Death Toll Revised Down to 24 After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado…100+ Injured…Children Among the Dead…Stunning Pictures…Woman Finds Dog During Interview!

WATCH on TheBlaze TV: Latest Updates on Tornado Aftermath, Including Updates From Glenn Beck in Oklahoma

Politics

How Not to Reform the Republican Party

Dec. 2, 2012 7:16pm

David Lampo, director of publications at the Cato Institute, is a long-time libertarian activist and author of "A Fundamental Freedom: Why Republicans, […]

David Lampo, director of publications at the Cato Institute, is a long-time libertarian activist and author of "A Fundamental Freedom: Why Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians Should Support Gay Rights." His articles have appeared in the Washington Post, Newsday, National Review, Chicago Tribune, Richmond Times-Dispatch and many other publications. He resides in Alexandria, Virginia

[ x ]

dlampo@cato.org

Author's Website

While most Democrats are still gloating about the recent election results, Republicans are in a full-throated what-went-wrong self-examination. Most have a theory about why Romney lost: Hispanics turned off by a strident anti-immigrant stand; women turned off by anti-abortion candidates like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock; younger voters turned off by the anti-gay Republican platform. These groups in fact represented a larger share of the electorate this year than in 2008, so Republicans certainly have cause for concern.

There is some truth in all of these theories. While Gov. Romney narrowly won independents, a turnaround from four years ago, President Obama won these other groups by wide margins. Clearly, many or most of these voters were turned off by the overtly rightwing positions on social issues held by the Republican Party and endorsed, if only half-heartedly, by Romney himself. While Gov. Romney generally steered clear of social issues during the general campaign, Christian Right candidates kept shoving them back into the spotlight, a godsend to Democrats that reinforced their talking points about a Republican war on woman, gays, and racial minorities.

But on the Christian Right, there’s a completely different theory about why Romney lost: he wasn’t conservative enough on social issues. This is not a new theory; after McCain’s defeat four years ago, prominent rightwing spokesmen argued he lost because he was too moderate. Ironically, they said that only a few months after they had praised the Republican ticket as the best in years because of the addition of Gov. Sarah Palin, arguing that she fired up the base like never before. This year, turnout by white evangelicals was actually up even though Republican turnout overall was down, and Romney won 78 percent of their votes. The contrast between Romney and the president on social issues could not have been greater, so it simply defies belief that social conservatives weren’t motivated to turn out against the president.

Rather than acknowledge that most Americans disagree with their views, some on the right continue this line of attack. A recent example was Robert Jeffress, senior pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas and a prominent spokesman for the more extreme wing of the Christian Right. Jeffress made national news this year when he compared Mormonism to a cult. Writing recently in the Washington Post, Jeffress conceded that evangelicals “are a diminishing minority in America,” and that many of them believe they’ve already lost the culture wars, but he argued that Republicans should nevertheless choose presidential candidates who are outspoken in their opposition to gay marriage and abortion rather than candidates who focus on economic issues. He claims this will lead to victory for Republicans, but his reasoning is, to say the very least, odd.

To make such candidates more appealing to moderate and independent voters, he argues, they should repudiate many of the traditional anti-big government positions the Republican Party has long held, such as opposition to Obamacare. In order to advance what he labels the “biblical absolutes,” Republicans should compromise on what he calls their “political preferences,” the very economic issues that have defined the Republican Party for generations. “We must be willing to bend on the latter if we want our moral agenda enacted,” he says. He never explains how that social agenda will be enacted when most voters oppose it.

Contemplate the tortured logic of this proposal: If the Republican Party would simply repudiate its core principles of support for limited government and free markets and instead make its primary focus an anti-gay, anti-abortion social agenda, it will win presidential elections by bringing more social conservatives to the polls and drawing more independent voters. Mr. Jeffress doesn’t offer any evidence for why establishment Republicans, Tea Party members, or libertarians would find this a more appealing agenda than what we have now. In fact, most of them would reject it out of hand. It is a prescription for a third party comprised of all the disaffected Republicans his agenda would drive out of the party.

The idea that voters would flock to a new Republican Party that puts social issues at the top of its agenda while compromising its free market views on economic issues is ludicrous. Republicans may disagree about a lot of things, but one thing most of them should agree on right now is to exclude Mr. Jeffress and his like-minded colleagues from the debate over the future of the Republican Party. Otherwise, it will join the Whigs in the history books as just another defunct political party.

David Lampo is the author of A Fundamental Freedom: Why Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians Should Support Gay Rights (Rowman & Littlefield 2012).

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (63)

Matt
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 11:08am
David, the point of a political party is not to win elections. You want that to happen of course, but that is not the main goal. Holding true to your principles is the main goal. There can be some degree of coming together and compromise, but what you are advocating is more than that. You are saying that we should completely abandon our principles and allow the Republican party to become indistinguishable from the Democrat party. We do not need a one party system David. The repubilcan party should stand for its principles, and if that means not winning elections, well, that is better than selling your soul to the devil for votes.

I am quite disgusted that this drivel keeps getting posted, not only on Fox, where I’d expected, but even here on The Blaze. I think Beck should fire everyone who agrees with you. You clearly care more about winning elections than standing for what is right. If our founders had been as great of cowards as you are then we would still be a part of Britain today. You do what you want with your integrity sir. Personally, I will die before I abandon my principles.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- wilkes71
  Posted on December 7, 2012 at 7:57pm
  It is much too late to restore the GOP. It is almost indistinguishable from the Democratic Party. In other words, we have a one party system masquerading as opponents. Meanwhile we have the Constitution Party that has stuck to the founding principles election after election and has been virtually ignored. If we can get all those who feel betrayed by the Republicrat party to join the Constitution Party, it will become dominant and win the election in 2014 and thereafter. America will be restored. We should forget the GOP but never forget America was once “the light on the hill” and can be again.
  
  Report this comment
- David Lampo
  Posted on December 17, 2012 at 2:18pm
  “the point of a political party is not to win elections.” That takes the prize as the most ludicrous statement of all time. If you want to make a statement, buy a soapbox and make all the speeches you want, but, yes Matt, winning elections is exactly what parties are all about. You talk about standing for principles, but our founding principles were about freedom and limited government, not imposing your personal religious views on the unwilling, which is what you are advocating. You have let your religious views trump your supposed commitment to freedom. It is you who has abandoned your principles, not those who believe in equality before the law for all.
  
  Report this comment
- jmm124567
  Posted on December 31, 2012 at 8:45pm
  @Matt
  David is right!
  
  I’m a Republicans and you Religious Right people need to stop imposing your religion on others. This country is full of different religions and you guys try to shove your religion down everyone’s throats and push your moral beliefs on everyone you drive people away from the party.
  
  You guys one minute are talking about wanting individual freedom then the next minute talking about regulating what every consenting adult does in there house and taking away peoples freedoms. You guys have become extreme and authoritarian. You have become very intrusive and ruined the Republicans “limited government” message!
  
  Report this comment
quiltgal
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:57am
Obama WON on social issues. But it’s not going to work for conservative Republicans. Democrats have been allowed to frame the argument, which is that abortion and gay marriage are among the most important issues of the day, even more important than economic stability. Democrats have cultivated a public impression that they are champions of personal freedom because they condone abortion and gay marriage, and that Republicans are enemies of personal freedom because they want to restrict these behaviors. It’s slight of hand on the Democrats part of course. At the same time they’re championing the freedom to marry if you’re gay and do whatever you want with your body if you’re a woman, they’re also (more quietly) doubling down on government regulations that take away individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as gun rights, speech rights, religious rights, and property rights. Perhaps this is the broader social issue Republicans should be campaigning on: The importance of individual rights and getting big government OUT of our personal business. In this broader context, right to life for babies still in the womb becomes not a threat to individual freedom, but a safeguard of it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- wilkes71
  Posted on December 7, 2012 at 8:05pm
  Obama won on fraudulant ballots, not social issues. I don’t understand why the GOP is allowing it to stand unless they are just part of the same mob that is rushing America into one World government and don’t really care which party takes us there.
  
  Report this comment
- David Lampo
  Posted on December 17, 2012 at 2:22pm
  Yes, you’re right: Democrats are complete hypocrites when they talk about personal freedom but support all kinds of controls over people’s financial and economic freedom. But Republicans who talk about limited government and freedom but support the government imposing certain religious values on everyone are just as bad.
  
  Report this comment
thereyougoagain
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 8:14am
“it simply defies belief that social conservatives weren’t motivated to turn out against the president” — what you really mean is ‘that social conservatives should have held there noses and voted for a DemLite’ —

If this did not work with Cain; why are you so surprised it did not work with Romney — a little slow are we?

If the Rep party will get the “right” candidate they will stop losing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:20pm
  I will try and make this simple… THERE IS NO “RIGHT” CANDIDATE…..even the precious Ron Paul had MAJOR flaws with over half of America…
  
  The problem that NOBODY wants to look at or emphasize or deal with is just simple MATH…
  120 million Americans are REFUSING to participate. Only 51% of the eligible voters in the USA voted in this last election. Of the 49% that did not vote nearly 30% aren’t even REGISTERED!!! That is nearly 40 million people.
  
  Our Founding Fathers TOLD us this would happen. Our form of government is ONLY able to survive with a well educated, engaged, and AWAKE electorate that subscribed to a moral, ethical, and just worldview centered on Judeo-Christian values. Now that does not mean they all have to be Jews or Christians or even people of any faith, but they have to agree that freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, and self sacrifice are more important than getting FREE STUFF paid for by OTHER people.
  
  ANY politician that wins an election and starts talking about having a MANDATE is a complete LYING A-Hole especially when only 31% of the people eligible to vote voted for your stupid arse… this seems to be the idea of Dems and recent GOP heads…”we won so we have a mandate”… yes you do but not what you think… how about FOLLOW the Constitution and get the 40-50% that has not voted or registered in the last 112 years BACK into the GAME!!!
  
  Report this comment
- David Lampo
  Posted on December 17, 2012 at 2:27pm
  To say Romney was Dem Liteshows how out of touch you are with reality. On social issues and economic issues, there could not have been any greater difference between the two. Sir, you on the search for the Holy Grail. We heard the same thing from folks like you in 2008, when there was also a vast difference between the two candidates. Elections are always won in the middle by attracting more independents and other mainstream voters, not the far right or far left.
  
  Report this comment
vilma
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 6:59am
So the gop establishment really blew the election again. Some of us knew from the start that Romney was their choice but the dumbber voters didn’t listen. If we ever needed a third party, NOW is the time. Let the good reub politicians switch over to the new party. The progressive gop is the same as the dem party. Why in the world 55% of the US population want this country to fold is beyond normal comprehention. The rich money supply will dry up and those 55% will be the very ones burning the cities down and the entire population will starve. Total idiots they are.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:27pm
  Vilma
  
  40-50% of this country doesn’t even vote or register to vote once they are eligible… THAT is the issue… not that 55% voted for Obama or any other candidate for that matter…a slim majority even CARE to participate because we have fallen so far from our Founders and our Constitution that they don’t see the point…
  
  we have to start local, start small…group to county, then district, then State and then back to National….most States don’t even have over 70% registration let alone participation in an election…some are down around or below 50%…..mainly the heavily socialistic ones… States that are heavily conservative or split like “swing States” tend to have higher registered voting percentages even if they don’t have higher actual voting percentages.
  
  We are a SAD LAZY people that would rather let the DC insiders run our lives as long as we get our “free stuff” …. We have sold our soul… Yes..our soul…and the price was cheap….the host of Hell is laughing their collective butts off at how foolish we look and act….and just waiting for the gates to open so they can collect their prize….
  
  Report this comment
- wilkes71
  Posted on December 7, 2012 at 8:20pm
  You are “right on”. However it is important that we make the GOP the “third” party and we dominate them and the Democrats. To do that we need to unite all conservatives into one party. I think the Constitution Party should be the one. They stand for roughly what Ron Paul was campaigning for; a return to the Constitution. I am a Libertarian but will be switching to the Constitution Party.
  
  Report this comment
MrArbitrage
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:55am
MSNBC’s Chuck Todd is Clearly Pro-Slavery
http://youtu.be/z72FhnhtYDc

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Arizona Luke
Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:50am
Wait wait wait, we are somehow to believe the policies of the man that averaged 5% of the Primary vote (Ron Paul) is the ‘cure’ for the GOP ills and the man that almost beat Mitt with absolutely NO MONEY is the wrong way to go. Rarely do I see such an asinine post on The Blaze. But then again, nobody’s perfect.

Reagan’s statement of the 3 legs of Conservatism is the answer — and, like it or not, that INCLUDES Social issues. Fiscal, National Defense, and Family Values — anything else is lacking and may be called many things but it cannot be called “Conservatism”.

Santorum 2016!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 6:14am
  Yeah that’s the problem with the GOP. Most of you are looking for the next Reagan, when he EXPANDED Jimmy Carter’s government, debt, and deficit. Social issues are unconstitutional, progressive and only EXPAND the federal government.
  
  Report this comment
- ThoreauHD
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:31am
  Government exists to protect property, not family morality.
  
  Report this comment
- Brother Winston Smith
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:58am
  Santorum:
  
  Supports NDAA
  Supports SOPA
  Undeclared nation-building
  Foreign welfare
  Private Federal Reserve
  Interventionist (with no military service) = “chicken hawk”
  “Patriot” Act (smashes the 4th Amendment)
  Sonia Sotomayor
  Voted for Sarbanes-Oxley, but now claims to want it repealed
  No Child Left Behind (socialist education)
  Medicare prescription drug benefits (socialist medicine)
  NEA (socialized arts)
  Supports Assassinating Americans without Due Process
  Lautenberg Gun Ban
  Mandate locks on handguns
  Federal background checks at gun shows
  Multiple debt ceiling increases
  2005 “Bridge to Nowhere”
  Unconstitutional “war” on drugs
  Endorsed Arlen Spector (key vote for Obamacare)
  Endorsed Romney 08
  
  “There is no such society, that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”
  ~ Rick Santorum
  
  Report this comment
- David Lampo
  Posted on December 17, 2012 at 2:31pm
  The social issues Reagan talked about were crime, school choice and busing, and opposition to affirmative action. Now social issues focus almost exclusively on gay rights, and in a very hateful way. The overwhelming number of Americans don’t agree with that kind of hate, and they will reject a party that promotes it. Santorum would have lost in a landslide, and deserves to.
  
  Report this comment
- jmm124567
  Posted on December 31, 2012 at 8:55pm
  Sorry but the “family values” plank is dead. Yes it worked well for Reagan back in the 80′s because like three quarters of America or something like that opposed abortion and gay marriage.
  
  Are we in the 80′s anymore? NO! America has evolved. More people today support abortion and gay marriage!
  
  And Reagan barely talked about adoption and gays. He didn’t use all this hateful speech against gays calling them Satan like the Republican party does today. In fact Reagan opposed a law in his home state of California that would ban gays from teaching in schools. Reagan said being gay is not a disease. I bet Reagan would also support allowing openly gay people to serve in the military.
  
  Report this comment
Brother Winston Smith
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:37pm
Post 2012, there is NO “RINO”… there is NO “Establishment Republican”… there is NO “Elitist Republican”… there is NO “Republican Dinosaur”… or any other cute little names.

There is ONLY “REPUBLICAN.” Nothing more. Nothing less. REPUBLICAN. THEY ARE ALL THE SAME.

And it’s time for conservatives, Constitutionalists, Christians, Libertarians, Tea Partiers, etc. TO MOVE ON!!!!!!!!!!

The Constitution Party.
The Libertarian Party.
State nullification.
NOW!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
savagenatn
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:31pm
simple solution…stop with the damn RINOS!!! How many horrendous defeats does it take for these karl rove brain surgeon types to get it through their cast iron skulls? Afraid to criticize obummer because fear of “racism” wooooo…guess what idiots, they call us racists anyway so what the hell is the difference? This should have been the easiest win in the history of mankind with obummer’s pathetic record, but good ol RINOS blew it again

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- stage9
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:17am
  I’m not sure what ludicrous BS Mr Lampo is advocating but the Republican Party has lost because it has no soul, and because it forced a LIBERAL REPUBLICAN down our throats! There is no other magical explanation. The “extreme right” as he calls it EPITOMIZES the values of our founding fathers, while people like Mr Lampo only HIJACK THEM to push an anarchist agenda! After all, that’s all libertarians are anyway, anarchists.
  
  And as for liberals, everyone with a pulse understands that they are the enemy within. Their intention is to destroy America from the inside out. Removing moral restraint was their first target. And Republican morons like Mr Lampo wish to marry himself to them!
  
  A nation cannot and will not stand without a moral base. Social issues represent the FRONT LINES of the battle for the soul of America. Mr Lampo is too stupid to understand that too! You can put 16 trillion dollars into the coffers, but without a moral compass money will only be used to finance more decadence and debauchery!
  
  If Mr Lampo and his degenerate ilk in the GOP, who apparently have only one ambition — to lose elections — represent the future of the Republican Party, then he can have it! And may God have mercy on you for being a dumb fool!
  
  Report this comment
charles116
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:14pm
Santorum is now on regular on a birther website.
And he thought he’d be in the WH.
The GOP let the crazies take over.
Bachmann needs to be locked in an attic.
And Boehner rehashing Ryan’s nonsense as a ‘counter’ offer is just insulting.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 1:39pm
  why can’t Boehner to the same thing Obama just did….he rehashed his budget from the past 3 years and is trying to sell it as new and improved and balanced…he started out with 3.2 Trillion his first year and is now up to 4.2 Trillion… Umm…there is only 2.6 Trillion in revenue annually and NO amount of stealing from the rich will cure that….you can tax them 100% on all income and gains and investments… you can even STEAL all their investments, property, and wealth…and Obama would be out of money before the fiscal year was over…
  
  if Obama was SERIOUS..if he was a LEADER…he would say “lets raise the taxes on the top 5% of the people…those with combined incomes over $250K…and then lets cut $870 Billion…not in TEN years but in ONE”…that is what a LEADER would do…
  
  Romney had a plan to cut $4 trillion in 5 years….twice what Ryan planned…but you didn’t listen..so suffer you idiotic moron…
  
  Report this comment
- David Lampo
  Posted on December 17, 2012 at 2:39pm
  You’re certainly right about Bachmann and Santorum. Either of them would have lost in a landslide.
  
  Report this comment
Wisdom7
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:11pm
I just want to ask the people that keep saying “you shouldn’t legislate morality” a few questions. Why do you think civilized societies create laws? What is law? Why do we have rules and laws?

Listen, very few, if any, even agree with Jeffress. As a Christian, I am not trying to enact any agenda legislatively nor do I want to. As a “senior pastor” Mr. Jeffress should be concentrating on the Church, not political agendas.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- KidCharlemagne
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:56pm
  Wisdom7
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:11pm
  
  I just want to ask the people that keep saying “you shouldn’t legislate morality” a few questions. Why do you think civilized societies create laws?
  ==============
  
  1. To make money or to create wealth for special interests
  2. To protect existing wealth on behalf of special interests who are concerned about legitimate competition from smaller competitors (i.e. preserve monopolies/oligopolies)
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 12:39am
  Wrong.
  
  Report this comment
- jmm124567
  Posted on December 31, 2012 at 9:12pm
  Wisdom7 There’s a flaw in your argument.
  
  The morality you want to legislate is harmless. You want to create laws for things that are harmless like gay sex and gay marriage. You guys said that gay marriage would end the world and it was made legal in a few states and nothing bad happened. Like 65% of people in 2004 opposed gay marriage now a majority support it. And why are you Religious Right people so hooked on gays? What about drug addicts isn’t that a sin in the bible using drugs?
  
  Report this comment
glassaudioguy
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 10:05pm
You guys that think you’re so close to the Founders’ intentions by being so libertarian, moral issues were a BIG DEAL to them. Self government without self discipline just won’t work, as the late Paul Harvey often said. Badly handled the social issues can bite us in the ****, yet that is no excuse to ditch them, it just means we need to handle them better.

The REAL reason that Romney lost is that he didn’t believe the message he was delivering and even if they couldn’t express it in words, the average voter could sense it. He would have won if he had actually believed in conservatism. Note this clip from Bill Whittle on what Romney should have said about things like Benghazi or the economy- http://conservativevideos.com/2012/11/bill-whittle-explains-what-it-is-to-be-a-conservative-and-why-romney-lost/ This will have you out of your seat cheering if you’re a true conservative.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jmm124567
  Posted on January 1, 2013 at 12:37am
  You guys act likes gays are criminals. Gays are harmless.
  
  Report this comment
UnreconstructedLibertarian
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 10:03pm
How ironic it is, the “most winnable” candidate went down in flames – now the GOP is considering the entire platform of its “most unwinnable” candidate?

Got news for you folks, had the GOP gotten behind Paul – Obama would be toast. The tent would be so big as to leave the real communists (of both current parties) out in the rain. Social issues would become the responsibilty of the States (which is how it was supposed to always be).

Let’s recap, that’s NOT what happened. The grassroots were torn out of the party, at the RNC – we ain’t forgot that. Now, the establishment RINOS are flipping on some of their keystone positions? Hint, they never cared about those positions. Wasn’t it Santorum who declared the any “libertarian influence should be forcible purged from the GOP”? How’s that working now, bub?

I’m done with the GOP. Whigs are their rightful name. Interested in pork barrel “internal improvements” which amount to insider deals meant only to retain power – any benefit to “the people” is secondary and expendable. I am so sick of Washington DC’s “swamp fever”, I’d like to see every gov function except national defense divested back to the States.

Our Real History is coming around to bite off our posterior, as we’re falling of the cliff. So not only are we going to fall on our asses, we’re not going to have asses to fall on.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- hallkbrdz
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 10:21pm
  Here here.
  
  The RNC and GOP did them selves in. First they pick who they want to win, and make sure it happens. And in doing so tick off the supporters of the other candidates, especially Constitutional Republican Ron Paul supporters like myself. Ron many have not been the best messenger debate wise – but his arguments were sound. But most of the talk radio people wrote him off as a crazy old guy since he said that our fiscal situation was more important than Iranian nukes.
  
  With Obama we will see much of what he described happen. We are now at the cliff (or rather Grand Canyon), to which we many not have the money for the military to matter much in the world in the few years. But then – we were just a bunch of stupid Republicans. And we were told to vote for your choice (once again), because you know best. Look how that turned out…
  
  That “crazy” old guy was right. And he attracted lots of the youth vote who sees the pending problem better than those in D.C. And they don’t want to pay for the excesses of those in power, or their idiotic ways. But – Romney and the RNC didn’t need us.
  
  Your loss, and our Country’s loss. Hope you like Obama – you deserve him.
  
  Report this comment
- loneindividual
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:53pm
  You are no longer Sons of Liberty for Voting for Obama.
  
  Stop your self-righteous ******** and go to Hell without dragging any more innocence with you.
  
  The Wolf thinks himself a Shepherd
  The Devil thinks himself an Angel.
  Ordo Ab Chao
  
  I am Lockean. You are something far from it.
  
  Report this comment
- UnreconstructedLibertarian
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 9:17am
  LoneIndividual,
  
  I voted for Romney, you idiot. Correction, I voted for the Republican Plafform as emerged from the National Convention. Its pretty dang obvious, the Republicans were lying about that platform – painfully obvious in light of their wholesale retreat from anything remotely constitutional since. I gritted my teeth and went for the ride one LAST time. I hoped the destination wouldn’t be what it is regarding the GOP, but here we are. I declared right on this website what I was doing, who/what I was voting for in the general election, and that if the GOP wasn’t successful – they’d be shown as the Whigs they truly are.
  
  You call yourself a Lockean? I’ve seen your posts, you’re not even remotely Lockean – you just hope nobody knows who John Locke is or what he wrote. The writings and governmental philosophy of Locke is completely incongruent with current “respectable conservatism” – you are trying to keep one foot on each side of the fence in this respect. It obviously can’t be done. I think it more appropriate that you re-dub yourself as “Hamiltonian”. In the respect that you spout off Locke principles with an alterior motive of disabling the same – kinda like Hamilton did when writing the Federalist papers.
  
  Report this comment
- loneindividual
  Posted on December 5, 2012 at 9:37pm
  @UnreconstructedLibertarian
  
  I was refering to the SONS OF LIBERTY you moron.
  
  Did you not read my post?
  
  You said you read my other posts and accused me of not knowing John Locke.
  
  ANYONE WHO VOTES FOR THE DEATH OF AMERICA HAS AN EVIL SPIRIT IN THEIR HEART.
  
  Why would a Son of Liberty ever hasten the demise of their country by voting in a Tyrant?
  
  It’s obvious you haven’t read John Locke. You have not cited one empirical word that indicates I am anything like Hamilton or how John Locke would disagree with any of what I said.
  
  You’re so stupid, that you don’t even realize that my message wasn’t for those innocent of the SIN..
  
  Why bitterly and slanderously attack someone who is angry at someone else? You are a hypocrite in the highest, cuz my message was for all Libertarians THAT BETRAYED THEIR GOOD HEARTS AND VOTED FOR TYRANNY.
  
  And just so you know, LOCKE WASN’T A MASON. He was in the Court of Queen Elizabeth PURELY as an advisor….much like how Libertarians are treated nowadays….
  
  If Britain had embraced the spirit John Locke had in his heart…The American Revolution would have never needed to happen.
  
  Locke never worked to sabotage. Only to build something TRUE & RIGHTEOUS BEFORE ALMIGHTY GOD.
  
  He did not believe in ORDO AB CHAO. These immature and vengeful New-Age Libertarians apparently do. You cannot deny it without being one of them.
  
  And if you actually read my posts…you’d know that I was angry at the corruption in the GOP.
  
  Report this comment
loneindividual
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 9:27pm
Finally a person with some political sense!

Social is Economic. Economic is Social.

Ultimately, Success and a Pure & Content heart is the only proof to Liberals that they are PARASITICAL, VAMPYRIC & CANNIBALISTIC….even unto their own children.

Not only that…as a Pro-Lifer…the logic that was spewed by these socalled “PURISTS” wasn’t pure at all!

When it comes to the Life of the Mother and the Life of the Child…that is too high a standard for the Government to set on anyone. God must judge the character of that woman and the doctor that diagnosed the risk.

Rape is also an act of War. It’s biological warfare. She did not welcome the Man into her Home as a guest. (No Consent and thus no Contract).

Incest shouldn’t be a pre-requisite for an abortion. Destroying a fetus purely because of a defect, potential or not, part of Eugenics and violates Human Rights as well as the Laws of God, in a complete and utter fashion.

Social issues for this election were at a standstill. Our focus was to free ourselves Economically and thus obtain greater power to restore the Social Order.

THE DEAD WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN! If they ever are, then what proof is there, that we ever loved them or anyone who will die!?!

It’s all meaningless at this point. The Economic Order has left True Principles and America will Fail.

THE EAGLE WILL NOT BE REBORN!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TRILO
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 8:27pm
Joel, I could not agree with you more. Republicans preach limited government and personal responsibility then legislate where they should not. These matters belong at the state.

I disagree with the notion that the republican party will join the ranks of the Whig party, because they are already there. They are old, useless, irrelevant and horrible negotiators. The democrats run circles around them on messaging.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AnimalsAsLeaders
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:41pm
Oh, wait, I see the issue with the Republican party. It’s a political party.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ree758
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:50pm
Republican party doesn’t need makeover,all we need is an investigation into voter fraud.Have you called your representatives yet?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jmeister8
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 9:01pm
  Ree758, come on do we really need an investigation? We all know that there was an election flip the vote going on. We all know that Romney won. You see by law voting is only half our right the other half is to be able to wittness the counting of the vote and to verify the results. Proof you want proof? Look at all those precincts that went 100% for Obama. A statistical impossibility yet we accept it without a wisper of protest. We should be holding their feet to the fire. Proove to us that you won. Show us the code inside those digital voting machines and open them up for examination. Nullifie the votes where there was prooven voter intimidation. ect. ect. ect. The funny part of it is that you couldn’t ask for more proof yet the republicans are eating their own young over their failure at the polls when the reality is that their was no failure.
  This is not a battle of facts or ideas it is a battle of narratives. Their narrative is that we lost because we were too socialy conservitive or that we were too fiscaly conservative and we have to bow down to their narrative, but we can set the narrative that we won and the election was stollen and if the election was stolen then my vote was stollen and if my vote was stollen then yours was also and it really wasnt our vote at all, and if we don’t have a legitamate vote then no one has, and if no one has then libertty is over in America and we are nothing more than captives in this land. Thats the narrative!
  
  Report this comment
- jmeister8
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 9:33pm
  Step 1. set the narrative…. The election was stolen
  Step 2. find reasonable facts to support the narrative..
  Step 3. gather your talking points based on the narrative.
  Step 4. Put together an army of talking heads together all saying the same talking points.
  Step 5. If if is said loud enough and long enough and with conviction and with enough people then citizens will start believing it.
  Step 6. Probably nothing will be done now but if message reaches into the hearts of Americans that their vote may not count or may be changed they will demand that their vote be verified in the next election.
  If enough people demand their voting rights we may be able to take back our country in the way that our forefathers invisioned.
  Your eyes may tell you that a magician can pull a rabbit out of an empty hat but your common sense should tell you that that is impossible. Obama’s win was impossible in my opinion. Probably in the opinion of every mathamatician that ever lived also.
  A Joke… A young boy lost his dime in the living room. When asked why he was looking for it in the kitchen he replied that the light was brighter there, you see it was easier to look in the kitchen. Lets not deal with the dark reality in the livingroom. Come on people you must be courageous, go into the dark livingroom to find your real answers. Untill you do all your going to do is spin your wheels in the kitchen only to find you have lost more freedom again in the next stollen electi
  
  Report this comment
Wolf
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:35pm
RomneyCare lost because there was no difference between him and Barry Sotero but skin color and name spelling.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kaydeebeau
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:26pm
  You perfectly illustrate the low information, uninformed voter
  
  Report this comment
- charles116
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:11pm
  RomneyCare was changed to “Go to an emergency room.”
  The jerk runs away from his one achievement hoping to win votes.
  
  Report this comment
servant100
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:19pm
The Republican Party is dead… I have been a loyal republican since the 80′s and have served as a leader in Tarrant County, Texas. I watched the moderate George Bush take control of the party in the 80′s from the Regan Conservatives. I watched as these “moderates” or RINO’s proceeded to compromise their way to the current position of being “democrat light.”

Romney and McCain…two examples of extraordinarily unqualified candidates that were shoehorned into their primary wins by deep pocket country club republican moderates. Romney won because he was able to outspend his opposition 20 even 30 to 1. He flooded the primaries with virulent and viscious propoganda and lost when Obama’s team out slezed him in the main election. Simply put, Romney like McCain lost because they had little to stand on and nothing significant to offer the voters over the democrats. They simply stood for NOTHING of any real significance whatsoever.

The takeaway from the last to presidential disasters is simple. You must field a candidate that STANDS FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT than the democrats. Regan won because he BELIEVED in his PRINCIPLES and presented those principles CLEARLY.

Romney and McCain lost because they had no real principles and no intensity whatsoever.

The current republical party is about winning…It has no principles whatsoever now…it is the Whigs.

Its time to start from scratch…and do a new party …

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SocialistSlayer
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:37pm
  I agree, I’m also a lifelong Republican but now, I want a strong new party. One that stands for conservative and Constitutional Principles. One that says what it means and not one that panders to all the fringe loonies. When that party comes along I will vote for it, until then, the Republican party can kiss my rosy red rear end! Bohener, McConnell, Cantor nothing but a bunch of Commies !
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:40pm
  What he said ^^^
  
  Report this comment
- circleDwagons
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:11pm
  I am a Ron Paul republican and I agree
  
  Report this comment
- Silvertruth
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 6:20pm
  Not really. Romney won because he was the MOST qualified of a field of fairly radical choices. Ryan could be his running mate because VP is not POTUS. That is the current dynamic, have a more moderate as top of the ticket and do the fiscal/social conservative as second.
  
  For the most part, I agree with the article’s writer. Republican’s need to DROP the entire social agenda from their ticket and be the Tea Party: fiscally conservative, socially agnostic. Push social issues down to the state level, say they don’t belong at the national level. This lets people choose their states (and representatives) by both a social AND a financial standing. I can leave a state that constantly violates my matters of conscience, I can’t leave a country so easily.
  
  The Tea Party has Democrats AND Independents in it, please don’t forget that. That makes it the Perfect model for a renewed GOP. All about the financial health of the Nation, Freedom, and accountability. That would be the new winning formula. Stand on those principals, and leave the social ones to specific candidates.
  
  Report this comment
- Brother Winston Smith
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:41pm
  “Start?”
  
  Actually, we ALREADY HAVE well-established third (second) parties. The Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party.
  
  Report this comment
- MontaraMissileMan
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 6:09am
  @Silver
  
  That party already exists, it’s the Libertarian party.
  
  Report this comment
neverending
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:16pm
It is certainly plain to see that jeffress hasn’t gained an ounce of common sense or brain power since he last opened his mouth. He and his minions can take nearly all the blame for Romney loss of the election. So he thinks doing more of the same is a good idea. sure jeffress just keep on voting on people that do not have a chance of winning. What an idiot! And we think we have a chance of getting this country back on track?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kaydeebeau
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:34pm
  So you think the Repubs should just embrace all of the demonrats social platform? There is no fiscal conservative postion without it being tied to social conservative positions. All gov’t spending is tied to social postions. Shore up the moral / social foundation and the spending takes care of itself.
  
  Want rabid drug use or un-wed motherhood keep funding them. Want to stop it – let people lie in the gutter until they grab themselves up. The left uses our compassion and Christian charity against us.
  
  We cannot have it both ways. Until people have to suffer for their poor choices and until we can stop feeling guilty and enabling the poor behavior, we will not cut fed spending
  
  How do you do that? Shame and pain. Tough love started Nov 7…..
  
  Report this comment
David Lampo
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:07pm
Joel, you hit the nail on the head. I could not agree more, let’s hope our fellow Republicans wake up to this fact.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
joel beemer
Posted on December 3, 2012 at 3:38pm
Religion and morality should have no role in our government. Legislating morality does not work, and it never will. The real problem with the Republican Party is its incompetent leadership extablishment. People like McConnell, Boehner, Rove, Cheney, etc. must get out of the way and allow new thinking in the party. They have allowed the party to become identified with religious zealots and the legislation of morality, They have utterly failed America and their party . These White Elephants must be replaced. The proper role of government, as defined in the Constitution, should be the primary consideration. The government should not force taxpayers to pay for abortions, and the Republican Party should not try to outlaw abortions. Let the government fix our roads, defend our freedom, and provide other legitimate services, and only as defined in the Constution.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:09pm
  Yup, both parties would rather use the federal government to achieve their goals rather than obey the Constitution
  
  Report this comment
- paultard
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 5:30pm
  Awesome post Joel!
  The GOP must embrace true liberty and freedom.. Strict adherence to the founding principles of the constitution. (which means getting rid of the 16th amendment) Drop the abortion issue.. Here is my “compromise” after the first trimester you’re having the baby which means you have three months to decide then you’re having the baby. After that its murder. The GOP must abandon or JAIL the Rothschild, Rockefeller and Morgan banking cartels that back them. Become true “Tenthers” and be consistent with states rights.. (states rights is one of the main reasons the GOP lost the election)
  Ben Swann summed it up here: http://youtu.be/bibIOX4Wrrw
  
  Report this comment
- Lord_Frostwind
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:00pm
  You can’t escape the moral issues. One, the Liberals ARE using the government to legislate their morality, if you stand up against that, they place you in the same category as all the radical Christians. Don’t believe me, look at the EPA and all the Neodruids in the environmentalist movement, any dissension and “you want to kill the planet!”
  
  That’s not even mentioning the media which will drag you back into morality and social issues no matter how hard you try to run, like Romney and “the War on Women,” at total media construct that apparently succeeded among Women making them believe he was going to take away their abortions and contraceptives. If you come out against some of the issues that the base cares about, Republicans will never hold an office again.
  
  These solutions sound easy on paper, but implementation will not go nearly as well.
  
  Cynical as it may seem, the best solution at the moment will be to brace for impact, because that is the only way this country will be brought back to sanity. I just hope there’s enough left by the time this is all said and done.
  
  Report this comment
- truthnstuff
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 7:30pm
  Joe, could not have said it plainer. Not pro or anti so called “religious” issues. The message needs to be freedom, personal responsibility, constitution, and strongly articulated.
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on December 3, 2012 at 11:42pm
  @LORD_FROSTWIND
  
  You are correct. I am a little concerned over how many people are confused over this issue. The reason civilized societies create law is to legislate behavior based on the values of said society. If only one sect of society has a voice on the matter, then their “morality” becomes the law.
  
  Report this comment
- VRW Conspirator
  Posted on December 4, 2012 at 2:18pm
  Frostwind is right…you can not just abandon the social and moral issues and think the people will rally to your cause simply because you don’t want to force them to do this or that…the other side does and will and is and will frame the argument that way no matter how hard you try not to be brought into the issue….
  Joe is also right…the GOP needs to adopt a TRUE Constitutionist approach…if the Dems want to bring up the social issues…the response should be…”I don’t believe the Federal government should have a hand in that discuss on either side of the issue. That is an issue left up to your individual State. As the POTUS, my job is to govern ALL of the people, even those that might agree with or disagree with my religious, moral, ethical, or social positions. If I was a Senator or Congressman, whose job it is is to represent the people of their State, then I would fight for the majority opinion of my State regardless of what my personal opinion would be. Now I might speak out from time to time within my role in Congress or as POTUS about certain issues but only in the context of espousing the underlying belief of the American people. I believe that underlying belief to be what Benjamin Franklin said “I believe in one God, the creator of the universe. That he governs by his providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other children.”
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.