It was inevitable. The moment former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman announced his homosexuality publicly, a flurry of journalists eagerly penned the obituary of the Republican Party’s stance on traditional marriage. Again. It’s happened multiple times since social conservatives responded to activist judges in Massachusetts six years ago by propelling George W. Bush to a second term. Democrats’ electoral rampage in 2006 was a repudiation of the GOP’s anti-homosexual marriage agenda, they said. Ditto 2008, when Barack Obama — who could be called the first gay president, like Bill Clinton was the first black president — coasted to victory. But liberals’ celebration was tinged with angst. In 2006, many of the candidates who gave Democrats the majority trended conservative on the marriage issue. And in 2008, California might have voted for Obama over John McCain by a landslide, but 52 percent of voters backed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. That wasn’t supposed to happen. Now, in 2010, the frustration continues. Obama’s goal of reversing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays serving openly has fallen on hard times. Complainers in the netroots notwithstanding, Obama hasn’t changed his mind on gay nuptials, either. He supports civil unions but not marriage redefinition. So, when your own guys aren’t helping much, what else to do than falsely portray a seismic shift on the issue in your opponent’s party? The Washington Post informs us that older Americans and social conservatives are evolving to support homosexual marriage. Read between the lines: the issue is an albatross around the neck of a GOP trying to refocus on economic issues. Judging by the tenor of media coverage, you’d think traditional marriage was a failing issue for the GOP. But it’s not. To date, 30 states have adopted marriage amendments, including several deep blue states. Those campaigns often have aided moderate Republicans by turning out a base that otherwise would have stayed home. Can the GOP point to comparable victories on immigration, tax policy, or gun rights? No. Yet marriage is fast becoming the pariah to top party bosses. Blue-blooded country club Republicans aren’t comfortable talking about God, morality, and tradition. Can we get back to railing against illegal immigrants, please? That’s not to say political shifts aren’t happening. During the past decade, public acceptance of same-sex marriage has tilted slightly to the left, and polls show that young voters tend to favor it. But neither development is significant or shocking. Polling shows a leftward tilt on several of the GOP’s pet issues. It’s unfair to portray marriage as an outlier. And the fact that young people are liberal, a systemic trait of young people, is hardly a news flash. Politics aside, the reasons for conservatives and Republicans to continue standing for traditional marriage are legion. Glenn Beck doesn’t get it when he claims freedom-loving Americans have “bigger fish to fry” than traditional marriage and abortion. “You can argue about abortion or gay marriage or whatever all you want, the country is burning down,” Beck said in early August. That sentiment fails to recognize the inseparable connection between America’s social and economic ills — as if the fiscal sphere were solely responsible for the decline of America. It’s not. The fall of the traditional family has long been linked to economic instability, the rise of the welfare state, and an electorate that doesn’t understand, nor want to defend, freedom, liberty, and tradition. There’s also a marked distinction between the public issue of same-sex marriage and the private issue of protecting the rights of homosexuals as citizens. Americans should be protected under the law regardless of sexual orientation. But that’s a far cry from re-defining civil marriage to include relationships that nature defines as untenable and God as immoral. Economic concerns are, understandably, at the forefront of voters’ minds this fall. But marriage continues to be a winning issue with voters. If GOP bosses continue down the road that leads to total abandonment of this principle, they’ll fast discover unintended consequences at the ballot box.
Read more here:
Unintended Consequences
From Investor’s Business Daily : Fearing lawsuits over injuries, a West Virginia county is removing swing sets from elementary schools. A minor, local issue? No. America’s litigious society has changed the way kids play. Roughly a year after a child broke his arm jumping off a swing like Superman and his parents are settling a lawsuit for $20,000, Cabell County, W.V., schools are yanking swing sets from school playgrounds. The lawsuit was one of two filed in the last year against Cabell County schools over swing set injuries, the West Virginia Record reported Thursday. School safety manager Tim Stewart, who is overseeing the removal, said he sees “a high potential when it comes to swings and lawsuits.” What’s happening in Cabell County is not an isolated case. Local governments, fearful of lawsuits, have been for years closing pools, stripping playgrounds of equipment and banning outdoor games. A Massachusetts elementary school has told students they can’t play tag. One Boston school forbids handstands while another in Needham, Mass., doesn’t allow students to hang upside down from the monkey bars. A pool in Hazleton, Pa., closed some years ago after a swimmer sued for $100,000 because he cut his foot running and jumping into the pool, though he’d been warned not to. There used to be pools. Not only that, they used to have diving boards. When’s the last time you saw a diving board? Or a jungle gym? Civil lawyers are ruining this country.
Go here to read the rest:
Lawyers: Making the Swingsets Disappear
“I pass the test that says a man who isn’t a socialist at twenty has no heart, and a man who is a socialist at forty has no head.” — William Casey,
According to the latest Gallup poll , Republicans now lead by ten points in the generic ballot — 51 percent to 41 percent. That is the largest lead Republicans have ever had in sixty years of polling on this question by Gallup. Much smaller leads, such as in 1994 and 2002, have translated into significant Republican gains. Yet as one Robert Stacy McCain recently reminded us, polls are not campaigns . The Republican ground game is nowhere near the level of the Democrats in 2008 or the Bush-era GOP in 2004. There is no evidence the Tea Party has compensated for this. Many Republican challengers in key swing districts remain underfunded. The Republicans’ national campaign committees are generally at a disadvantage to their Democratic counterparts and it has shown in most of the recent House special elections. Quin mentions some other factors cutting strongly against Republicans here . Then again, I’ll repeat the same thing I was saying to Republican dead-enders in 2006: If your base is disenchanted, the other side’s base is fired up, and swing voters hate you, you are going to lose elections. We are seeing Republican primary turnout in states like Colorado and Washington exceed Democratic turnout. In Colorado, the losing Republican Senate candidate, Jane Norton, got more votes than the Democratic winner, incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet. Republican complacency could still blow the midterms elections. I fully expect Republicans to lose some races that they would have won in either 1994 or 2002. But there does come a point where the national mood is so powerful that not even the Republicans can bungle it. Take a look at the rare special election victory for Republicans, Scott Brown in Massachusetts: it came in a case where the swing voters were fed up, the Democratic candidate was a walking turnout-depresser, and the national GOP got involved too late to screw things up. Whether that happens on a massive enough scale to flip a house of Congress remains to be seen. But the proper Republican mood at this point is neither triumphalism nor despair.
See more here:
Gallup: Republicans Take Ten-Point Generic Ballot Lead
The big deal is we didn’t vote for you to caucus with the Democrats, although I do agree with him when he says “I don’t know what the surprise is,” we just didn’t think it would be this bad… Who was praising President Barack Obama last week for his handling of the drawdown of U.S. troops in Iraq? It was Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown commenting on the end of U.S. combat operations. “I think the president has done a good job on that,” said Brown, who has also backed Obama’s surge in Afghanistan. However, they part ways on the president setting a timetable to consider withdrawal from Afghanistan next summer. …Sarah Palin, who is pushing tea party candidates further to the right, dissed Brown, saying he was not conservative enough to pass muster in a state such as Alaska. Brown is brushing off the intraparty attacks, making no apologies for the pledge of independence he preached during his campaign and says he is living out in Washington. “I’m a Massachusetts Republican. When I go down to Washington, people say, what are you doing? They say, well you are working with the Democrats. I say, so what’s the big deal? I do that all the time. I’ve been doing it for 15 years,” Brown said. “I don’t know what the surprise is,” he said of the attitude of critics from the far right. “I said I was going to go down there and be an independent voice, an independent thinker and vote accordingly,” he said. Rest here> > > H/T: Hot Air
More:
Scott Brown Responds to Palin: Yeah, I’m a RINO, “What’s the Big Deal?”…
