Litmus-test Conservatives Drive Republican Party Farther South

Reader Comments
Back to article

I am a Republican, but there is NOT a party for an intellectual conservative. The GOP has been dumbed down to the point that now it is almost comical. I am also a Northener and it doesn't escape my attention that everytime an elected GOP'er speaks that he has a Southern twang. There is a name for an historically all white southern party and they are called the KKK. But even the KKK has more women in their organization than the GOP. That's right, the KKK is more diverse than the GOP. If the Republicans lose Hispanics like we have permanently lost African Americans then the GOP becomes the Whig party. Bigots like Limbaugh,Tancredo and Sessions have already cemented that. Hispanics voted 2 to 1 for Obama and in 4 years that might be 3 to 1. If that happens, Texas will go blue and that means the GOP will never win another national election!
Cloaked in religiosity does not help, atheists are the 2nd fastest growing group in the US since 2000 behind Hispanics. Atheists are now 16% of the US pop. Atheists are usually better educated and according to a Rasmussen last year, 97% of American atheists voted in 08. 68% support for Obama pre-Palin which meant McCain was actually getting almost 30%! After the convention, Obama recieved 89% of that vote. Only African Americans had a higher % of support.
Speaking of Palin, it is my point of a party dumbed down. I and about 10 of my friends no more about global events than she does. The anti-intellectualism has ran rampant in the GOP for so long that we are at a point were a Palin can actually be on a national ticket??? Can my party, which Ive been a registered voter of since 80 devolve any further? Sure it can! She can be the nominee in 3 years! It is certainly what the Dems are praying for. Seeing her debate Obama would be painful. PAINFUL!!!!!!!!! Hell, I would vote for PBO if Palin was the nominee in 12. Any party that would nominate Palin does not want to win an election but make a statement. Palin cannot play victim all the way to the WH. Playing victim seems to be this quitter's strongest attribute.
We must stop being reactionary! Within 48 hrs, Romney is issuing a statement crticizing Obama's response or lack of. Is that what a statesman does? Make comments before factson the ground are known? Romney looked like a fool. Gingrich calling Sotomayor a racist, IDIOT! If he thought before speaking he wouldn't have had to later issue an apology! We are playing checkers and the Obama admin is playing chess!!
Like I said, I am a Republican. While the Dems love Palin and Limbaugh be because it ensures that the GOP will be out of power, I want to see changes.

Don Yablis of CO 9:42PM July 17, 2009

Southerners are some of the finest people I know. Despite the media/Hollywierd stereotypes, they are fierce defenders of self-reliance, hard work, family and basic moral values. If one believes the likes of MSNBC and CNN, one would think these were "bad" things.
I believe America was built on these very qualities and I am encouraged when I see those from every state in this nation stand up and declare they still believe in these qualities too.
SEE: TEAPARTY
The writer should really check his history and realize that our last pacifist/brave new world/Democratic President was a man from Georgia named Jimmy Carter. Well after LBJ.
He too was a one-termer that inspired the nation to return to conservative values after his disasterous Presidency.
Only 53% of America bought in to Obama's "change" as I am now ashamed to admit that I bought into Carter's "change".
All we got was ole time Democratic Religion that believes they know best how to spend YOUR money.
Bad idea then ,BAD IDEA NOW.

Chris Petty of GA 1:07AM May 15, 2009

I see ol' "one note" is back with a vengeance! That would be you, R.L.! Don't know how I missed the notice of your election as sheriff/enforcer of Catholic Church teachings-or is it judge and jury; actually you seem to be playing God. Is that it? Do
you think you should be God? That'd explain a lot. Delusions of grandeur and all that. Where did you get so much anger and all that raging 'holier than thou' attitude, anyway? We're all sure you're not God 'cuz the real God preaches compassion, forgiveness, love, tolerance and, oh yeah-that line about "do not judge lest you be judged" - so we know that's not you! Words like rigid, controlling, perfectionist, judgmental all seem more apt descriptions in your case. So, sorry, you do not get to decide the goodness, morality or sinfulness of others or if they're Catholic enough-in the way You define it, of course, or if they'll go to Heaven. Well, maybe if you're the Pope..are you the Pope?! Naw, couldn't be! So,rant away if you must, but we're not buying it. And, lay off the character assassination-it's pathetic, childish, ineffective and reflects poorly only on you. Your responsibility is for yourself and your relationship with God, which does not include monitoring & enforcing others morals & behaviors- or damning them for what YOU perceive as their shortcomings & sins. So often in life it is those who feel least worthy who try the most to control others, rather than face their own demons. You might look into that... And see if you can't get a nice big hug from someone this week; I think it'd do you some good. Peace, child.

Clas of CA 10:00AM May 14, 2009

No Meryl Morality never changes. Humans can chose to ignore and deny it - they may discover it - or even rediscover it... But it never changes - nor does its source.
Subjective morality is meaningless - And so would be a "relative" god.
It is apparent that you have decided that God can not be known or that he doesn't exist. Either way, God has no meaning for you since He is either subject to your will and "perception" or you deny Him.
You are a victim of impenetrable skepticism and it's progeny "relativism". This view is quite fashionable nowadays and those who think as you are in control. Our schools and universities teach it, politicians pro-claim "choice" and the media views it as "progressive tolerance". However, Eternal Truth - the Mind of God - remains as it always has.
And so, we have returned to the beginning.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:28PM May 13, 2009

I learned of your "Catholic" views from one of your own columns, "Abortion, Catholic Sex Scandals..." published on Sept. 23, 2008 - U.S. News. The "depth" (or lack of same) of your religious beliefs was apparent. In the aforementioned article you stated that, "I have serious problems with my church..." You went on to defend the right of pro-abortion politicians to receive Holy Communion. I observed then, and do so again now, that your position is in direct conflict with more than 70 U.S. Bishops, The Pope, Church teaching and tradition (notwithstanding theologian Pelosi) and the catechism of the Church.
Furthermore, if you didn't want your "faith" to be part of your public persona you should have kept it to yourself- "off the table" as it were.
With regard to me being a "coward" - well, I've been called many things, by many people but "coward" doesn't come to mind. Further, I don't think I'm hiding behind anything...You have my email - though I don't have yours. I would be happy to debate you publicly or privately - any time.
You also accuse me of "name calling" - sounds rather like a playground accusation, doesn't it? In any event, I suppose you're referring to "erstwhile Catholic". I note that "erstwhile" means "former" or "sometime". I further observe that you support abortion and think politicians who support it should be allowed to receive communion. I point out that this position puts you "outside" the Church and in conflict with its teaching - hence the adjective, "erstwhile".
Finally, why is all this germane to your current article? The answer should be fairly obvious... A relativist, such as yourself, sees no problem with an organization, be it the Church or the Republican Party, changing traditions, teachings, morality or principles to accommodate decaying moral values for the sake of expediency or "subjective" progress/success.
An excerpt from my blog on your column of 9-23-08 will further illustrate this point.
"One can proclaim themselves anything they wish - you can pretend to be Napoleon, Lincoln or Batman if you wish. But a pretense is not a fact. Don't expect the Church to endorse the fantasy of those who proclaim to be a thing, but do not honor the definition of it."
Well, I hope that clears everything up.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 1:09PM May 13, 2009

We disagree on just about everything. This is no exception. The suggestion that morality is totally static is absurd. It used to be that it was considered our moral duty to return slaves to their "rightful" owners. Thankfully, we are more enlightened than we were then.
The suggestion that the GOP has not adjusted its values at all, ever, is equally absurd. You used to be the party of small government and little spending. Now, your party seems to only run on the fumes of an ill-advised, expensive war while stirring up the ire of its base by suggesting that the long arm of government invade our bedrooms and bodies.
I'm thankful for progress. So, too, should you be.

Meryl of CA 12:14PM May 13, 2009

R.L. Schaefer, a coward hiding behind an e-mail,
deserves an answer from the writer.
He will not decide about the depth of my religion.
I know not, and care not, about his religion.
Bue he will not be my ultimate judge. In fact,
he may have a lot to answer for with his incessant
name calling of others.

john w mashek of DC 7:32PM May 12, 2009

is that, as an erstwhile Catholic, it is obvious that you have adopted a position of total moral subjectivity regarding morality - right and wrong - good and evil...
You call yourself Catholic but you are not, and so want to change the Church to mirror your progressive (read ever changing) values.
Republicans are faced with a similar situation. They can become "progressive" and embrace Green-Socialism, abortion, judicial activism and "social justice". Or, remain committed to truth, morality and tradition.
Tell me John, what does it profit a man to gain power at the expense of his soul and honor? You should be an expert on that...

R.L. Schaefer of CA 12:35PM May 12, 2009