GOP to Concentrate on "Moral Issues"

[Mephisto]

CNN) -- "Moral values voters" may have made the difference for President Bush and Republicans in the 2004 election. These voters were driven to the polls not only by their support for the GOP, but also by the dozens of state ballot measures dealing with issues like same-sex marriage and gambling.

While some strategists say it is hard to pinpoint to what degree these issues motivated evangelicals and conservatives to turn out in 2004, both parties plan to emulate the strategy this fall by putting moral values issues on state ballots and debating these topics in Washington and on the campaign trail.

Congressional Republicans have unveiled their "American Values Agenda," a platform that includes banning embryonic stem cell research, gay marriage and flag-burning. Democrats have called the GOP's "values" focus election-year "pandering" and put out their own agenda dealing with issues like rising health care costs and increasing the minimum wage.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/special/issues/moral.issues/
__________

Of course, nothing could be more important in these days of terrorists actions and an unpopular war than; stem cell research, flag burning and gay rights.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

I feel confident that the GOP will dictate to me what "morals" are important.

Charlie (morally challenged in a GOP universe) Monoxide

 

[Mephisto]

I feel confident that the GOP will dictate to me what "morals" are important.

Charlie (morally challenged in a GOP universe) Monoxide

Are we worshiping the golden calf this week, or is it the "all-loving God" who backs us in our war against terror?

 

[Katana]

I feel confident that the GOP will dictate to me what "morals" are important.

Charlie (morally challenged in a GOP universe) Monoxide

Well, only they have a handle on what American values really are.

Thank goodness someone does.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

Are we worshiping the golden calf this week, or is it the "all-loving God" who backs us in our war against terror?

Are you implying that the GOP has "poll driven moral priorities"?

Why do you hate Bush and baby Jesus?

Charlie (at least this week anyhow) Monoxide

 

[Mephisto]

Well, only they have a handle on what American values really are.

Thank goodness someone does.

They've been doing it all along, you just haven't paid attention.

"Free societies are hopeful societies. And free societies will be allies against these hateful few who have no conscience, who kill at the whim of a hat."—Washington, D.C., Sept. 17, 2004

"I didn't join the International Criminal Court because I don't want to put our troops in the hands of prosecutors from other nations. Look, if somebody has done some wrong in our military, we'll take care of it. We got plenty of capability of dealing with justice."—Niceville, Fla., Aug. 10, 2004

"Secondly, the tactics of our—as you know, we don't have relationships with Iran. I mean, that's—ever since the late '70s, we have no contacts with them, and we've totally sanctioned them. In other words, there's no sanctions—you can't—we're out of sanctions."—Annandale, Va., Aug. 9, 2004

"The reason we start a war is to fight a war, win a war, thereby causing no
more war!"

G.W.Bush--The first Presidential debate

I tell people all the time, you're equally American if you're a Christian, Jew, or Muslim. You're equally American if you believe in an Almighty or don't believe in an Almighty. That's a sacred freedom.
-- Dubya offers some unintentional irony by calling the freedom to be an atheist "sacred", Washington, D.C., Mar. 10, 2006

I believe we are called to do the hard work to make our communities and quality of life a better place.
-- Or something like that, Collinsville, Illinois, Jan. 5, 2005

The idea of a democracy taking hold in what was a place of tyranny and hatred and destruction is -- is such a hopeful moment in the history of the world.
-- The idea is a hopeful moment? Washington, D.C., Dec. 21, 2004

And here's one I just HAD to include:

"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB/GYN's aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country."—Sept. 6, 2004, Poplar Bluff, Mo.

 

[Tony]

CNN) -- "Moral values voters" may have made the difference for President Bush and Republicans in the 2004 election. These voters were driven to the polls not only by their support for the GOP, but also by the dozens of state ballot measures dealing with issues like same-sex marriage and gambling.

While some strategists say it is hard to pinpoint to what degree these issues motivated evangelicals and conservatives to turn out in 2004, both parties plan to emulate the strategy this fall by putting moral values issues on state ballots and debating these topics in Washington and on the campaign trail.

Congressional Republicans have unveiled their "American Values Agenda," a platform that includes banning embryonic stem cell research, gay marriage and flag-burning. Democrats have called the GOP's "values" focus election-year "pandering" and put out their own agenda dealing with issues like rising health care costs and increasing the minimum wage.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/special/issues/moral.issues/
__________

Of course, nothing could be more important in these days of terrorists actions and an unpopular war than; stem cell research, flag burning and gay rights.

"Moral Values Voters" aka the "Idiot Vote".

 

[Random]

Well what else can the GOP do? Run on their record?

 

[BPSCG]

Well what else can the GOP do? Run on their record?

Problem is, the Repubs pretty much capitulated any time Harry Reid mumbled "filibuster," so there's really not much of a record to run on. What happened to Social Securoty reform? System's going to hell, but the Dems were able to Dem-agogue it to death.

The Wall Street Journal had some suggestions for the coming 12-day mini-session:

Military tribunals. In Hamdan, the Supreme Court invited Congress to rewrite the rules for military tribunals for terrorists, and Republicans can help President Bush and the war effort by doing so.

Spending restraint. One reason many GOP voters are in a sour mood, and may stay home in November, is the lack of spending discipline. Republicans can lighten that blot on their record by passing reforms that stem the worst abuses -- namely, more transparency for special-interest "earmarks," and a line-item veto to allow a President to delete specific spending pork.

Health insurance . The latest Census data finds that 46.6 million Americans lack health insurance, with the cost of coverage rising. The House has already passed a popular bill to let small businesses and associations offer lower-cost insurance the way that Fortune 500 companies can. Liberals in the Senate are blocking it precisely because it might reduce the ranks of the uninsured and thus reduce the demand for government health care. Why not force Democrats to vote up or down?

Gas prices . Gasoline prices are falling nationwide, but with oil prices still near $70 a barrel now is the time to open new sources of domestic energy supply. The House and Senate have both passed bills to expand drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, and there's no reason they can't be reconciled in conference. The House has also passed faster permitting for new gas refineries, and Senate Democrats should also be forced to kill that if they dare.

Taxes . Democrats who oppose making the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent are arguing for one of the largest tax increases in American history. The average family with children would see its tax payment rise by $2,084 a year. A vote in both houses on making these permanent is good policy and politics. Ditto for another vote on repealing the death tax, to remind voters in red states about where their tax burdens will head if Democrats take control.

These are all issues the Repubs should force votes on, and let the voters decide in November. Note they are all issues that people personally care about (as opposed to, say campaign finance reform), so they can offer the voters a real choice in November if the Dems line up to oppose the Repubs on all of them. If they do that, they certainly run the risk that the country might not support them on death tax repeal and health insurance reform and so on, in which case they'll become the minority party again.

But if they don't, it'll all come down to a referendum on Iraq, which will just about guarantee the Repubs become the minority party again.

 

[gnome]

Problem is, the Repubs pretty much capitulated any time Harry Reid mumbled "filibuster," so there's really not much of a record to run on. What happened to Social Securoty reform? System's going to hell, but the Dems were able to Dem-agogue it to death.

The Wall Street Journal had some suggestions for the coming 12-day mini-session:
These are all issues the Repubs should force votes on, and let the voters decide in November. Note they are all issues that people personally care about (as opposed to, say campaign finance reform), so they can offer the voters a real choice in November if the Dems line up to oppose the Repubs on all of them. If they do that, they certainly run the risk that the country might not support them on death tax repeal and health insurance reform and so on, in which case they'll become the minority party again.

But if they don't, it'll all come down to a referendum on Iraq, which will just about guarantee the Repubs become the minority party again.

People are aware that Social Security has a problem--opposition was to the Republican solution, not to the idea that there was a problem.

I question the statistic about the average family's tax payments--it seems to say that most people will pay more than $2000 a year MORE in taxes if the tax cuts are removed? I have to question that number. I'm above average and my taxes haven't fluctuated that much, to the best of my knowledge.

Of course, it's deceiving to report that by dollars anyway. Percentages are more meaningful, as $2000 means a lot to a middle income family, but not a lot to someone with a six-figure income. In fact, it would be even more informative if the differences were broken down by income quintiles or something similar.

 

[gnome]

One more:

Spending restraint. One reason many GOP voters are in a sour mood, and may stay home in November, is the lack of spending discipline. Republicans can lighten that blot on their record by passing reforms that stem the worst abuses -- namely, more transparency for special-interest "earmarks," and a line-item veto to allow a President to delete specific spending pork.

*Hits assistant with a hat* "How we gonna run on the reform when we're the damn incumbents?"

(taken from O Brother, Where Art Thou)

 

[Random]

I question the statistic about the average family's tax payments--it seems to say that most people will pay more than $2000 a year MORE in taxes if the tax cuts are removed? I have to question that number. I'm above average and my taxes haven't fluctuated that much, to the best of my knowledge.

Of course, it's deceiving to report that by dollars anyway. Percentages are more meaningful, as $2000 means a lot to a middle income family, but not a lot to someone with a six-figure income. In fact, it would be even more informative if the differences were broken down by income quintiles or something similar.

No, that sounds about right. Remember that when Republicans talk about how much their policies benefit average Americans, they fold in the oppulently wealthy at the top in their calculations of "average". Take the total amount of all money Americans will save on their taxes, including multi-billionaires, then divide by number of taxpayers. Poof, instant average American tax savings.

This is pretty much how the GOP has been able to keep all these reasonably good economic statistics flying around, even though the economy is mediocre to poor for the bulk of Americans. Take out the top one percent and recalculate the economic statistics and it doesn't look nearly as good...

 

[President Bush]

What happened to Social Securoty reform?

What happened to common sense?

We need wages growing more (quit kicking me, Dick) proportionately over all earning levels. If the wages of (Bernanke... Heimlich!) high-wage earners are growing faster than low-wage earners, then the percentage of total earnings (Paulson, put down that gun) subject to Social Security taxes has to fall, given the ceiling on Social Security-taxed wages.

 

[steverino]

I am not quite sure how to ask this. I am very nervous, but are you REALLY our president, sir? Can I shtoop one of your daughters, even the brunette?

 

[President Bush]

Can I shtoop one of your daughters, even the brunette?

Five, four, three, two, one...

 

[peptoabysmal]

After much hand wringing, the Democratic Party has developed an effective strategy to win in 2008. It has been leaked to me.

Increased voter registration - make certain that every Baldwin brother registers to vote.

Move headquarters of Democratic Party to Hooters.

Fire current DNC staff - use saved monies to develop a better Barbeque sauce.

Support Alan Keyes' bid for the presidency.

Support Big business loophole for healthcare - corporations are no longer required to provide insurance for workers who do not believe in evolution.

Prove that Republicans plan to use Department of Homeland Security to deport all landscape workers and cleaning ladies.

Introduce populist ballot measures:

Tax credit for porn rentals.
Mandatory health coverage for obesity surgery
Celebrity political gag order.

Use direct mail campaign to convince Evangelicals that Jesus loved lattes.

Split the conservative base by suggesting that stem cell research may find a cure for homosexuality.
...

http://www.alldaycoffee.net/story.php/85

There's more, but I'm pushing the limits of "fair use" as it is.

On a more serious note Mephisto, it sounds a bit like you are hoping that people who don't share your world view don't show up at the polls. Real positive message there...

For a second there, I made myself believe that you were going to reveal the Democrat strategy for Foreign Policy and National Security.

 

[steverino]

Five, four, three, two, one...

 

[BPSCG]

I question the statistic about the average family's tax payments--it seems to say that most people will pay more than $2000 a year MORE in taxes if the tax cuts are removed? I have to question that number. I'm above average and my taxes haven't fluctuated that much, to the best of my knowledge.

Fine, let's have Congress vote on whether to make the cuts permanent or not. Let the Dems run on a platform that says they only want to increase your taxes a little bit.

The point is, there are serious, winning issues for the Repubs that don't involve constitutional flag-burning and gay-marriage amendments. But it looks to me like the majority party isn't interested in governing, but in simply hunkering down and hoping that the voters will decide that the Dems would be even worse. That's an excellent strategy for becoming a minority party.

 

[Darth Rotor]

GOP to concentrate on moral issues? How about

"Waste not, want not."

*Looks at the deficit*

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight

DR

ETA:

I am not quite sure how to ask this. I am very nervous, but are you REALLY our president, sir? Can I shtoop one of your daughters, even the brunette?

This just in from Miss Manners: One should usually ask if one can court someone's daughter, regardless of whether or not schtooping is the real aim. Some social conventions are necessary lubricants to prevent friction, or random bird shooting.

DR

 

[ponderingturtle]

Well what else can the GOP do? Run on their record?

Interesting idea, but then people might start noticing all the contractual violations of their contract with america. Remember that ballanced budgets and term limits are only things parties want when they are not in power, when they are in power it is all about the raw naked power.