Will Widening Fissures Doom the GOP’s Chances this November?
by Rich MunyApril 15th – Tax Day – inspired protests across the nation. Demonstrators rallied for smaller government, lower taxes, and liberty. They want government off their backs. They demanded it, in fact, and they are demanding that the Republican Party delivers it. The majority of the conservative movement is uniting around these central tenets of conservatism, which would typically bode well for the upcoming primaries and general elections. A handful of social conservative leaders, however, are reacting to this development with fear, and they are pushing back in ways that could cost conservatives dearly on Election Day.

While most social conservatives wisely believe the best way to protect our nation’s values is to keep the corrupting influence of government as far from our values as possible, a few social conservative leaders want to use big government to promote and enforce social values policies. These leaders advocate for expansion of government to achieve their aims, and they are not happy with the ascendancy of limited government conservatism. “There’s a libertarian streak in the tea party movement that concerns me as a cultural conservative,” Bryan Fischer, director of Issue Analysis for Government and Public Policy at the American Family Association, recently told Politico. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins expressed similar concerns to Politico as well.
In this political atmosphere, groups like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family (Focus declined a request for comment) now find themselves more likely to be laying off staff than significantly influencing the direction of the Republican Party. In their weakened state, these groups are now threatening to take their ball and go home. As was reported in this space a couple of weeks ago, Tony Perkins has lashed out against conservatives. Perkins called former House Majority Leader and current FreedomWorks director Dick Armey and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist “liars” for implying that conservatives want less big government in the social arena. Perkins has further stated that he is advising Family Research Council members to stop donating to the Republican National Committee.
The latest salvo was reported in the Washington Post – on Tax Day, no less. Per the article, “conservative groups” [(i.e., Focus on the Family (link)] are demanding that the GOP fight in Congress to ban online poker. They are even demanding that this effort be undertaken as an official party position. This effort includes even scorched-earth policies, such as distributing a memo within Congress reminding everyone of the Jack Abramoff scandal…the very scandal that started the GOP’s fall from power!
Going back to the founding of modern conservatism in the 1950s and Senator Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential run, true conservatives have always believed in limited government principles – fiscally as well as socially. That is why leading conservatives, including former senator and current Poker Players Alliance Chairman Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY), former House Majority Leader and current FreedomWorks chairman Dick Armey (article), Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) (video), George Will (article #1, article #2), Walter Williams (article), Grover Norquist (letter to Congress), and Jacob Sullum (article #1, article #2, article #3), publicly oppose efforts to prohibit online poker.
Conservatives have a good deal of momentum right now. If we do nothing from now until Election Day, the GOP could take at least one house of Congress. However, moves against online poker can only bring harm. While such moves may appease a dwindling handful of people who will vote Republican anyway, these moves would not earn the GOP one extra vote. On the other hand, moves against online poker would cost the party the votes of many poker players and enthusiasts, as well as the votes of those who believe in Internet freedom. Additionally, such actions would convince many Americans that the GOP was using limited government promises just to get elected, while planning on immediately reverting back to their pre-2006 ways once regaining control of either house of Congress. We all saw how unpopular that was with the electorate in November 2006 and again in November 2008.
Poker players are organized and energized. The Poker Players Alliance has over one million members, and they will vote for their liberty this November. One wonders how many votes the GOP is willing to give away in efforts to appease the rapidly shrinking big government wing of the party. The bigger question is, of course, how many votes true conservatives are willing to give away?
Furthermore, most Americans believe strongly in Internet freedom. This is especially true of younger voters. They do not want any government control of this liberating medium. Americans have loudly objected to government controls over the Internet in China and Iran, and they will not support similar controls in the U.S. Additionally, most Americans accept that the gaming issue has been long settled. Commercial gaming in some form – state lotteries, Indian gaming, riverboats, casinos, etc. – is lawful in all but two states, Utah and Hawaii. To most Americans, steps against online poker are seen as nothing but protectionist measures to maximize tax revenues from licensed gaming.
Not only are bans bad policy, but steps to ban online poker are doomed to failure. The Internet is international and the U.S. does not control this medium. Unless it is placed under government control like in China, any prohibition would be nothing but a feel-good (for some) measure. The real way to control this would be to permit U.S. based sites to open. Market forces would drive business to those sites, and they would operate under U.S. law. Sites currently offshore would have to find ways to place themselves under the jurisdiction of U.S. courts to be able to compete in this market. It is too bad that some are not yet interested in true solutions, preferring instead to pander to those who refuse to see that times have changed.
Unfortunately, a handful of veteran GOP lawmakers – insulated by the inside-the-Beltway culture – pay the same heed to Focus on the Family’s lobbyists that they did back in 1984. These lawmakers have made representing (or at least claiming to represent) the American people their life’s work. Unfortunately, a lifetime on Capitol Hill is no way to stay in touch with those whom they purport to represent. As a result, groups from the 1980s like Focus on the Family have residual inertia on the Hill, while groups representing today’s conservatives are working just to gain traction.
In this environment, perhaps it is not surprising that some Republican lawmakers feel that going after online poker could shore up the support of the dwindling ranks of social issue statists. However, this should alarm the rest of the movement, who rightly feel that this would do nothing but threaten to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It is up to conservatives to tell their lawmakers that they demand fidelity to conservative principles. If we want them to fight for smaller government, lower taxes, and liberty, we need to tell them. If we do not want them wasting political capital on online poker bans, and if we do not want them fighting for smaller government fifty percent of the time and for larger government the remaining fifty percent, we need to tell them. If we want – and demand – principled, limited government conservatism, we need to tell them, because those who want big government are telling them.
Similarly, it is time to tell Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, and similar groups that they do not need big government to achieve their aims. While their founders may have grown up under progressivism and still see government as a useful tool, the rest of their members surely do not. As Tony Perkins feels it is time to stop donating to the Republican Party, perhaps it is time for us to stop donating to these organizations until they stop opposing limited government conservatism.
Focus on the Family used to use a two-pronged approach to achieving its goals. The first prong was the group’s ministry, where they used to excel. The ministry assisted people in choosing of their own free will the path Focus recommends. The second prong was Focus’ Congressional and state lobbying, where Focus sought laws restricting behaviors the group deemed immoral, thus using the power of the state to achieve its ends. Sadly, the fact that Focus laid off hundreds of employees since 2002, including seventy-five just last September, while doubling-down on lobbying shows a disturbing shift in the direction of the organization. The group now prefers forcing the changes they seek through the power of the federal government over encouraging people to choose the appropriate path, and it seems they wish to push conservatism in the same direction.
Regarding the last round of layoffs, Focus on the Family spokesman Gary Schneeberger said, “Managers are meeting with their employees, praying with employees. We want to make sure that even after this process, they have a transition package and that’s not just about money, but helping them find a new job.” That is kind of Focus, but one imagines it is cold comfort to the families of the laid-off employees who know those salaries are now going to Washington lobbyists. One wonders how many would have voluntarily given up their jobs to ensure that Focus had sufficient funding to continue their all-encompassing fight against poker players. As poker players are showing no signs of giving up, one also wonders how many years and how much donated money Focus is planning to put into this fight, and exactly how much they will continue to demand from the GOP in this matter.
It is time to move forward. Those who advocate for big government solutions for social issues need to understand that the nation, and their cause, will be better served by embracing true conservatism. As President Ronald Reagan famously said, “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
201 Comments
As conservatives we must stop treading water, we must swim to shore, fight the enemy, and plant our flag. No more will we accommodate. If liberals want a few states, let them run those into the ground. We are too great a nation to let our future be defend by the lazy and the fearful. We must do the big things, not the small things. Let the States do them. Washington DC must be put back in its place.
As President Ronald Reagan famously said, “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
Indeed. He did not qualify that statement either. R or D, …more government…more problems. Less government…more freedom.
The problem is finding 600 or so people to elect that understand this immutable law of politics.
"Social" Conservatives are as bad as liberals. This is supposed to be AMERICA, where you can't confiscate my money and tell me how I should live. If these "social conservatives" have such an appealing lifestyle and message, why hasn't it caught on better? Why do they seek to impose it on others through the force of government? This post is not a knock on Faith or religion, it is a shot at people who want to tell others how to live and think "properly". Don't these people understand that if taxes were significantly lowered that there would be a lot more money for- and a greater willingness to give to- charity? Let them compete in the marketplace of ideas and see how much they can raise to help their fellow man.
Take your ball and go home? As frustrated as I get with the (R)'s at times, I know I must vote and support the lesser of the two evils. You garner no influence when you abdicate your seat at the table.
All they have to do is LISTEN to the people. I have no freaking clue what the heck Lindsay Graham, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and John McCain are thinking. Get with the people or get the he** out. Stop trying to appease the Dems only to have your hand slapped. Get a spine and start representing us.
Great cartoon on the November elections and the liberals push to ram through their agenda athttp://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/category/electi...
Thanks for reading! If you like it, please remember to vote for it on Digg.com, athttp://digg.com/political_opinion/Will_Widening_F... .
Thanks for reading! If you like it, please remember to vote for it on Digg.com, athttp://digg.com/political_opinion/Will_Widening_F... .
Well done Richard. As conservatives we do not need government programs and do not welcome (especially) federal regulation. When programs and regulation exist on a federal scale ($$Trillions), there is a de facto approach by anyone and everyone to get their fair share of money or their fair shake from the legislation… stop it!
When these are not the prevailing practices in American society as they currently seem to be, our citizenry will focus on productive pursuits and abandon kowtowing to the washington establishment for consideration and coin that was theirs in the first place.
One hundred years of progressivism badly eroded the country. If allowed to continue, it will destroy destroy us under a mountain of debt and social chaos. "Progressive-lite" Republicans will lead to the same outcome, only taking longer to get there. The country has strayed far from founding principles. And the current situation is largely as founders predicted it would be, if the public ever allowed. That only further validates the principles they laid down.
Generally speaking, policitial compromise is a necessity, but not on this point I think. All progressivist roads lead to calamity, and we're nearly there now. A restoration of founding principles of limited government is necessary, and it's now or never. Compromise is not an option. Republicans need to get on board. Backtracking a few steps to the status quo as of a few years ago does not solve anything.
BTW, I posted this link before. No new information, but the video is pretty effective: http://remembernovember.com/
Thanks! I appreciate your taking the time to read my column and for your kind words.
As long as thousands of babies are murdered everyday in this country no amount of budget cutting will save us from God's wrath.
"Will Widening Fissures Doom the GOP’s Chances this November?"
No.
Over 50 million and counting…
A social conservative, if he is a true conservative, has no intention of forcing anyone to do anything.
No conservative, social or antisocial believes that the murder of 1,000,000 little children each year is a good thing for America.
A true social conservative believes in individual freedom, not state-sponsored murder.
Don't let the noose medea get into your mind and force you to believe that a social conservative wants to make everyone love Jesus. A true social conservative simply wants to be sure nobody is preventing you from loving Jesus. If you don't get than then the noose medea has already infected your brains.
Focus on the Family is an organization to stay far from. They are nothing but a bunch of right wing socialists. Like any socialist all they really want is power. The only reason groups like this have any voice, is that the lefty media gave them one starting in the 80s. They provide a very convenient counterpoint to the socialist agenda. They hold the other end of the rope so that it can be kept tout making it easier to to sweep us all along. Remember, "By their fruits you shall know them." They wrap them selves up in the cloak of Christianity, but they use the tools of the enemy, lies, manipulation and intimidation. Don't be fooled by superficialities. BTW, I figured this out 10 years ago when I was arming myself with knowledge to help me, a single dad, raise my son by Christian principles in the mess that is California. Of course, I turned to what I thought was an Christian oriented organization for info. Sure did not take me long browsing their website to see what they really were all about.
The teabaggers are spelling your doom right before our eyes.
You have seen those idiots on the TV, I assume.
Protesting taxes after Obama cut taxes. Utterly preposterous.
I mean no disrespect, but why is every one of your stories about poker? With the multitude of problems we face from our enemies, especially the Socialists, do you think this the best time to declare war on FOF? I think everyone agrees that yours is the correct position in regards to online gambling, but we need a broad coalition to defeat the left, as President Reagan had, and that includes social conservatives. It's time to consider that a few concessions can be made until the Socialists are defeated. Repairing the damage won't be accomplished overnight and will remain a work in progress…. forever.
Richard,
Your article shows points which I believe most true conservatives embrace.
The progressive movement is not made up of just unions and the likes of acorn.
My concern for the conservative awakening is the left being able to cause a divide.
No. These religious groups that want to control our behavior from the right as just as clueless as the lefties. Internet poker is near the bottom of our problems for most people. Our house is burning down. Wake up or burn, brothers and sisters.
May I suggest that we all read the GOP platform from 2008? The document is clear thinking. The problem is the GOP leadership.
For example, the platform says:
"Immigration policy is a national security issue, for which we have one test: Does it serve the national interest?
"Border security is essential to national security…
"Our commitment to the rule of law means smarter enforcement at the workplace, against illegal workers and lawbreaking employers alike, along with those who practice identity theft and traffic in fraudulent documents.
"The rule of law means guaranteeing to law enforcement the tools and coordination to deport criminal aliens without delay — and correcting court decisions that have made deportation so difficult….
"We oppose amnesty. The rule of law suffers if government policies encourage or reward illegal activity….
"Immigrants should be encouraged to learn English. English is the accepted language of business, commerce, and legal proceedings, and it is essential as a unifying cultural force."
Do we hear that coming from Bush, McCain, Steele or even Palin? No.
I rest my case.
Bingo. If we vote for baby killers, we'll always have baby killing. Besides, pro-killing candidates, because they don't think straight, are incapable of straightening out the mess. Holy Family, help us!
The Only Solution… Constitutionalism
Its time to stand up, find these career-politician tyrants in gross violation of their Constitutional Oaths and purge them from the halls of our government.
Eliminate the Washington DC snake pit of entrenched appeasing, expedient, placating and crab-walking despots by voting these delusional, megalomaniac realpolitiks out our government… they are not worthy to represent We, The People of this Country. They are, in fact, a scourge upon the land.
1) Reject all career-politicians running for re-election. They have become corrupt and no longer fit for Leadership or Statesmanship.
2) Recruit and elect true representatives of We, the People… Citizen Representatives who demonstrate strict compliance to the Constitution in every respect. Citizen Representatives whose attributes include excellence in management performance, integrity, patriotism, pride and optimism, chivalry and civility.
3) Citizen Representatives serve a maximum of two terms in the Senate and three terms in the House to re-establish the public service model of our Founding Fathers… Leadership, Statesmanship, Dignity, Honor and Duty. They may run again after two and three term cycles.
"Life and liberty for thee, but not for me," said the baby in the womb.
John McCain is one of my greatest disappointments. I was so clueless to his real agenda, I even voted for him as a write-in candidate (yeah, I know I was wasting my vote, but I couldn't bring my self to vote for Kerry or Bush & staying home was worse – neither is an option this November!). He lost me when he came up with his immigration with amnesty bill. It was like getting in the gut – I only voted for him again because Barry was way too far left.
I would not vote for him again if there were a decent conservative opponent running. I think his goose is cooked in AZ! All the rest of those RINOs have got to go too. If Olympia Snowe hadn't cast to bring Obamacare up for
Clueless, you are.
The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVAhr4hZDJE
It's the economy stupid
God Bless America
Hi! This isn't about abortion. I'm a pro-lifer and I covered my thoughts on that in my last column, athttp://biggovernment.com/rmuny/2010/03/28/gop-pol...
=========================
From that column:
For limited government to succeed, it must be limited across the board. If we allow government to expand in one area, it will naturally expand in other areas as well (as we saw with Bush’s prescription drug benefit). Fortunately, we can accomplish all we want – without big government.
For example, pro-lifers can be pro-life without being pro government. Legislation can be based on protecting the unborn from the aggression of others, rather than on the morality of having or performing abortions. This is how many Libertarian presidential nominees have been able to be strongly pro-life (including Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root in 2008 and Ron Paul in 1988) without being statists. Protection of rights is a proper function of government under any definition. This is why no one thinks laws against murder or robbery represent big government.
I know!. Why is no one pointing out the fact that but for Olympia Snowe, Obamacare would still have been being debated?
Guess what. I'm pro-life. Too bad many, like James Dobson and Tony Perkins, use this to justify other big government laws on behavior.
The reality is the Libertarian ticket this year — Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root — was at least as pro-life as the GOP ticket. 1988 nominee Ron Paul is a strong pro-lifer as well.
We can be pro-life without being pro-big government.
Great video. Thank's for sharing.
God Bless America
This sort of Social "Conservative" needs to understand that persuasion and action at the state and local levels is the proper forum for almost all of their ideas. Using the Federal stick to bludgeon everyone into their social agenda is no more good for us than when the Leftists do it.
It is the most important job of the government to protect the lives of it's citizens. Especially the most innocent among us. This is not big government.
Ron Paul is pro-choice for the states. We need what Ronaldus Magnus proposed, a constitutional amendment banning the infantacide that Barack and Michelle Hussein promote.
Despite John McCain the GOP ticket was as pro life as it could get with Our Sarah on it. Just ask Trig or Trip.
One reason is that I like to play.
Another is that I hate big government.
That being said, I have observed that this issue really does form the dividing line between true conservatives and those who prefer bigger government. For example, Andrew Breitbart, Dick Armey, Grover Norquist, and others are on the side of liberty. James Dobson and Tony Perkins are on the other. IMO, this is a great way to tell who REALLY believes in keeping government off of our backs vs. who only wish to limit government when Democrats are in power.
So, am I declaring war on FoF? No, not at all. Rather, the entire conservative movement is trying to work with them. It's FoF that needs to work with us to create a strong coalition, rather than demanding that we fold and accede to their wishes.
Keep in mind that we'd not be in the trouble we're in today had the party stayed true to limited government conservatism in the first place, as we'd not have lost in 2006 and 2008. My goal is for us to confront these issues now, so that we can have a stronger coalition.
that's assuming they are thinking….
As important as I think the abortion issue is, I think it's more important to elect leaders who will reign in spending. If the government collapses, no one will win and what government emerges would in all probability be much, much worse for all involved. I'm not willing to risk full societal collapse simply because the man in question might be questionable on abortion. Societal collapse would possibly be brutal enough that you wouldn't even have babies to save because their parents died in the resulting upheaval.
Besides, polls show that pro-life sentiment is winning the public over slowly and gradually. It isn't perfect, but it's better than risking a totalitarian government even if it is one you might agree with for the most part. Totalitarian is totalitarian … end of story. Even if it enforces dictates you agree with, you are still no more than a slave.
The real battle against abortion is best done at the state and local levels. Change hearts and minds. Don't attempt to have them changed.
It's not fair to say Ron Paul is pro-choice for states. Rather, Ron Paul doesn't believe the Constitution authorizes the federal government to dictate this issue to states. So, he'd strip the feds of this power and would then work for states to pass pro-life legislation. Many within the pro-life community believe exactly the same.
As for the GOP ticket, I weighted my evaluation based on McCain being on the top of the ticket.
Nothing preposterous about protesting the higher taxes we know will come. Even with any tax credits (not tax cuts) the rate of taxation is high enough that most are unhappy with it.
Or do you think the government can continue to spend us trillions into the hole without trying to increase their dollar intake indefinitely? If so, ignorance must be bliss for you, anon.
Yeah, and once he got into power, Ronald Reagan expanded the federal government, increased the deficit, and then raised taxes.
Republicans, like Democrats, cannot be trusted.
Here in lies the great debate in the Republican Party: Are we Conservative or are we Libertarian?
Republicans must first win the elections in November, in order to have this debate. Having the debate first gives victory to Democrats.
For years the Libertarian wing of the party has said "We don't need government…(you fill in the blank)" and "you cannot legislate morality." This thinking is defective, as basic laws must be enacted and enforced to protect the rights of citizens. But it gets fuzzy after this point. How far should the law go? How much should we legislate and enforce?
Business used to enforce some of these unwritten rules, especially when it came to money and finances. Unfortunately, a Democrat legislative branch forcing banks to loan to people who are not credit worthy, has already taken away business' way of checking the financial malpractice (Socialist Democrats call this "redlining") in the name of social or racial justice. Now, we the tax-payers, will have to pay to compensate for this grave error.
Although, I count myself as a conservative (All 5 categories: defense, moral, religious, fiscal and government), we must unite with our Libertarian brothers and sisters before the election. Gambling, while an easy way to give away money and financially dangerous to those with addictive personalities, in and of itself is not bad. It’s evil is just spent on those that are less wise than others.
Moral and religious conservatives have sought to protect those with addictive personalities from being preyed upon from engaging in destructive behaviors (gambling and alcoholism come to mind). (In the Moral and Religious Conservatives defense, it is NOT just for their brother’s own good, but also to keep from spending finite resources again and again on the same people.) But a free people cannot exchange their freedom for the security of the nanny-state’s protection. That is what the Socialist Democrat state is selling and we need to turn away from it.
Libertarians are as split on abortion as the rest of the nation. The Libertarian Party did nominate a pro-life ticket this year, in fact.
Too bad those who want big government control over individual behavior reflexively trot out abortion to justify all the other big government they want.
The Constitution is clear as to what the powers of government may be used for. Social values are the purview of state and local governments.
Hey, it finally let me log in!
Yeah, I agree that we have a lot of work to do concerning BG 'conservatives' since they're the majority. Re/dis-placing them will require continued effort for years to come. So… in premise, we're on the same side.
In practice we must be cunning and often indirect as we 'utilize' those organizations to our greater common cause. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "war" and, instead, suggested that in picking and choosing our battles, being a perceived enemy to a necessary ally may not be the best course of action.
I wish you well. And I wish FoF well.
Here's the problem I have with Social "Conservatives" that believe it's the government's place to enact laws concerning social behavior. God wants people who follow him and live the life Christ enjoined us to live because those people chose to live and be that way. As sad as it is, there are those who are going to fall away from God and live lives that are not good.
Also, it is my belief that it's my calling, my job, as a Christian to try to bring others into the light of God's grace. Trying to use the government to force others into that path is evil and, frankly, lazy. Why should I be bothered to be a "fisher of men" (old church school song reference) if the law compels them to faith or a reasonable behavioral facsimile thereof? God wants those who follow of their own freewill. Even God understands the value of personal freedom and choice.
The problem here is that we never have that debate. When out of power, the GOP ALWAYS runs on limited government promises. After winning, those who truly believe in limited government think they are done. Those who do not think they are just getting started. They start pushing to use the federal government, while those who disagree are told to keep quiet so that they don't help elect Democrats. The rest of the party reflexively backs the bigger government wing and shouts down those who disagree, and then the GOP loses. The cycle then repeats.
I figured it was time to mention that there really are GOP lawmakers who even now, when out of power, are squandering what political capital we have on online poker.
morality is a very big part of what conservatives believe, however, we MUST separate what needs to be taught from the pulpit, from what needs to be done in Washington.
it is the same stupidity that brought about the rise of Hitler. A mesmerizing promise that has absolutely not one ounce of truth to it.
"Nothing preposterous about protesting the higher taxes we know will come."
Yes there is. Should I start protesting the next war that is certain to come. Before anything has been proposed.
Obama cut taxes for 95% of us. You should be thanking him.
"Or do you think the government can continue to spend us trillions into the hole without trying to increase their dollar intake indefinitely?"
No. Obama was handed the worst economic crises in 80 years. There was no demand. The spending worked. It has stimulated demand.
Haven't you heard? We're gaining jobs.
Just like Clinton paid for Reagan's deficits Obama will pay for Bush's. Be patient. It's been 15 months for God's sake.
God you people are stupid.
i'm in agreement with your post aharris, as a conservative. one of the first things God gifted to man is free will. He never imposed or forced His will on anyone – even as we are aware all the choices we make have consequences, good or bad.
TOL
I couldnt agree with you more
hey my earlier reply disappeared! if you get this twice, excuse me:) but i commented i agree with your post. conservatives need to think outside the box – God gave man free will and does not force His will on anyone. Certain choices need to be determined from within (individual choice), not by creating more laws.
Unfortunately, we've seen a tendency by some to exaggerate the addictiveness of various behaviors to justify government regulation. They also seem to prefer prohibition to alternate means that aid those with tendencies toward destructive behaviors while preserving liberty for those without these tendencies (especially if they happen to have moral objections to the activity itself).
What industry sector is gaining jobs? Government doesn't count.
Do you know a difference between a tax credit and a tax cut? Bush's tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2010. A tax is what some people receive from Obama. A big whopping tax credit of $13! Wow, I guess people like you could buy extra cigs and a case of beer.
Do you realize the wonderful government is talking about a VAT tax that would be another tax. And what about cap and tax?
I'm curious, how much is the Soro's outfit paying you to type this dribble?
Sometimes, we do what we must instead of what we would prefer. He DID break the Soviet Union's back in the Cold War and was responsible for re-unifying Germany. That takes money. You fault him if it makes you feel better. He was a great man by any standard.
As long as the Ohio GOP has an asshole for the Chairman…Kevin DeWine we are screwed!!! he just called the Tea Party Liars…. see:http://clevelandteapartypatriots.blogspot.com/201...
Go to my facebook page titled KEVIN DEWINE RESIGN!!!http://www.facebook.com/misrold#!/group.php?gid=1…
Again, our somewhat spoiled generation inherited unimaginable freedom and prosperity without hardships and sacrifices of earlier generations. Having inherited rather than earned it, some valued it less, took it for granted, and grew complacent. Add in decades of corrosive progressive influence, spread through academics, law, media and entertainment. So schools indoctrinate naive young people in liberal doctrine rather than encouraging independent, critical thought or teaching history Some now literally chant praises to Obama!. Media that started with biased reporting then segued to corrupt propagandists. (Joe Klein: Dissent=Sedition!?) Growing secularism contributing to a shallow culture that values style over substance (BHO. 'nuff said).. Activist judges that turn their back on Constitutional restraints. Corrupt career politicians primarily catering to special interests to enrich themselves and extend their career. Tax-and-spend policies aimed at multiplying ranks of Americans infected with entitlement mentality. Top it off with shifting demographics, owing to open border policies that imports cheap labor and/or new crops of voters bought off with more entitlements paid for with borrowed money. The good news? America is finally wakening up. Let's hope it's not too late.
I love it when anon tells everyone else how stupid they are.
It reminds me of the story of a bunch of college students being granted an audience with Governor Reagan. They told him how dumb he was, how out of touch he was, how he didn't know what was going on in the modern world. After all, he grew up when there was no telephone, no modern appliances, etc.
Reagan replied that they were right; his generation grew up poor, that they had to INVENT all of the modern conveniences the students enjoy and take for granted.
I find it comical how many libertarians pride themselves on Constitutional values (which are, BTW, rooted in the Declaration of Independence, thus the reference at the end of the Constitution regarding "the twelfth" meaning 12 years since the Declaration) which are first and foremost LIFE. Without life, there can be no liberty or property (pursuit of happiness), and yet they play fast and loose with the issue of LIFE.
Only the Spirit of God changing the heart of man will save this country. God, have mercy!
God you are stupid.
huh? about 50% libertarians are pro life. dork.
id rather be an addict than a prisoner.
it doesn't matter if the dems win if the gop is same as they've been.
He also had a democratic congress to deal with and he reduced the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 28%. He slowed the growth of government to a near standstill, a miracle from what had been happening for the previous 50+ years. He also re-established the center point of politics to the right of Richard Nixon. He was a great man.
So? I really don't see your point here. You seem to say (correct me if I'm wrong) that libertarians are all pro-choice. I'm a libertarian and I am pro-choice. I don't like abortion. I think it's pretty grisly. However, I also realize that it isn't my business and I don't have a say what some woman does with her body. I am also an atheist; I have no beef with someone's religeon, but I believe that people are conscientious beings, and left to their own devices, along with a sensible Rule of Law, we can all pursue what makes us happy.
However, the point that most of us seem to be missing is that while we may disagree on a few things, we agree on alot more, and that should be our focus. Progressives got their shit together (so to speak) and are attempting to pass huge legislation. While it's true that they have done this through bribes, threats, and exocommunication (for lack of a better term) from the Progressive mix, this isn't how we need to approach it. We need to use truth, honesty, and of course due dilligence to swing this country back towards freedom and prosperity.
You cannot legislate morality. Any effort to do so just proves the old adage.. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Prohibition, of anything, seems only to create more demand for whatever is being prohibited.
Self righteous groups like Focus on the Family cannot control other people's behavior. It is futile, like a wave rippling through all levels of society, ultimately destructive in ways never intended (like their own group with lay offs, potentially winnowing themselves out of existence & politicians who disagree on narrow issues, sacrificing votes on the major issues)
WE have major issues this election. What 80% of Americans see them as 'Freedom Ending Issues'. Our Founding Fathers, and most Americans, believe that through a sacred covent with God, this beautiful land and all of our Freedoms were given to us If Focus on the Family cannot put aside their their narrow scope of 'online gambling' on an "Or Else" basis, then may God have mercy on them.
They, then, have set themselves up to play God. Even worse, in their hubris, they are putting themselves out as knowing the mind of God. The name for this is blasphemy… And they spitting in God's as knowing better than he…
So, the baby if dead inside the mother right up until it is born? Sorry, but my youngin' was pretty lively even at just 13 weeks (had a heartbeat at 10) and has DNA that is certifiably human and distinct from my own. That qualifies to me as human life, and our Founders documents recognize all humans as having the basic rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The conflict here is that while the woman is making a decision about her body, she is violating another human's basic right to life. I don't think abortion should be outlawed entirely, but I do think abortions of convenience should be.
Millions more will be slaughtered if we wait for all 50 states to wake up the reality that the abortion industry is in the infanticide business. My concerns are greater than which party or ideology hold power in this world.
I hope Sarah and I can count on your support. When she becomes President in 2013, babies will be saved in all fifty states from butchers like George Tiller and Barack Obama.
The scriptures, both Christian and Hebrew, do not specifically speak to “though shalt not murder” as it
relates to our most modern character fault, abortion. What is addressed in society today is mans
interpretation of those scriptures, as they apply to abortion, which are a matter left for each individual
to observe or not to observe. I do not condone abortion for sure.
Could not the God each of us worships force compliance on us? Yes, but he wants agreement with his
laws, not just compliance.
Liberty either is or isn't, it is like being pregnant! Liberty for me and many others, means you have the
right to do and say as you will as long as it does not infringe on liberty of others. The right to defend
your person, the right to defend your liberty, and the right to defend your property are the basics of
what we possess even without any law. We were born with these rights.
Individuals must exist prior to any laws being formed; laws were made by individuals to protect their
liberty, while guaranteeing that another's liberty did not suffer. Laws are the extension of individual
rights/liberty to society so as to be enforceable, or at least that is the way it should work. The law's purpose is to make sure injustice does not reign, to make sure that liberty is not infringed.
The law does a good job at protecting us from illegal plunder, the loss of liberty by another individual's
actions. The law defeats its own purpose when it allows legal plunder, the establishment of laws, which
if they were done by an individual would be otherwise illegal because they infringed on another's basic
rights/liberty.
The law violates my liberty when it mandates that I must do anything which I do not want to do, when
and if what I want to do does not impact the liberty of others. It violates my basic rights by not
protecting them. Such is a law mandating that I must support abortion through taxes, or a law which
mandates that abortion is not legal for an individual to obtain.
When any legislator uses the law to place the governed in a position that takes away their liberty and
rights, that legislator is guilty of using the law as “legal plunder”. The law is then at odds with its only
goal of protecting my basic individual rights, ensuring that injustice does not reign in society. Putting
our team in government to use the law as “legal plunder' is no more moral than the other teams quest to
do the same.
more
“ M e n n a t u r a l l y r e be l a ga i ns t t he i n j u s t i c e o f w h i c h t he y a re v i c t i ms. T h u s, w h e n p l u n d e r i s
o r g a n i z e d b y l a w f o r t he p r o f i t o f t h ose w h o m a k e t he l a w, a l l t h e p l u n d e re d c l asses t r y s o me h o w t o
e n te r — b y p ea c e f u l o r re v o l u t i o n a r y m e a ns — i n t o t h e m a k i n g o f l a ws. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r d e g ree o f
e n l i g h t e n me n t, t hese p l u n d e re d c lasses m a y p r o p os e o n e o f t w o e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t p u r p oses w h e n t h e y
at te m p t t o at ta i n p o l i t i c a l p o w e r:
E i t h e r t he y m a y w i s h t o st o p l a w f u l p l u n d e r, o r t he y m a y w i s h t o
s ha re i n i t. W o e t o t h e n a t i o n w h e n t h i s l at te r p u r p ose p r e v a i l s a m o n g t he m a ss v i c t i ms o f l a w f u l
p l u n d e r w h e n t he y, i n t u r n, se i z e t he p o w e r t o m a k e l a ws!” – F r e de r i c B a s t ia t “ T h e L a w ” c i r c a 1 8 4 9-
1 8 50. more
Right now, the federal government is preventing any of the 50 states from doing anything but following the Supreme Court dictates contained in the Roe v. Wade ruling. I think it's safe to say that returning this to the states, where the Constitution places it, would be the way to go.
"….as long as it does not infringe on liberty of others."
I didn't say anything about it being a religious belief. Also, abortion infringes on the liberty of the unborn. Those who believe unborn have no rights would agree with your agrument. Those who believe the unborn have the same rights as those already born would not.
anon;
If The Zero in Chief cut taxes for 95% of us, who is going to pay for all the spending he and his lemings in congress have done so far?
Ues, we're gaining jobs – TEMPORARY JOBS for the census.
Do you ever pay attention to what goes on around you?
I feel that it matters not at this juncture as we must unite and find the common ground to bring a halt to the decline into Socialism being rapidly rammed down our throats by the Progressives. Perhaps then the true Democrats can clear the vile filth from the party they often times professed to be. For this November we must work together and plant the big STOP sign right in front of America and the office in the White House. Difficult times create odd bedfellows and we must all come together as a nation to defeat these zealots dead in their tracks. Nothing less will halt them from their insanities.
So "Progressive" is ok, but it's opposite (Libertarian) is not…….According to who!!!!
STICK OBAMAdork UP YOURS WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE.
ANON=SHYTE FOR BRAINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I want a TRUE conservative to run for president on the GOP side; not a "I have to get them to like me" McCain, and NOT Mitt Romney! If the only true conservative we have to run is a woman, so be it. At least Palin has the b–ls to stand up for what she believes! The dems/libs/progressives keep attempting to knock her down and she gets right back up and gives 'em hell again!
Why can't we find a conservative man that is brave enought to challenge the left? Are there any left?
a non entity is anon! sitting behind his little computer—-shoveling out his asinine crap—-for his beloved soros, who's ass he would wipe if asked—–
your projecting again—–poor dolt—-
Aharris pretty much summed it up. The mother is violating another human's right to life. Abortion does not make you unpregnant. It makes you the mother of a dead baby. I refuse to dress up murder by any other term.
What should be patently obvious is that the social conservatives are not really conservative. They are really liberals in the sense they believe in their version of big government. ANY believe and advocacy of big government, whether it be in economics or in social stuff, is liberal, plain and simple. Anyone who advocates government power over the individual, for any reason what so ever, should be considered liberal and fought against.
Conservatism means less government regulation, lower taxes, less government intrusion into people, period.
From the Tea Party Movement to State Legislators, the American people are drawing a line in the sand. On what side of it will you stand? Has the government our Founders created been forgotten by Washington DC? Is a Patriot Uprising ready to capture the spirit of 1776?
God Bless America
Another reason to vote Buck over Norton in Colorado.
I may be completely off base here, but how does social conservatism wishing for government to
enforce their priorities, differ from progressives wishing for the government to be a nanny state,
absolving us all from exercising our Christian faith by charitable donating etc? The progs want
the Gvt to fulfill these roles, rather than individuals. The social conservatives also want the Gvt
to fulfill the role of arbiter of rights, but only certain rights.
Thank you aharris, I've been trying to sort this out for some time, not sure yet if I'm done with it,
your post has given much food for thought.
"or else" is what the Pauliacs did to us in 08, many admit it openly, even proudly. I question their
true numbers, but the election of 08 & all its ramifications may lie on their backs. Before the HC
bill passed some were even gleeful with our doom, thinking they would surely be chosen to re-
pair & rebuild the country. So naive they didn't understand the seriousness of our plight. That
we may not have a country to rebuild. With friends like them, who needs enemies?
The GOP has two choices available to it.
It can work to get small-government, stop spending people elected.
It can worry about the fractures, third parties and all that fun stuff, at the risk of not being one of the three when the counting comes down.
Your ignorance is truly astounding. Putting $10 Trillion on our national credit card is game over for the country. Tax Cut? Are you nuts? Do you have a job? Own a home? Drive a vehicle? Buy things that you pay for? I've seen no tax cut, only tax increases. If I were in the Federal government now I'd be investing in some land in Mexico.
The failure of the GOP to stick to conservative principles is what caused this in the first place. Had we remained true, we'd never have lost in 2006 or 2008. If we put a band-aid on this now, rather than curing the underlying disease, we'll be planting the seeds for the next electoral loss.
Keep in mind that these people don't share our concerns. Even now, they're insisting that the GOP use its very limited political capital on pushing for an online poker ban. Sen. Jon Kyl wasted a one-shot opportunity — a block on Obama's Treasury nominees — to protest a delay in an online gaming law (a delay requested by 20 Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader McConnell). Spencer Bachus, the House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member, has done nothing to slow the Democrats' financial plans. He focuses his efforts exclusively on efforts to ban online poker. Now, we see this scorched earth effort with the Abramoff memo.
We can sit around and talk about uniting all day long, but they seek unity on their terms only. Anything short of this and they'll take their ball and go home.
We have four Christians and five atheist communists on the Supreme Court now. The Palin Wave of 2012 will bring about an end to abortion, political correctness and the homosexual agenda.
After that we can decide amongst ourselves on the Right what to do next.
The Soviet Union would've collapsed by itself anyway.
You overestimate Reagan's importance.
Gorbachev's weakness as a leader contributed more to the fall of the Soviet Union than any imaginary "Star Wars" program ever did.
That wouldn't have been a problem had the GOP stayed true to conservative principles.
How could Reagan have been "slowing the growth of government", when he expanded the military budget so drastically?
In general, I am sick and tired of non-producing groups and individuals with 3 or more letter names telling us what is good for us. Get a real job and then, just maybe, you might be worth listening to. Meanwhile, shut the hell up.
I have one social issue I really care about and it is the same one the founding fathers cared about. Life. It is an unalienable right. That should be the end of the discussion. You can not be a constitutionalist, or a conservative or a libertarian following constitutionalist principles without adherance to this simple premise It is the first and most significant Natural Right. Toss that away and the constitution is used toilet paper. A libertarian who seeks liberty without the responsibilities to others inalienable right to life is just an Anarchist pretending to beleive in social order.
How? We've had many pro-life presidents since Roe v. Wade passed. We've had GOP Houses and Senates (sometimes simultaneously). What did it get us?
You can't be serious. The federal government has spent the past ~40 years PREVENTING states from ending abortion. The LAST institution I'd trust with this is the federal government. Give it back to the states and trust the people to do what's right, because Washington surely isn't.
Anyone else remember the Carter years before Reagan was elected? Stagflation, gas rationing, Iranian hostages, failed rescue mission. Dismal times. Reagan helped turn things around, although I wasn't crazy about all the spending then either. He (and Volcker) also eliminated the runaway inflation of the Carter years. And the peace dividend after the fall of the USSR contributed to the "economic miracle" of the '90s, together with the Contract with America, Clinton's lurch to the right in 1994, and unfortunately, a hyperactive Fed under Greenspan that led to the tech bubble, then it's aftermath, the housing bubble. We all know the rest of that story…
You must be logged in to post a comment.