Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

There’s a new report out on the GOP’s future prospects. The findings are grim; the recommendations are predictable and somewhat craven: “On messaging, we must change our tone — especially on certain social issues that are turning off young voters. In every session with young voters, social issues were at the forefront of the discussion; many see them as the civil rights issues of our time. We must be a party that is welcoming and inclusive for all voters.”

Obvious problem? As Ms. Alex Palombo at DailyKos noted, the Republican National Committee’s Growth & Opportunity Report is made up almost entirely of “surface suggestions.”

The deeper reality is that the Republicans have lost so much support in recent years mainly by betraying their one plank that appealed across party lines: fiscal responsibility.

The Republican Party will go nowhere until it gets serious and consistent about the principles of limited government. Sure, that has implications for social issues. I hope the GOP changes its position on gay marriage, which I support. Generally, I think progress on social issues can best be made outside of government.

But mostly what the GOP needs to do to thrive with the young, with women, with minorities, is to focus on the immediate threat to the country’s future, the federal government’s rising debt, continuing deficits and looming liabilities.

Were Republican politicians honest and serious about this, they could gain respect everywhere.

Still, many retain hope in surface tweaks.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

 

 

 

By: Redactor

10 Comments

  1. Rich Waksman says:

    I agree with your column. There is a big battle in the Republican community as to whether it should move to the right to capture the “core” or move to the left to capture the “independents.” I think it is BOTH, depending upon the issue. On the issues you mention, fiscal responsibility, etc., we need to move to the right because the majority supports fiscal responsibility. However, on the social agenda (abortion, gun control, school prayer, etc.) we need to move to the middle because those are losing positions in national elections are terrify the independents.

  2. N says:

    Paul,
    Yes, Republicans would do well to advance fiscal responsibility.

    Progress on social issues outside of government makes sense. I support gay marriage, but not the right of government to define marriage in a way that conflicts with religion, history, and tradition. What is wrong with the idea of getting government out of the marriage business? Let government issue civil unions, enforce contracts, and stay out of our personal lives. Leave “marriage” to the churches or the people.

  3. Don Jordan says:

    You support gay marriage? Why?

  4. Charlie Seng says:

    Let’s limit this discussion about gay marriage as follows, Paul. There is no biblical basis for calling a civil union of gays to be classified as “marriage”, which is forbidden by biblical admonitions spoken by Jesus Christ himself. Most conservatives will allow a civil ceremony joining two gay men or two gay females in a kind of legal union. However, in no way can any thinking person advocate or approve of a transgendered person of either sex being allowed any kind of civil ceremony. Such “surgical” bodily disfiguration is simply against any laws decency. Sad but true, such persons have to be mentally unbalanced to resort to this kind of tearing the human body apart to satisfy some kind of craving.

  5. Howard Bleicher, D.D.S. says:

    Your comment: “Were Republican politicians honest and serious about this, they could gain respect everywhere,” They have been honest with their views and their behavior. For them to all of a sudden take the opposing social views,etc., would be dishonest.

  6. Art Hotchkiss says:

    Until this article I was unaware you supported “gay marriage”. I am now cancelling my email subscription to your articles. May God have mercy on your soul.

  7. Drik says:

    It’s not specified as a duty of the federal government in the
    Consitution. Nor is it prohibited by it. Leaves it under the authority of the state and the people and all of the rat’s nest of inconsistancies and confusion which that implies. Because the feral government presumes to weigh in does not make it their responsibility or business.
    The goal of our country was maximum freedom. If a state disallows something, there is nothing to prevent a free citizen from moving to a state where it is allowed. This is not commerce that the feral government can regulate, (or make regular). Nor does this force Americans to live under extra-Consitutional issues with which they do not believe. We need transformation as a country, all right, but not towards an enforced central uniformity.

    We need tramsoformation back to a country where local people decided how they wanted to live without the all-present, all-spying, all hyper-intrusive central authority getting to play.

  8. MoreFreedom says:

    To Howard Bliecher who writes “They [Republicans] have been honest with their views and their behavior.”

    I think you’d agree that nearly 100% of the candidates SPOKE against government subsidies for business and picking winners and losers in commerce. Now, if they honestly believe this, then why did over 70% of Republicans VOTE to further fund the Dept. of Energy “green investment” program that’s given us Solyndra, Abound Solar and other failures (unless your idea of success is generating campaign cash for Obama from billionaire solar company owners)?

    Why did Republicans create spending records under Bush when they controlled the House, Senate and presidency?

    Republican politicians say one thing to get elected, then sell us out for campaign cash later. Most of them are already DISHONEST.

    That you say they’ve been honest, shows the RNC they can fool some of the people some of the time.

  9. Jay says:

    More Freedom is one of the few that makes sense–in my view.

    When Tom Delay was the Republican Whip–he (more or elss)only would deal with lobbyists who were or had former Rep. officials (IE former Senators; Congressmen or their aides); pushed busiensses to GOP supporters; etc. Palosi took DeLay’s methodds and expanded them But he was the architect.

    And the Dept. of Ed.- ( and states with Rep. governors) ordered teaching aides made by ( surprise, surprise) a firm controlled by NEIL BUSH . A product that most educators said was worthless.

    AND I AM A REPUBLICAN and think that this is terrible. As to items like abortion, gay marriage, etc.–i go with the late Barry Goldwater–(leaving out the irrelevant parts)- keep the government out of the bedroom”. (As to Biblical; etc.- if you don’t beleive in it, don’t do it- be it abortion; gay marriage; owning guns; etc).

  10. Roger and Lynn Bloxham says:

    N, you are correct. Get government out of the mix. In fact note that most controversy is caused by the State trying to control decisions that individuals should be making. Imagine that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2019 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top