conservatives at the convention has been a challenge for the Republican Party in recent elections. In 1992, after a bruising primary battle over social conservative issues, the party gave the outspoken traditionalists like Patrick J. Buchanan a major share of convention airtime. Many strategists later argued that their battle cries of a culture war over abortion, gay rights and feminism contributed to the defeat of the first President George Bush by driving away moderate voters.

Seizing on that lesson, George W. Bush was nominated in 2000 at a strikingly different convention dominated by images of inclusion and his calls for "compassionate conservatism," with little discussion of abortion or other priorities of social conservatives.

Prime airtime is particularly precious this year because the networks have said that they plan to limit their hours of coverage of the conventions. And at the Republican event in New York City - Aug. 30 to Sept. 2 - the Bush campaign appears to be following the template used in 2000.

The speakers' roster makes room for many moderate Republicans, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Gov. George E. Pataki of New York, as well as Education Secretary Rod Paige, Laura Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne Cheney. But conservatives have noted with alarm that so far, aside from Mr. Bush, the only like-minded social conservative with a featured speaking role is Senator Zell Miller, a Democrat from Georgia.

"When the only Reagan Republican to enjoy a prominent supporting role at the party's convention is a Democrat, the G.O.P. has a serious identity problem," Kate O'Beirne, the Washington editor of the conservative National Review, wrote in a column posted on its Web site last Wednesday. The list, she wrote, "is not the mark of a self-confident party establishment," adding, "if the lineup is intended to make an overwhelmingly conservative party attractive to swing voters, it does so by pretending to be something it's not."

Yesterday, Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the Bush campaign, said: "The Republican Party is a national party, and the convention lineup will reflect the broad national appeal of the Republican Party. When the speaker lineup is complete, it will reflect that."

This year, Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser, has emphasized the importance of turning out conservative churchgoers whose votes fell four million short of his projections in 2000. Bush campaign pollsters have concluded that frequent churchgoers are likely to vote disproportionately Republican and made them a major target of voter registration efforts.

And as the Democratic campaign of Senator John Kerry has tried to reclaim "values" rhetoric over the last week, Mr. Bush has turned up his own talk of opposition to abortion and especially same-sex marriage. He devoted his radio address on Saturday to supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment, which is scheduled for a vote in the Senate this week.

"We had been assured months ago that as this vote happened the president would take an active role - both publicly and on Capitol Hill," said Gary L. Bauer, a social conservative candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2000 and the founder of the organization American Values. "So they are keeping their word and my hat goes off to them for that."

But Mr. Bauer added, "If they are going to win the values debate - and it looks like there is going to be one - it is important for the president's words to be reinforced by other major personalities at the convention." He said social conservatives were continuing to push for greater representation at the convention, as well as for Mr. Bush to take up abortion, same-sex marriage and similar issues prominently in his own address at the convention.

Some Christian conservatives were already feeling sensitive to perceived slights from the Bush campaign, in part because of how hard it is pushing for their help in turning out voters. Some had already reacted badly to reports of the Bush campaign's efforts to recruit churchgoers to help turn out their fellow worshipers, including by sending the campaign their church registries and by speaking about the election to church groups.

Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the conservative Southern Baptist Convention, issued a statement saying, "I'm appalled that the Bush-Cheney campaign would intrude on a local congregation in this way."

He added, "I am fearful that it may provoke a backlash in which pastors will tell their churches that because of this intrusion the church is not going to do any voter registration or voter education."

The Rev. Donald E. Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association, said that many conservative Christians felt the Bush campaign had made mistakes, including its outreach to churches and the omission of more social conservatives from the convention so far. "This campaign has done some dumb things," he said. "They have alienated people who they desperately need, big time."

Mr. Schmidt, the spokesman for the Bush campaign, said that polls show that support for Mr. Bush among the Republican base is at record levels, comparable to support for President Ronald Reagan.

On Friday, as the Senate began debating the amendment on same-sex marriage, the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, placed an advertisement in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call listing Governor Schwarzenegger, Governor Pataki, Senator McCain and Mr. Giuliani. "Want to get a prime time spot at the Republican National Convention?" the advertisement asked. "Oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment."

Hoping to turn the same advertisement into a message to the convention planners, Tony Perkins, president of the Christian conservative Family Research Council, sent flowers to Cheryl Jacques, the executive director of the Human Rights Campaign, with a note that said, "Dear Cheryl, per your ad in Roll Call - thank you."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: New York
KEYWORDS: conservatives; convention; republicanconvention; republicans; rncconvention
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-145 next last

1 posted on 07/12/2004 12:05:48 AM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"If the president is embarrassed to be seen with conservatives at the convention, maybe conservatives will be embarrassed to be seen with the president on Election Day."

RINO's have won, lets go home


2 posted on 07/12/2004 12:09:59 AM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Nah, give the RINOs the TV time. Conservatives control the platform, that's the more important thing.


3 posted on 07/12/2004 12:11:49 AM PDT by thoughtomator (End the imperialist moo slime colonization of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Let's just let John F*ckin' win so the RINOs can get the President they really want.


4 posted on 07/12/2004 12:14:46 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator; goldstategop

Hey, I'm just kidding


5 posted on 07/12/2004 12:15:43 AM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The Left is putting out a bunch of this wedge stuff. Try to ignore it.


6 posted on 07/12/2004 12:19:45 AM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It sounds as if the administration has a tin ear when it comes to listening to social consevratives and there can really be only one reason for that. They don't really believe in what we stand for.

There was certainly no problem with Reagan reaching social conservatives. And Reagan didn't have slam dunk issues like gay marriage to fall back on.


7 posted on 07/12/2004 12:21:46 AM PDT by Tall_Texan (Ronald Reagan - Greatest President of the 20th Century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

is it any suprise the republican leadership wants to downplay the role of social conservatives on their biggest night? gay marraige, abortion and family values are important to a lot of americans, but none of these issues have fired up middle-of-the-road voters in 2004. it makes sense to dwell on less devisive topics like security and the economy.


8 posted on 07/12/2004 12:25:57 AM PDT by unaffliliated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Conservative Republicans don't have the guts to punish Bush for being a RINO.

So he'll assume he can get away with anything. And he will.

But not with my support.

9 posted on 07/12/2004 12:26:59 AM PDT by Hank Rearden (Refuse to allow anyone who could only get a government job tell you how to run your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Consort

Yup this is a quadrennial exercise around convention time. Their (the media) success in falsly painting the Pubbies as extreamists with the Pat Buchannan speach has only encouraged them.

Most often they use abortion.

Years ago it was race.


10 posted on 07/12/2004 12:33:22 AM PDT by nathanbedford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: unaffliliated
Yes, it is a surprise that the leadership of the republicans wants to move away from their base.

Welcome to freerepublic.

11 posted on 07/12/2004 12:33:27 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Social Conservatives Want More of Their Own to Speak at the G.O.P. Convention --

I am waiting for Zell Miller's speech. That speech may be the highlight of the Convention.

12 posted on 07/12/2004 12:36:09 AM PDT by beyond the sea (Maria Sharapova, please endorse G.W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

Zell Miller will be good... I guess I can crack a smile when Arnie speaks too.


13 posted on 07/12/2004 12:46:43 AM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

I am waiting for Zell Miller's speech. That speech may be the highlight of the Convention.

I'm sure it will be. Ironically, he's the only Conservative in the bunch, and he's a Democrat. Sad.


14 posted on 07/12/2004 12:50:44 AM PDT by ETERNAL WARMING (He is faithful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ETERNAL WARMING

So how come John F*ckin' can't get a RINO as his keynote speaker?


15 posted on 07/12/2004 12:52:43 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
Years ago it was race.

Psst, it still is race, e.g. racial quotas, phony BS about more churches will burn, exploiting James Byrd's murder to yap about not passing hate crimes laws, equating conservatives to Nazis, voter disenfranchisement in Florida 2000, etc. This stuff is continuing.

16 posted on 07/12/2004 12:52:53 AM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden

Conservative Republicans don't have the guts to punish Bush for being a RINO.

Why should they punish him when so many agree with him? Look how they supported Swartzenegger over McClintock. A bloody lefty if ever there was one, I don't care what he calls himself. They accuse the Democrats of being led by Hollywood, but they're just as bad. They pick the pretty boy every time. Sad. Republicans aren't Republicans anymore. They're now to the Left of old time Democrats.


17 posted on 07/12/2004 12:54:15 AM PDT by ETERNAL WARMING (He is faithful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Hugh Hewitt says the base of our party is the party of faith; for the Democrats, the base is the party of race.


18 posted on 07/12/2004 12:55:23 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ETERNAL WARMING

I'll fill you in on a secret: we're old time Democrats. The Democrats have moved so far Left we've had to become Republicans.


19 posted on 07/12/2004 12:56:39 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

You are absolutely right. I was just limiting my observations to wedge articles directed toward the convention and the platform.


20 posted on 07/12/2004 12:57:07 AM PDT by nathanbedford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hank Rearden
But not with my support

Who are you trying to kid, he never had it.

21 posted on 07/12/2004 12:59:50 AM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms of a wealth creating society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

thanks exnavy!


22 posted on 07/12/2004 1:04:54 AM PDT by unaffliliated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
So how come John F*ckin' can't get a RINO as his keynote speaker?

They got the Gipper's son, Ronald P. Reagan, to talk about stem cell research, although I think he may be registered on the dark side. A better analogy would be a DINO, but who could that be, Zel Miller, at both conventions?

23 posted on 07/12/2004 1:05:20 AM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

RINO's have won, lets go home

The New York Times sure knows how stupid the right is. They know the right thinks thatt the rights 35 percent of the voters can cast 51 percent of the votes.

So when th Bush campaign tries to get from 35 percent of the vote to 51 by appealing to the center, the New York times knows the right is stupid and used that knowledge to good advantage of the left. The Times knows they can drive the stupid right away from the polls.

It is a technique the left has used to advantage for decades.

I am convinced that the leftist rank an file are a lot brighter than the right. The left knew that the Clinton's let on to steal the right's right to get votes in 92 and 96. The left is bright. They knew Clinton was just doing what it took to get and keep the left in power. The right ain't that smart as your post proves.

You may not think you don't fall for leftist media attempts to fool the stupid right wing voters into taking a walk.... But the NEW YORK TIMES knows better.


24 posted on 07/12/2004 1:06:26 AM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Common Tator
No one is taking advice from the NY Times. I disbelieve everything they print.

and I WAS kidding about going home.

25 posted on 07/12/2004 1:09:38 AM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The heck with the elections, let's appoint a King! Applications now being accepted!
26 posted on 07/12/2004 1:10:14 AM PDT by Indy Pendance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

in regards to "moving away from its base", we all know democrats and republicans do things for the sake of political expediency in election years. i think this is just a way to make sure undecided and moderate voters don't get turned off by concentration on issues that don't grab them. this isn't a matter of platform, they are still behind their base who will always vote for them, but a matter of marketing.


27 posted on 07/12/2004 1:14:34 AM PDT by unaffliliated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; Common Tator
and I WAS kidding about going home

Then don't put your "kidding" in big bold letters and leave a (/sarcasm) tag, next time.

JMO Geron, you were serious about your reply #2, but backtracked when you realized you were being played like a cheap violin by the NYT.

28 posted on 07/12/2004 1:17:44 AM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms of a wealth creating society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan
Reagan stiff armed the social conservatives. He was good at paying lip service to them but that was it.

Religious social conservatives scare the hell out of many many moderate Republicans because if they become the predominant voice in the party, the Republicans are doomed to lose nationally.

29 posted on 07/12/2004 1:21:00 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dane

I was discussing this stuff in another thread. I ain't happy with the GOP, but we don't have anyone else than Bush right now.


30 posted on 07/12/2004 1:23:44 AM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

Oh come on...it is a well accepted principle that during the primaries you solidify your base and during the general election you move back to the middle...That's how you get elected fer crying our loud. Have we so quickly forgotten what it was like with Clinton in office? Have we forgotten so quickly that we are at WAR? Paul Weyrich has more than a few problems of his own so lets not even go there...


31 posted on 07/12/2004 1:25:42 AM PDT by jnarcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: zarf
Religious social conservatives scare the hell out of many many moderate Republicans because if they become the predominant voice in the party, the Republicans are doomed to lose nationally.

I think "religious social conservatives" have been the predominant voice in the GOP, and have made up the party's base, for quite some time. It's one of the better reasons to vote Republican. The day the "moderate" liberal Republicans have a stronger voice is the day the party will be worth writing off, at least temporarily.

32 posted on 07/12/2004 1:30:53 AM PDT by k2blader (It is neither compassionate nor conservative to support the expansion of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: unaffliliated
First, you must understand that a wide majority of American households are "social conservative". Therefore, to pander to "moderate" voters is folly.

Secondly, the Democrat party is extremely left wing, and shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence with republicans. If republicans continue the leftward motion of the party, they will lose their base of conservative followers.

Leftist ideas and liberal "I'm a constant victom" mentality is ruining this fine country. What made U.S. great is old fashioned hard work, and basic Christian values, and that is all we need to sustain us.

33 posted on 07/12/2004 1:32:17 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
The day the "moderate" liberal Republicans have a stronger voice is the day the party will be worth writing off, at least temporarily

Well let's take a look at the recent signing by Pres. Bush of the partial borth abortion ban.

You can bet that Gore or Kerry would not have signed one.

34 posted on 07/12/2004 1:35:25 AM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms of a wealth creating society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

See reply #34.


35 posted on 07/12/2004 1:36:10 AM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms of a wealth creating society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The choice is clear. Big tent or no tent.


36 posted on 07/12/2004 1:36:31 AM PDT by tkathy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unaffliliated; jnarcus

see post #32 as well.


37 posted on 07/12/2004 1:37:13 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Dane

You are correct.


38 posted on 07/12/2004 1:38:27 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
as well as Education Secretary Rod Paige,

A person who has harsh words for teacher unions isn't exactly a mushy middle moderate to me.

39 posted on 07/12/2004 1:39:04 AM PDT by Dane (Trial lawyers are the tapeworms of a wealth creating society.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jnarcus

It is high time that politico's in D.C. stopped shifting from conservative, to moderate, to liberal and back. We need rock solid, conservative leaders who do not waiver, or sell out on principle. In short we need "Statesman" types or we are going to lose this war we are in.


40 posted on 07/12/2004 1:45:41 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Consort
EXACTLY!

People, do you not get it? All this 'neocon', 'RINO', and other wedge rhetoric comes from the left. They are a poison, and they want us divided. They certainly do not want you to vote for George W Bush.

If you love America, then you will not let a couple disagreements sabotage the party and give the election to the hypocritical, lying disgrace that is John Kerry.

The way to make America more conservative is not by punishing the president, or even controlling the presidency with a staunch conservative - it is by maintaining a Republican control of that branch and working to elect more conservatives within Congress. A president must have mainstream appeal to win independants, they can not be seen as a strict partisan, we all know that. But the others can be whatever you want, and THAT is where you fight the culture war for conservatism.

Also consider that if W wins this time around, he will not have to worry about re-election, which means he can move more toward his base. In the back of every liberal's primitive mind, that's what they fear.

If that's not good enough, if you can't see the point and you are going to take your ball and go home anyway by not voting Bush (which is exactly what the rats want) then fine, don't let the door hit you. I will ask you to vote for GWB as a fellow American, but I'm not going to beg you. If you choose to vote for someone other than the President (or not vote at all) don't you dare complain during the Kerry regime. Not once. Don't you dare cry when the Supreme Court recognizes the 'right' to pedophilia. I don't want to hear you upset about a 'national moratorium' on the death penalty. Bet you can't wait to pay reparations for slavery (only if Kerry would pander to the Black Caucus, of course)! Get ready for a welfare raise (oh, I'm sorry, 'cost of living adjustment'). At least you'll get to keep your guns though, right? Kerry has stated he supports gun ownership rights, and Kerry is nothing if not consistent. Hey, you might have to rent them out to whatever will be left of our military with President Kerry. If you're upset at your taxes being raised, and again sent off to pay for Planned Parenthood abortions it is YOUR FAULT. You don't vote for W, then you did it to all of us. You at that point fail to be a patriot, you become an accomplice to what Kerry will do to my family and your family. That happens, and you let us down.

It doesn't have to be that way friends, but only if you show the wisdom to rally behind the man who brought us back from eight years of Clinton ineptness and corruption, President George Walker Bush.
41 posted on 07/12/2004 1:46:27 AM PDT by Dragonspirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

I don't think that the Republican leadership is "pandering" to moderates, I think it is paying them lip-service. Once Bush is reelected they can work on satisfying their base.

You are right though, they do have risk alienating the base. This just means they are walking the election year tight-rope right now. Since there are only two real meaningful parties any split is disasterous and the Republicans know this. They won't move too far to the left, because they don't want another Ross Perot spoiling things. Just as the Dems won't move too far to the right and risk another Nader taking votes.

All I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't worry that the Republican party is moving too far to the left. After election day there won't be any more need to appease moderates for another four years.


42 posted on 07/12/2004 1:58:31 AM PDT by unaffliliated
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

AS much as we would all like to think that we conservatives are in the majority, it ain't that simple. On particular issues some folks that you would think should be conservative aren't. For example, the "social conservatives" would probably cover a large number of practising Catholics. How many of them are going to vote for Bush if the Rats are busy punding away on the "scary right wing"? John Kerry is the classic "statesman" and frankly so was Clinton, they all want to get along and find consensus. There is something known as cutting your nose off to spite your face. Statesmen don't win wars...in fact they usually get us into them at too late a date ( think Chamberlin)


43 posted on 07/12/2004 2:06:47 AM PDT by jnarcus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: zarf; unaffliliated; Dane; Tall_Texan

Zarf, you made an excellent point and now I want to point out something that is going to get those who read this and identify themselves as social conservative very angry.

You see, social conservatives are not really "conservatives". Those who readily identify themselves as politically active SC's are almost always just religious fanatics. And, religious fanatics are, based on their (often admirable and passionate beliefes) striving to achieve Utopia. At the end of the day, they want basically what the Taliban wants, which is complete and literal observance to whatever scripture they purport. And, this means everyone and if someone refuses they will be forced to do so. Of course, if everyone really did listen to what Jesus taught we would live in a Utopia. If everyone acted the way Karl Marx thought it would also be great. (Please do not think I am equating Marx with Jesus, rather showing the parallel that sexpectations that all people will act properly are utter nonsense) A real conservative will immediately let you know that this is only the wishful thinking. That does not mean we can't make things better, just not perfect.

Real conservatives begin and end their thought processes by reminding themselves that Utopia (by its very definition) is not to be achieved. RATS want to social engineer everyone there and so-called Social Conservatives want to pray and, yes, legislate everyone there.

This is not to say that SC's often stand on the right side of the debate - to the contrary. Just that the manner in which they self-righteously do so is not only off-putting to more moderate folks, but downright scary in a Sharia Law kind of way.

For most Americans, including true conservatives, talking about denying people rights rarely strikes a positive cord. The abortion issue aside, SC's often (and perhaps for good reason) give your average moderate the feeling that they have no intention of stopping with their current demands and that a first they came for the . . . is always just the tip of a much larger SC iceberg agenda.


44 posted on 07/12/2004 3:28:05 AM PDT by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Tax Energy not Labour.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

HERE WE GO AGAIN. DIDN'T WE LEARN OUR LESSON IN '92 WHEN MANY OF US ABANDONED BUSH THE FIRST FOR ROSS PEROT? REMEMBER? THAT GAVE US 8 YEARS OF BILL CLINTON.

I'M AN EXTREME SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE BUT YOU GUYS NEED TO PEACE OUT.


45 posted on 07/12/2004 3:32:32 AM PDT by no dems ("Gay marriage" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Note the source...NYTimes...divide and conquer.

What conservative, in their right mind, would vote for Kerry, by abstaining to vote for Bush?

If Bush loses because of division in the party, then it seems maybe the Democrats deserve to win.

I don't believe in "cut off my nose to spite my face" politics.


46 posted on 07/12/2004 3:33:54 AM PDT by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

Why don't you guys keep it up and divide the GOP as much as you can then on election night maybe Michael Moore, George Soros, Whoppi Goldberg, John Mellancamp or Chevy Chase will invite you to one of their victory parties.


47 posted on 07/12/2004 3:34:45 AM PDT by no dems ("Gay marriage" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

"Let's just let John F*ckin' win so the RINOs can get the President they really want."

If you wouldn't make statements like that people wouldn't know just how ignorant you really are.


48 posted on 07/12/2004 3:38:38 AM PDT by no dems ("Gay marriage" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: unaffliliated
I don't think that the Republican leadership is "pandering" to moderates, I think it is paying them lip-service.

I believe GWB sees himself as president of ALL Americans, not just one party or one interest group. Like all politicians I suppose he has to take care of his big donors first, and of course he wants his base supporters to vote for him, but he also has to govern. And that means governing all America. Not just the red states but the blue states too.

49 posted on 07/12/2004 4:00:50 AM PDT by Huck (I love the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Consort

Yep, the left is going to put out as much of this crap as they can:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040712/ap_on_el_pr/bush_conservatives&printer=1


50 posted on 07/12/2004 4:03:26 AM PDT by Huck (I love the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-145 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