Featured Republican Party Elites Abandon Traditional Marriage

Are legal briefs some kind of new loyalty oath?

Do Senators typically sign legal briefs?

Or is this just another fabricated issue?

 

Senators don't TYPICALLY sign a letter a, go around a President and State Department, and attempt to interfere with Foreign Policy. But they OBVIOUSLY thought signing their names to such a declaration means something.

Yet they wouldn't do the same when it came to traditional marriage.

What can we glean from this type behavior? I surmise that after Indiana and RFRA, the kitchen has gotten pretty hot for members of the GOP when it comes to all things gay. They feel like they are losing the battle of public opinion and just looking bigoted and hateful. So they retreat and didn't stand firm.

Just reinforces that folks will do whatever they think they need to stay in power. These folks aren't worried about SS marriage anymore than they are about abortion. It's a political tool for the lot of them and nothing else.

 

The Democrats do have the g@y vote. As Salty points out, there are a lot of 100% Democrat districts--parts of Cleveland, for example, voted 100% Democrat in the last presidential election.

CBT made a false point about legal briefs--only lawyers who have a point to make need sign a letter.

As for posting a letter on a website, it pales in comparison to Pelosi's visit to Syria, which may explain why she is no longer majority leader.

 

You refer to the Republican "Elites" in your thread title----to which I can say----well, too bad for them---and that this Republican Party "White Trash" preacher will never bow down to current political correctness!!

 

And the GOP thought it was obvious fraud then. So what's changed? You need it to be that way now to make a point?

Nobody said that the GOP Senators NEEDED to sign the brief. It's just odd that more of them didn't sign it.

Wickedness rises. Wickedness falls and new wickedness rises up in its place.

 

So there are 100% Democrat precincts because fraud was never proven in Cleveland, so it is possible that I don't know any Dems because I live in a GOP area.

I don't know why Dems are worried about GOP legal advice--you would think that Dems would be happy that they are only up against a few GOP lawyers.

The truth is that Dems have made far worse forays into foreign policy than posting a letter on a website in a vain attempt to stop Iran from starting a nuclear war.

 

How's the weather in Sodom, CTB?

 

Yeah.... Just like Reagan. I remember him being "too conservative" and unsophisticated politically. The GOP had to run "moderates" (aka progressives) like Ford, Nixon, or Bush 1 to win. But Reagan won then won again in the biggest landslide in a generation BECAUSE PEOPLE SAW what a real conservative was about and liked it.

Companies today spend big $$ trying to create a perception that they are different and better... even when they're virtually the same. Yet people are convinced that a GOP presidential candidate has to be almost indistinguishable from Dems to win swing voters. The truth is people want a real choice and for you to convince them yours is the right one. If their choice is Dem or Dem lite... they'll choose Dems because at least they have the conviction to sell their "product".

You have bought a lie that has been repeated long enough to become commonly accepted. If ANY Dem or establishment Republican had been subjected to what say... Palin was... they'd have been just as unpopular.

Ted Cruz is an EXCELLENT candidate in every respect except that he is hated by people with a lot of money and media power. There's no one in either party that wants to be in a debate with him. He just has to figure out a way to work around those who hate his positions and ideology like Reagan did.

 

While I think traditional marriage is a vital issues... it isn't quite as urgent as preventing a radical Muslim regime from getting a nuclear weapon.

That is an amazingly well constructed illusion.

Homosexuals comprise no more than 2% of the population and more likely around 1%. According to a survey conducted by a homosexual magazine a few years ago, only around 10% of self-professing homosexuals said they were in a monogamous relationship... with the majority of them admitting they had had sex with a 3rd person within the previous year. So even if ALL of the 10% who are monogamous wanted to marry... you are talking no more than .2% of the population. That's only around 700k of 350 million.

Just by proportions, this is not an issue that warrants the effort being given by the left... unless the real objective is different. I believe it is a simply another line of attack on Christianity.

Very true of the GOP political class. They'd rather have an issue than a solution. The same is true of immigration.

There is a very easy, workable solution to immigration.

1) legitimize those who are here and working but fine them AND THEIR EMPLOYER and provide NO path to citizenship unless they leave the country for 5 years and reapply for entry.

2) Send people to jail who hire an illegal knowingly or carelessly... and do the same for gov't workers who sign them up for ANY gov't benefit or privilege.

3) MOST IMPORTANTLY, restructure our RIDICULOUS immigration process that takes more than 5 years and thousands of $$$ just to get an answer. It should take 5 months MAXIMUM to give someone an answer. An alternative would be to do a summary qualification then give someone a provisional permit that required them to report in monthly until getting final approval.


People are natural economists. Right now, we punish those who do it the right way and reward those who do it the wrong way. Doesn't changing that make more sense than fences or amnesty?

 

Kidding :laugh:... I hope

Just like virtually every other state, if you get away from the cities you find more freedom loving people.

 

Minnesota is the only state that Reagan could not carry. It is a Scandinavian paradise.

 

Nixon carried Minnesota in 1972. The Republican Party is disgusting. It is as pro gay marriage as the Democrats who you expect it from. In reality, there are no red and blue states. Kentucky is a red state only because there is no other choice but to vote for RINOs like Romney, McCain, Bush 1 and 2, etc. The fact is there is no difference of substance between the two major candidates for President to date. Republicans talk about right to life at the federal level. Nothing changes. They have been in power. What is different? Neither party gives any consideration to the Constitution. The clowns in Congress get paid a handsome salary and work about 120 days a year. While they are there, they do not govern, but play political games.

 

Just saw CMG's post via the quote feature.

What does a high percentage of Scandinavians have to do with the ability of Republicans to carry Minnesota in a presidential election? Sheesh.

We just got done having a Republican governor for 8 years and the state House of Representatives is controlled by R's.

 

I may have to add the Scandinavians to my siggy. :laugh:

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

Didn't you know that they vote Democrat? Ask Al.