Comments on Advance Indiana™: Some Conservatives Balk At Daniels' Invititation To Speak At CPAC

Paul says: "I don't like some of the soci...

2011-01-13T09:04:56.479-05:00

Paul says: "I don't like some of the social issues. I couldn't care less if gay people want to get married for example. (And I think this issue will eventually fall off the radar.)"

Yes, it ultimately will, but the sponsors of the so-called "Indiana Marriage Protection Amendment" have reintroduced it this General Assembly session. With the GOP now controlling the House, its chances for passage are substantially increased.

And the sad part is that most legislators, the media, and the public haven't a clue as to what they would be passing, including the fact that the sponsors have without fanfare changed their original language (SJR-7) into something even more draconian. Despite what they say, it's not just about "unelected activist judges" anymore.

People ought to ask what's behind the big change, and why the sponsors are running away from even acknowledging it.

A Republican presidential candidate will never win...

2011-01-12T18:43:06.004-05:00

A Republican presidential candidate will never win a national election being solely a fiscal conservative. The social issues, like them or not, is the key to putting together a coalitiion that can win.

I don't like some of the social issues. I couldn't care less if gay people want to get married for example. (And I think this issue will eventually fall off the radar.) But if Daniels thinks he's going to win the presidency while declaring a truce on social issues, well that's not going to happen.

There is no evidence that Republicans have lost elections because of the social issues. There's plenty of evidence that voters don't believe Republicans are fiscal conservatives. That's what is killing us now, not the social issues.

Amen, Sean.

2011-01-12T17:07:49.600-05:00

Amen, Sean.

As a Bluedog, I've always felt that the social...

2011-01-12T17:00:09.710-05:00

As a Bluedog, I've always felt that the social issues were antithetical to the Republican msg of smaller government.

What I've come to understand is that the Republican's aren't really interested in smaller government... it's a myth that they keep perpetuating while giving contracts to their buddies and removing common sense regulation.

The truth is that the social issues bring (Republican)voters to the polls in a way that "less government" never will.

In fact, most people want "less government" until it affects them.
Tell seniors that you are going to cut Medicare spending (the largest underfunded entitlement) and kiss your political future goodbye.

Tell people you want to cut waste from the military and you will have astroturf organizations defending the failed weapons programs because of the jobs they bring.

I don't think that Daniels is any different than other Republicans - he spent half a billion dollars on a failed system that screwed the unemployed. He has hired his friends into lucrative positions. He has sacked environmental oversight.

The funny thing is that the original founder of CP...

2011-01-12T15:59:13.427-05:00

The funny thing is that the original founder of CPAC was gay.

If Mitch Daniels were actually a fiscal conservati...

2011-01-12T15:56:01.109-05:00

If Mitch Daniels were actually a fiscal conservative, who did not create a ton of jobs for his cronies in his administration or bungle around with money in his agencies, I would be more supportive of him. He is right, I think, regarding a need to not focus on social issues so much -- and that the federal government needs to tighten spending.

But, he needs to practice what he preaches: his administration has severely ruined Indiana's unemployment program to the point where it will take at least 5 years to fix under good circumstances (and much more if continued as it is going now). If taxpayers and businesses knew what his administration has done with their money and its effect on both the unemployed and businesses themselves, everyone would be rightfully disgusted.

I agree with Sean on this one.

2011-01-12T15:43:31.960-05:00

I agree with Sean on this one.

The APP guy's quote about Daniels' invitat...

2011-01-12T14:40:14.785-05:00

The APP guy's quote about Daniels' invitation being an affront to millions of conservatives just makes me want to respond with, "APP is an affront to millions of Americans who aren't nosy, hypocritical busy-bodies hung up on what happens in people's bedrooms and who mostly probably had 'biblically immoral' premarital sex at some point their life but now want to use the same principle to blast or reject people who make alternative lifestyle choices."

Conservatives need to decide. Do you want government to mind its own business or not? You want small government or do you want government regulating your religious rituals and practices and who you are allowed to live your life with?