Tag Archives: DADT

Neal Boortz is right: “social conservatives” will cost the GOP more elections

republican logo

In a recent talk radio show, while filling in for Sean Hannity, conservative-libertarian Neal Boortz (the co-author of the FairTax) warned that Republicans will not recapture the Senate this year, because, says Boortz, they have an insatiable “urge to get into social conservatism”.

Boortz believes Republicans will once again prioritize social issues above all others, advocate radical no-compromise policies on those issues, and once again make stupid statements on these issues. He points to Georgia GOP Senate candidate Paul Broun as an example. (Broun’s most famous statement, other than his defense of Todd Akin, is his claim that evolution, embryonics, and Big Bang are “lies straight from the pit of hell.”)

Shortly after Boortz made that statement, an avalanche of insults, attacks, and false claims was launched against Boortz from every “conservative” corner of the Net. His critics, and they are legion, claim Boortz is an “establishment liberal Republican” and a “blowhard” just trying to attract attention. They furthermore deny that social issues and radical socially conservative politicians like Akin and Broun have hurt the GOP in the past.

But no amount of denial and false claims can change the fact that Boortz is absolutely right: radical policies on social issues, and politicians espousing such policies, have cost the GOP heavily in the past, and will cost it even more elections in the future.

Why? After all, didn’t social issues mobilize millions of voters in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s to the GOP’s standard? Weren’t American voters overwhelmingly socially conservative in those times?

Yes – but those were totally different times, decades ago. To advocate returning to policies of long bygone eras enacted (or advocated) in a totally different society is to lead the Party to disastrous defeats.

Today, Americans are a completely different society than they were 20-30 years ago. The GOP’s problem is that it hasn’t changed with them.

17  ago, a vast majority of Americans opposed gay marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act was passed with over 80 votes in the Senate and signed by President Clinton. Today, though, according to reliable pollsters like Gallup, a large majority of Americans approves of legalizing gay marriage and of DADT repeal. Banning gay marriage and gays from the military is a decidedly losing proposition supported only by a small minority.  Over time,  this small minority will shrink even further as older, more socially conservative voters die and are replaced by younger, socially libertarian voters.

As for contraception, support for its legality is – and has long been – so broad that most pollsters don’t even bother to ask the question.

On abortion, Americans are roughly equally divided, with the pendulum slightly swinging one way or the other from time to time. However, only a small majority supports banning abortion in all or most cases (per Gallup). So radical social conservatives’ position is again that of a tiny minority and a sure election loser.

The fact is that social issues are electoral losers for Republicans. The American people don’t want politicians to legislate morality anymore than they want them to legislate prosperity (neither of which can be really legislated, BTW – but that hasn’t stopped politicians from trying :) ).

The truth, therefore, is that – as Boortz says – Republicans will continue to lose elections by landslides if they continue to take radical positions on social issues. Or nominate radically socially conservative candidates like Paul Broun.

This truth has proven itself over and over again, even in “red states” like Missouri and Indiana where Republicans should win easily. All it took for GOP Senate candidates to lose there by landslides was a radical position on abortion and one stupid remark about rape. Not only did Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock lose their races, they cost other Republicans (like Scott Brown) their races as well.

This is because the voters Republicans need to win over – siphon from the Democrats, to be precise – are suburbanites, most of whom are fiscally conservative but socially liberal (especially suburban women, and American women in general, who currently support Democrats by a large margin). Saying that abortion should be banned in all cases, that a raped woman should be forced by law to bear the child of her rapist, and that two loving people shouldn’t be allowed to marry based on sexual orientation, is an electoral loser with suburbanites, women, minorities, and youngsters.

Boortz’s critics claim this is just a call to make the GOP more liberal, more leftist, and more in line with the GOP Establishment.

On the contrary, if fiscal and defense, rather than social, issues were the conservative “litmus test”, the vast majority of the GOP’s Establishment and its past candidates (including Daddy Bush, Bob Dole, Dubya Bush, and Juan McCain) would’ve had no business being in the GOP, let alone being GOP presidential nominees. Nor would John Boehner have been Speaker.

It is social conservatives who have enabled these RINOs to hijack the party and the country. All these RINOs had to do to win social conservatives’ votes was to promise to work towards banning abortion and gay marriage, and social conservatives supported them, regardless of their lack of fiscal conservative credentials (to say it mildly). So-cons didn’t care that Daddy Bush denounced Reaganomics as “voodoo economics”, or that Dubya was a failed businessman. All they cared about were these RINOs’ useless promises on social issues. As long as the Bushes, McCain, Dole, and Boehner pledged to fight against abortion and gay marriage, social conservatives were willing to overlook everything else.

On social issues, the Bushes, McCain, and Boehner have solid records.

But if fiscal and defense, rather than social, issues were the conservative “litmus test”, those RINOs would’ve had no business being in the GOP. Ditto Eric Cantor, Rick Santorum, and Tax Hike Mike Huckabee.

Social conservatives protest that “social and fiscal issues are inextricably linked.” No, they are not.

In fact, trying to impose one’s preferred policies on social issues on the rest of the society is every bit as much a Big Government statist policy as trying to impose a health insurance mandate, a new tax, a soda ban, or a lightbulb ban. So-called “social conservatives” are every bit as much Big Government Statists as Michael Bloomberg, Bill de Blasio, and Nancy Pelosi. They only difference is what exactly their pet issues are. For “social conservatives”, it’s abortion, gay marriage, and contraceptives. For Bloomberg, de Blasio, and Pelosi, it’s lightbulbs, SUVs, soda, and fast food.

But these people are all the same: all of them want to take away YOUR right to do what you want with YOUR money, YOUR vehicle, YOUR stomach, YOUR body, and YOUR home.

As any real conservative will tell you, the ONLY legitimate purpose of any government is to protect our rights and our liberty against those who would take them away, whether that’s you, my neighbor, a religious group in my town, or the majority of the society at large. The only legitimate purpose of any government is to protect our rights and freedoms – and to let us live as we wish to, as long as we don’t threaten anyone else’s rights and freedoms.

Whenever a government goes beyond that purpose, it becomes Big Government – and a danger to people’s rights and freedoms, regardless of whether it tries to legislate morality or prosperity. (And Americans don’t want it to legislate either.)

Therein lies the problem with the two major parties: both want to take your freedoms away. The Democrats want to legislate the economy, while Republicans want to legislate morality. The Democrats want to dramatically limit what you can do with your money, while Republicans want to dramatically limit what you can do with your body. For the last four decades, both parties have tried to do that and look just how dramatically the size and scope of the federal government has expanded.

It is NONE of any government’s business to legislate whether you or I can use contraceptives, whom I can marry, and whether or not a raped woman can seek an abortion. It is NONE of any local, state, or government’s business – and NONE of YOUR damned business, social conservatives.

And just think about it: if abortion, gay marriage, and/or contraceptives were banned, that would require yet another government agency (or agencies), costing billions of dollars annually and employing tens of thousands of bureaucrats and agents, to enforce such bans. You think the IRS is bad and oppressive? Or that the NSA is? Just imagine what a National Abortion Police or a National Counter-Contraceptives Agency would do if social conservatives got their wish.

As for funding for abortion, the fiscally conservative answer is simple: end it.

Finally, social conservatives claim there is a “moral decay in America”, and that fiscal issues cannot be solved without tackling these problems.

To some extent this is true when you look at divorce, single motherhood, alcoholism, and drug usage rates. But instead of targeting these very real and very serious problems and formulating positive solutions to them, “social conservatives” have, in the last 4 decades, railed exclusively against abortion, gay marriage, contraceptives, and DADT, and still continue to obsess about them, even though they are all lost issues.

So few Americans support banning gay marriage and contraceptives, or reinstating DADT, that these issues are, politically, irrevocably lost. As for abortion, it is legally lost because no Supreme Court, especially not one led by John G. Roberts, will overturn Roe v. Wade. If “social conservatives”  couldn’t get Roe overturned in the last 4 decades, they never will.

In fact, abortion, gay marriage, contraceptives, and repealing DADT have not done any damage to America’s prosperity or well-being. Contraceptives have, in fact, helped stem the plague of STDs and unwanted pregnancies (they are highly effective at fighting both). Repealing DADT has saved taxpayers millions of dollars lost on discharging qualified, disciplined men who happened to be gay (and has not caused any turmoil in the military, contrary to grave predictions made in 2010).

Similarly, legalizing gay marriage has not done any harm to anyone. It has only increased people’s freedom by letting them marry whatever person they love. (A few decades ago, when bans on interracial marriage were being repealed, Southern “social conservatives” were saying exactly the same thing they clam today: that repealing the bans would threaten “the integrity of the institution of marriage.”)

If “social conservatives” were really concerned about America’s societal ills, like divorce and single motherhood, they’d be tackling them. But they don’t want to challenge the powerful divorce attorney lobby; instead, they prefer irrelevant issues like “gay marriage” and “contraceptives.”

Gay marriage is not a threat to anyone’s marriage, or to the integrity of the institution, in any way. Divorce – particularly no-fault divorce, now legal in all 50 states, is.

(BTW, know who was the first state Governor to sign legislation legalizing no-fault divorce in his state? Ronald Reagan.)

So Neal Boortz is absolutely right, and so.-called “social conservatives” (I prefer to call them social Big Government Nannies) are dead wrong. “Social issues” like abortion and gay marriage are sure election losers; they alienate suburbanites, youngsters, women, and minorities from the GOP; and advocating bans and legislating morality on these issues is every bit as much a Big Government Policy as banning sodas or SUVs is.

Another Nail In Perry's Coffin…


I came across a Rick Perry ad today that stopped me in my tracks, and not for any of the good reasons.  At first glance, it seems like it might be another good TV spot for the candidate from Texas.  It starts off with optimistic music and Perry looking like a seasoned man from America’s heartland.  He’s standing by a quiet river, and he begins with a proclamation that he’s “not ashamed to admit that he’s a Christian”.  So far so good… Then his next statement kind of derails things.  Take a look…

Look…  I know that this statement will speak to the hearts of many Americans, but Perry really shouldn’t have added the line about “gays serving openly in the military”.  I think he had a good ad on his hands without the addition of that statement.  And to be honest with you, I’m not at all sorry for him for any heat this might bring upon his campaign.

This is a year where Republicans have an honest chance to unseat the current president, and that’s saying a lot, considering how dire the GOP’s hand was in 2008.  Commercials like this do nothing to bolster those chances, however, and I’m ashamed of Perry for putting this line in there.

Now, I know that Perry has been gaining support on this website, and that I’ll draw the ire of many of our readers for pointing this out, but if you WANT Perry to be the next president of the United States, ads like this do not help.  Whether it is fair or not, Republicans are known for being “against the gays”.  How does this ad help to change that perception?  It doesn’t.  It only “reaffirms” what many have suspected about Republicans all along.

Also… it was a good ad without that line.  Perry looked good, he sounded good, the production values were solid, and his message was fine.  Adding the line about gays serving openly in the military did nothing to improve or embellish it.  It was foolish, and it was the opposite of helpful.

This isn’t the first time that Perry has disappointed me, nor is it the first time that he’s “stepped in it”, but after enough occurrences, these things start to look like nails in his coffin.

Fred Karger: 2012 Presidential Profile

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Fred Karger was born January 31, 1950 in Glencoe, Illinois to Jean and Robert S. Karger.

It’s In The Genes
Mr. Karger seems to have inherited his mother’s genes, as she was an active volunteer within the community.



Education
University of Denver

Religious Affiliation
Jewish

Acting Career
Edge Shaving Cream Commercial
Owen Marshall: Counselor at Large
Rich Man, Poor Man
Horshack! , which was a pilot for a spin-off from Welcome Back Kotter
Airport- 1975

Political Career
1977 to 2004- Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer with the political campaign consulting firm Dolphin Group
He has worked on 9 presidential campaigns, including serving as a senior consultant on the campaigns of Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Gerald Ford.
March 23, 2011- Officially announced his candidacy for President 2012

Political Activism
Gay Rights Activist
Gay Rights Watchdog
1990’s- Worked for the tobacco industry to prevent smoking bans in California

Political Organizations
Formed a non-profit organization, Save The Boom, to save a historic gay bar in Laguna Beach California
2008- Formed Californians Against Hate to be a political watchdog group of the major donors and organizations fighting to repeal gay marriage in California through Proposition 8

Boycotts
Through his non-profit organization Californians Against Hate, Mr. Karger published what he calls a “Dishonor Roll” where he calls for a boycott of donors who give more than $5,000 to Proposition 8. There are a total of 4 companies on the boycott list:

  1. Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel
  2. A-1 Self Storage
  3. Bolthouse Farms
  4. Garff Automotive

I am listing these in this article, and I call for a BUYCOTT for these 4 companies to counteract Mr. Karger’s boycott.

Political Accomplishments
The first openly gay presidential candidate from a major political party in American history
Mr. Karger was the first to announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for President of the United States on March 23, 2011

Political Affiliation
“Independent Republican”- this is the political affiliation Mr. Karger used when he announced on April 10, 2010 at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference that he was “seriously considering becoming a candidate for President of the United States in 2012″
Mr. Krager has defined himself as the “Anti-Romney” candidate, and appears to have an express goal, in his words, to “run a campaign specifically designed to throw a wrench into Romney’s run”

His Reputation
It comes as no surprise that Mr. Karger does not fit into what is commonly identified as a Republican. Steve Scheffler, a delegate from the Iowa, said that Karger is “part of the radical homosexual community”.

Another term used to describe his candidacy is “a long shot”.

One interviewer actually had the backbone to essentially say the real “question on the minds of many is does he think he has a snowball’s chance?” Then the interviewer went on to say, “The answer to that is, yes and no.”

Straw Polls
March 31, 2011- Mr. Karger won the Saint Anselm College Republicans Presidential Straw Poll in Manchester, New Hampshire by receiving 25% of the vote. He defeated Mitt Romney by just five votes.

Endorsements
Endorsed by Mike Manning, a cast member from The Real World: Washington D.C.

On The Issues
Abortion– Roe v. Wade is the law of the land
If I were remotely leaning towards voting for Mr. Karger this issue alone would knock him out of the running for me. As I stated in another candidate profile, this is one thing I cannot compromise on. If you have read any of my articles regarding mine and my husband’s journey to have a family you will understand why this is an absolute for me. I cannot and will not budge on this issue- ever! Life begins at conception. I cannot vote for someone who believes a woman has a right to choose whether or not she carries life or kills life.

American Spirit– Optimism and getting along
Immigration
– Let’s Take Action Now
Energy Independence– We must end our dependence on foreign oil
Education– We need to transform education in this country
Jobs and Economy– Jobs First: We need to keep jobs in America
Marijuana– We should move to legalize and tax marijuana
Foreign Policy– Defense, Development and Diplomacy
Iraq and Afghanistan Wars– Surge out of both countries
Middle East and Israel– Strong American leadership to help bring a lasting peace in the Middle East
Supports Israel– Mr. Karger has stated that his record on issues relating to Israel are comparable with that of Menachim Begin, the former Israeli prime minister and founder of the Likud Party.

In his words, quoting from his official campaign website:

LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER AND QUEER RIGHTS
I am the only candidate for president who supports full equality for all Americans

Supports repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
Supports making same-sex marriage legal
Supports ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT)

28th Amendment Proposal
Mr. Karger has proposed a 28th Amendment be added to the United States Constitution that would allow 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote. His opinion is that this would encourage younger people to participate in the political process. In his words, from his official campaign website:

“I want to empower our youth”

In an interview with the Huffington Post on February 8, 2011 Mr. Karger states:

“I feel that we should immediately begin discussion and planning to lower the legal voting age in the United States to either 16 or 17 years old.”

“We should then encourage our schools and school districts to teach these young people about elections and the campaigns on the local, state and national level while they are happening.”

I had to catch myself when I was writing this, because I almost dropped my computer I was laughing so hard! Is this man serious? We have seen too many “Man On The Street” interviews where people much older than 16 and 17-years-old have absolutely no clue who Joe Biden is, much less someone like Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, or anyone less “recognizable” than the aforementioned people. Oh, everyone recognized Barack Obama- the lame-stream media made sure that the entire world knew him.

Mr. Karger states that we should encourage our schools and school districts to teach them about elections. Are you kidding me? The schools have indoctrinated our children too much as it is, politically! In the 2008 election cycle not one of my children knew who Joe Biden was. Oh, yes, they knew Barack Obama alright! In the infamous words of Sarah Palin, “you betcha” my husband and I informed them of the entire process, who was running and what they stood for. In their classroom elections all but one of my children voted for Barack Obama. This is after us talking on numerous occasions as a family about what we stand for and what is important to us. The power of suggestion and peer pressure is too great to entrust our future to children!

In a day and age when you talk about “The Situation”, people automatically assume you are talking about a a Reality TV show rather than the situation our country is in I think the last thing in the world we need is to have “Generation Me” voting at a younger age! The majority of 18-year-olds are uneducated politically- why add two more years of uneducated votes to the system?

Warped Priorities
At the risk of skewing the readers view of Mr. Karger, I am adding a personal heading rather than a “factual” heading to this section.

Mr. Karger has said that his candidacy for the presidency is not so much about winning but rather getting the LDS Church to end its political campaign against same-sex marriage.

Laying aside everything that I disagree politically with Mr. Karger on, to know that the express goal of a person running for the office of leader of the free world is to stop a religious organization from being involved in the political process to have their voice and opinion does not sit well with me. It is quite obvious to me that Mr. Karger is not a conservative. Why he is running on the “Republican” ticket I do not know.

I want a leader who has the best interest of this nation at heart rather than the numerous leaders who have a selfish agenda for running for office. Trying to “hush up and shut down” a religious organization from speaking out against the leftist agenda is not an admirable trait to say the least- especially for a candidate running on the “conservative” ticket.

Mr. Karger’s priorities seem to be very warped, to say the least.

On The Web
Fred Karger For President Official Campaign Website
Fred Karger on Facebook
Fred Karger on Twitter
Fred Karger on YouTube

_________________________

Sources:
Ask.com
Fred Karger Official Campaign Website

 

See the profiles of other potential 2012 GOP Candidates