Comments on: How To Win Again

By: race42008.com » Blog Archive » A Blueprint for Republicans

race42008.com » Blog Archive » A Blueprint for Republicans — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:14:57 +0000

[...] piece was originally posted on NewMajority.com on May 5, 2009. It was revised and updated for this post.) by Dustin Siggins @ 8:09 am. Filed [...]

By: choccity2005

choccity2005 — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:17:52 +0000

danbmil99:I agree and disagree with your points.First i love glenn beck and hate hannity.Second, As a conservative i could really care less if gays got married.I don't want to police anyone's bedroom.Yes there will be some people like pedophiles who will exploit it to adopt children,but thier are heterosexuals who exploit children.Marriage should be up to the states.

maine,mass,iowa,vermont all have legalized gay marriage and i support that decision.texas,florida,california,georgia...has said No to gay marriage and i support that too.

I am a christian and my bible tells me NOT to judge.So i don't.I just believe in state rights.......I wish abortion could be apllied to that same scenario.

Some might say well slavery should of been a state right......I agree.You know why....b/c eventually throgh civil unrest all slavery would have been abolished.plus all africans were brought here against thier will.

So i totally believe in state rights...I'm a conservative federalist.This stops all the social garbage that's going on in this country.

Your gay,and you want to get married...you go to maine and live.

Your in maine and you don't like it...move to texas.That should be the criteria for all these social issues:

Affirmative action
abortion
legalizing marijuana
prostitution
gambling
etc...let the states decide.

NO MORE DEBATES!!

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:12:18 +0000

BTW I think this is an excellent article. Well written, and hits just about every point right. While I am personally for gay marriage, and I believe the trend is obvious, the population is not quite there. What is critical is to stop sounding like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and our own Dragonlady — people suffused with fear and hate and dread. It’s a downer. People want positive energy. The GOP right now is like the walking dead. No one wants a zombie over for dinner.

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Thu, 07 May 2009 05:09:42 +0000

dragonlady: "We should support traditional marriage because of the unique value of what a mother and father can provide to a child."

Ugh, what crap. Do you know any same-sex families? Do you have any idea what "values" they promote in the lives of their children? This kind of bigoted, religion-inspired nonsense is what is killing the GOP. God does not give a crap about your antique, close-minded views on what is and isn't acceptable in OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES.

So take your bigotry, your hate, your fear, and shove it somewhere else. True conservative values don't need your baggage.

By: dragonlady

dragonlady — Thu, 07 May 2009 02:30:39 +0000

The majority of voters agree with Republicans on gay marriage. I would not put it front and center but I wouldn't shy away from it either. The left certainly wontwell essentially cede the issue to them. Look at all the personal attacks against Carrie Prajean. Gay marriage should be put in the 'change rhetoric' column. Marriage and family is the building block institution to a civil society. How it is structured affects the entire cultural context. We should support traditional marriage because of the unique value of what a mother and father can provide to a child. Do we really want to make kids merely commodities to adult desires? If we legalize gay marriage, why not polagamy? (As a woman, I prefer we not endorse an institution where women are clearly inferior to men). It also may curtail religious freedom, even if churches aren't forced to marry gay couples. They will be pressured to play ball, like the Catholic adoption service in Boston. Of course we should allow room for disagreement, and also respect the states' roles in defining marriage. If a state wants to allow domestic partnerships or civil unions, I wouldnt oppose it.

Also, polls show voters prefer less rather than more govt. Effective governance can be more easily achieved with less government. Government can be more agile and responsive to the public if its lean versus a sprawling bureaucracy. Govt should focus on creating conditions for individual success, and provide temporary help in times of bad luck, not be the continual nanny to fall back upon.

By: Realist

Realist — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:11:34 +0000

As long as the GOP is beholden to blowhard Rush Limbaugh, it's not going anywhere anytime soon. The much ballyhooed "rebranding effort" is completely dead in the water after Rep. Cantor was forced to bow to his lord and master and "rebrand" his own earlier statements that it would be based on a listening tour.

And what exactly is the current function of Michael Steele at the RNC? Now that he has been stripped of any budgetary control thanks to a rebel coup by the old guard, is he anything more than a television personality?

It will be interesting to see how Steele's insanely destructive statement that moderates are welcome to sit at the table, but not to change anything, works out in attracting more competitive candidates to sign up.

There is some hope, however, that there will be such a moderate candidate, and he may already be on the scene: Gov. Huntsman of Utah has stood up to Rush and I wish him luck.

By: choccity2005

choccity2005 — Wed, 06 May 2009 15:35:09 +0000

HHomer: I don't see any points in which you disagred with my reasoning.First i am all for the legalization of marijuana.Cigarettes and alcohol kill more people,ruin more lives and cost taxpayers alot more money in terms of healthcare costs.I believe it should be a state right.If california wants to legalize it,then so be it.Let it be taxed and regulated.Exported even.....they are suffering bankruptcy and who are we to say no.There is no information that says it is more dangerous than cigarettes.

Now when it comes to my 5 points i wrote earlier.The troops on the borders will cut the drug trade in half.If the cartels were making 100 mil a year,they will be making 50 now.You start legalizing pot it in certain states and that hits the cartels even further.That hits the drug gangs even further.they may bring in 30 mil a year now.that's a 70 mil dollar hit possibly more.

You are slowly destroying the cartels,now bribing officials,buying weapons,buying houses isn't so easy.If you think the cartels are fighting now,when that pie gets smaller and smaller.....plus the pressure from the calderon governemnt,you may see them disapear alltogether.

It has been reported that close to 80 percent of the heroin,cocaine,marijuana and other drugs come from mexico.

i also believe every state should legalize gambling,Online gambling,legalize prostition designated in certain areas of the state.Regulate it,tax it,offer help with addiction and so forth.This puts the pimps out of buisness,this also cripples the underworld.the only people that are helped by not regulating these things are the underworld,cartels,mafia and street gangs.

This would give the u.s billions of dollars,in new revenue.States would be able to lower property taxes b/c of the tax money derived from it.

We have had zero solutions to these problems,the problems just get bigger and bigger.If it does not work ,laws can be made to end it.But you can't tell me what is going on now is working.

The war on drugs then would be able to succeed.You can't police crack,cocaine,heroin,crank,etc.....when you have a billion dollar buisness of sending drugs into the u.s.you slow down the drugs from coming in.you focus on the big harmful deadly drugs.this is how you win that war on drugs.

I'm a REALISTIC CONSERVATIVE.There needs to be more like me

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:37:07 +0000

HHomer: Schwarzenegger just opened the door a crack (no pun intended) to the discussion of decriminalization of marijuana in California.

The "creative conservative solution," IMO, should be to propose a set of regulations, laws, penalties, etc., that are consistent with the best known theories and practices of medical science. This would also appeal to the college-educated young, who have looked at the GOP's moral puritanism and concluded that they're just a bunch of reactionaries.

Scientists have pretty conclusive evidence that marijuana, as it's used by most, is both less addictive and less dangerous than either alcohol or tobacco. And there is no real scientific evidence that marijuana is a "gateway drug" to harder drugs. Millions smoke marijuana who would never touch heroin or cocaine. Including cancer patients and terminally ill patients, who smoke it for pain relief.

So why continue to treat marijuana as this menace to society requiring Federal agents to stop it?

By: HHomer

HHomer — Wed, 06 May 2009 09:21:58 +0000

choccity2005 I admire your enthusiasm but disagree with much of your reasoning.

The war on drugs has been lost, any success in reducing supply will merely increase profitability for the drug gangs and raise the stakes all round. The creative conservative solution is legalisation and regulation, we'd spend less on enforcement and make lots in taxes. Are you planning to close the border with Canada too? A lot of drugs come into the US from the north. The truth is a nation the size of a continent can never 'close' it's borders completely.

By: choccity2005

choccity2005 — Wed, 06 May 2009 01:21:43 +0000

sinz54:We do need troops(quadruple border agents) on the border.When you have sanctuary cities like san francisco that will give illegals housing,foodstamps,welfare and tuition.you need to shut down the flow itself.You have many cities that would house them.So even though they have no employment,they still have shelter,food,opportunities.

the troops shut all that down.

The troops also do 4 things:

1.Stop drugs from coming into the U.S(atleast by half).This then lessens the criminals brought to jail/prison,brings alot of organized crime to it's knees.The main source of money for gangs is drug money.Gets alot of kids and adults off of the drugs...lessens the supply,and if anything the cost will go up.

2.Stops guns from coming from the U.S to the Drug cartels.Which helps calderon to defeat the cartels,they become less armed.If the military in mexico is corrupt they would then findout where the guns are coming from.

3.Stops illegal immigration,gives conservs cover with ideas 1 and 2 not to be labeled xenophobes.The stopping of illegals saves the nation billions in education,healthcare,welfare....etc.

4.There are millions of people on welfare in this country.They get a check every month to sit on thier backsides and do nothing.They get thier housing,food,healthcare through medicaid,daycare and actual money from the government.Set up a system where they work the jobs the illegals use to do.Make them pick the fruit,vegetables,clean the houses or whatever.then let the company pay thier wages back to the states and cities.Welfare people get thier benefits,company gets thier work,illegals have no jobs,government gets repaid some if not all for what they give the welfare recipients and it's a win/win.Illegals have little education or skills and so do welfare recipients.

5.We shut down the border,we stop any al qaeda members from ever getting in here.We use soldiers we are paying to guard europe of all places.Cripple gangs in this country,drug cartels in mexico,lesen the burden on states and cities.Now all the illegals still here can either go back home cause there are no work for them or choose to be citizens.If they choose to be citizens they have to pay fines,learn english,go through all the immigration hoops for 7 years.

The G.O.P should pay me for that solution i just gave them.Obama should pay me...Win,win all over the board.the only people who wouldn't like it is drug cartels,illegal lovers and american gangsters.