In response to:

Pharisees and Sadducees of the GOP

Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:08 AM
Some have suggested that Republicans should give up the fight for human rights because the inartful words of two Senatorial candidates cost them electoral victory. I disagree. I simply do not believe that fiscal responsibility need be purchased a the price of innocent human lives. Progress is being made and the GOP cannot give up the moral position that brought it into being when the violation of human rights was slavery.
IsraelFirsterSecond Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 12:50 PM
I agree with you Earl. The fight for the rights of the unborn preceeds everything else.
Andy544 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:20 AM
Earl, you claim that 'progress is being made'. I sincerely hope you are right. Meanwhile, the GOP is steadily losing ground as a political force. If 'abortion' was an important political issue to the American people, the GOP (the party of anti-abortion would have won in 2008 and 2012). It didn't. In fact, incredibly, two important Senate seats were LOST over the issue. What WILL win elections for the GOP is for it to return to the five (5) key principles which I outlined in the post at 9:34 am. The GOP has allowed abortion to become a 'front and center' issue in its political profile; and has alienated millions of voters (especially female) and harmed itself by doing so. I detest abortion, but abortion is a LOSER issue for the GOP..
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:37 AM
As JustMC has pointed out, what has been called the Civil War was not about slavery. Slavery was of great importance to slaveholders and abolitionists, not so much for the general public, but Lincoln did not run only on an economic platform. He did not abandon his anti-slavery stance and he won.
JustMC Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:42 AM
He won on abolition only because the ruinous war gave him a blank check in the end, no?
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 10:56 AM
No, I'm talking about the election of 1860. That was before the war and some say his election was the trigger for secession.
BTW, I have never had pointed out to me a Constitutional provision forbidding secession and I expect you never have either.
Corbett_ Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:06 AM
Andy -- considering that the GOP ran a pro-abortion candidate this time, I don't think that the anti-abortion platform cost them the election.
JustMC Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:06 AM
Agreed 100% on secession.

Though my read on the 1860 election is that it, like the war, was about money and power, not slavery. (Hence I think Lincoln won it on money/power, not on abolition.)
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:32 AM
Right, but he still said "A nation divided against itself cannot stand." He supported abolition in the Lincoln-Douglas debates. He didn't downplay it.
JustMC Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:44 AM
I'm a bit lost on this one. He said lots of things to lots of people, and ALL of it was about money and power, not about honestly trying to end slavery. (Meaning, he'd have been talking about unicorns if he thought it would lead to the money/power grab for the Northern states.) In fact, if you read some of the his quotes, he pretty much DID say all different things to different audiences at different times. I don't see any honor, nor do I see any principle in Lincoln, other than might makes right.
JustMC Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:49 AM
I wasn't as clear as I wanted above. I'm a bit lost on the significance of the quote you cited. I read it a bit like a broken clock being right at times. When it made sense to call slavery evil, he did. When it made sense to call blacks subhuman and/or inferior, he did. When it made sense to promise freedom only to slaves in the rebelling states and not in the north, he did. That's kinda what I was getting at.
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:50 AM
He was a politician, all right.
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:52 AM
JustMC Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 11:56 AM
Thanks. And now, I'm all the way out of time. It's been a pleasure and a useful experience. I wish there were more such bright, honest, and courteous people around here. (We had a remarkably good bunch in this thread, overall, in my view. Some I recognize, others not, but a much better thread than many I've seen.)

Every Republican knows another Republican who agrees with them on 99% of the issues, yet will attack them relentlessly over the 1% of issues they disagree upon. Instead of uniting against the left, these busybodies waste countless hours criticizing other Republicans. They will frequently do it under the ruse of being the “true conservatives,” claiming that anyone who does not agree with them is not conservative enough. Yet the 1% of issues they disagree with others on are often arbitrarily decided and not legitimate issues. Mitt Romney was criticized for being too moderate of a Republican presidential candidate, yet he ran...

Related Tags: John McCain GOP Conservatives