Many Republicans mistakenly believe that their party is a principled alternative to the Democrats. Look Again. In fact, it's all a sham. Both parties are the tools of big business and could care less about the millions of true believers. It's all about power and politicians whom have sold their souls to get elected and re-elected:
If Steve Schmidt is for same-sex marriage, can Senate Republicans be far behind?
Well, yes. We don’t expect establishment Republicans in Washington — or establishment Democrats, for that matter — to suddenly endorse gay marriage. But in a possible sign of the momentum of the gay-marriage movement, Mr. Schmidt, who was a senior adviser to the Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain, last year, is promoting gay marriage this afternoon.
He endorsed same-sex marriage last month, in an interview with the Washington Blade.
Today, Mr. Schmidt, who also served as a top Bush aide, discusses the subject with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group that supports gay rights. According to CNN, he will call on conservative Republicans to drop their opposition at a lunchtime speech in Washington.
Mr. Schmidt, who has a sister who is a lesbian, plans to say that there is nothing about gay marriage that is un-American or that threatens the rights of others and that in fact it is in line with conservative principles.
“There is a sound conservative argument to be made for same-sex marriage,” Mr. Schmidt plans to say, according to speech excerpts obtained by CNN. “I believe conservatives, more than liberals, insist that rights come with responsibilities. No other exercise of one’s liberty comes with greater responsibilities than marriage.’”
His remarks come in the midst of a flurry of legislative and judicial activity advancing gay marriage in various states. In the last two weeks, Iowa and Vermont have approved same-sex marriage, joining Connecticut and Massachusetts. The movement appears to be picking up steam in other states too, including New York, where Gov. David Paterson introduced a bill on Thursday to legalize gay marriage.
In his interview with The Blade, Mr. Schmidt said he voted against California’s Proposition 8, which ended same-sex marriage in that state. Mr. McCain supported the measure and has opposed gay marriage.
But Mr. Schmidt, who said he has never agreed “100 percent” with any candidate for whom he has worked, is undeterred.
“I’m personally supportive of equality for gay couples and I believe that it will happen over time,” he told The Blade. “I think that more and more Americans are insistent that, at a minimum, gay couples should be treated with respect and when they see a political party trying to stigmatize a group of people who are hard-working, who play by the rules, who raise decent families, they’re troubled by it.”
The darling of the Conservatives and Republicans thought of aborting her unborn child:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin entered the lower 48 and disclosed in a speech that for a second, she considered whether she should have an abortion upon learning of abnormalities after her amniocentesis. Her description of a fleeting moment of doubt has snagged many headlines today, with some articles trying to suggest hypocrisy because the resulting birth of Trigg, her youngest who has Down syndrome, transformed her into a darling of anti-abortion advocates. (Notwithstanding her simpatico views with theirs.) But the whiparound also snarls that her supporters may now be riled by her latest remarks.
Hmmmm? It’s really unclear from her comments that her musings back then were serious, and even she seems to give those thoughts little weight. In her speech, Ms. Palin recalled shifting into a lament about having to give up her BlackBerry for a breast pump at age 44. (On the campaign trail last year, as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Ms. Palin sometimes talked about the hardship of confronting a troubled pregnancy and learning to care for the newborn.)
The pertinent remarks begin around 4:44 in this take and continue on this consecutive video segment of her speech before a Right-to-Life group in Indiana. And even if she wavered, as she says she did, Ms. Palin did decide to go forward with the pregnancy.
Look at the hypocrisy when it comes to the government stimulus program:
Last week, we reported that Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) had experienced an epiphany about the stimulative effects of government spending...when that spending is on weapons.
Over the weekend, Paul Krugman took a shot at Congressional Republicans who fit the Chambliss profile--i.e. the subset of Republicans who voted against the stimulus but are now coming forward to claim that a (fictional) reduction in defense spending will cost jobs.
Since only three of Capitol Hill's 219 Republicans--Sens. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Susan Collins (R-ME)--voted for the stimulus bill, it's possible that many scores of them will ultimately fall afoul of this contradiction.
Until then, though, we've poked around a bit, and come up with the names of a few Republicans that have already fallen in to The Chambliss Hypocrisy.
Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) and Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) joined their fellow Peach Stater, warning that the demise of particular defense programs (paid for with federal funds) will eliminate jobs.
The administration's plans to cut the F-22 program "will...cost thousands of jobs at a critical time," said Price. Back in February, Price took a different view of federal spending, saying the stimulus bill "will not stimulate the economy. There is nothing stimulating about wasting historic amounts of taxpayer money.... I hope that all parties can finally come together to produce solutions that foster real economic growth instead of more reckless government spending."
Gingrey added that the "decision takes a short-sighted approach to maintaining American air dominance, while at the same time putting thousands of good manufacturing jobs at risk." When the stimulus bill passed, Gingrey said, "Republicans have a real plan to create twice as many jobs at half the cost of this 'spenduluous' [sic] through across the board tax cuts and cuts in government spending."
At least Glenn Beck correctly blames both parties for the obscene debt and deficits:
It's about spending — too much spending, to be specific. The idea that a business is too big to fail is anti-American; we've always been for the underdog.
It's about putting my family — my children — under $12.8 trillion in debt; all it took was two presidents and six months.
t's about the idea that we're all socialists now.
It's about the idea that the government can force companies, banks and states to take money and the strings that are attached to it, that they didn't want.
It's about power — too much power going to federal government.
It's about corruption — too much corruption, in both parties.
It's about the rule of law — that no one is above the law: if you're here legally or illegally, it applies-never too rich or powerful.
No comments:
Post a Comment