FRC Says No Rice Please

In their Monday email, the Family Research Council rained on the Condoleeza Rice parade.  Describing her as a “non-starter”, Tony Perkins said that she is not pro-life, pro-marriage or a strong defender of religious liberty.  Perkins also noted that the Family Research Council would only accept a candidate who was strongly pro-life, not just someone who “checks the ‘pro-life box'”.

Will FRC stop promoting Mitt Romney if he chooses Condoleeza Rice as his VP?  No.  They supported Bush even though Cheney supported gay marriage.  But now is the time to use their leverage as a group representing a large segment of fundamental Christianity and steer Romney towards a more socially conservative choice.

Condi is a great and extremely qualified candidate.  But Romney should carefully consider the promises he has made regarding his VP selection process.  If he is looking to shake the Etch-a-sketch image one of his staffers foolishly gave him, than now is a perfect time to take a principled stand.  On the other hand, Romney may do the calculations and figure he will pick up more independents with Condi than he would lose from his base.

FRC Says Santorum Schooled Cain

Herman Cain has been a rising star of the TEA Party social conservative wing of the Republican party, but that rise may have hit a bump in the road.  Cain’s quick answer to the gay marriage issue was in the debate Monday night was that it was a states’ issue.  That answer is not sitting well with the pro-family Christian grass-roots giant The Family Research Council.

In their Wednesday morning update, titled “Debate and Switch”, the FRC scolded Cain and Ron Paul for not supporting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and instead deflecting the issue to the states.

So who does FRC say got that issue right?  Rick Santorum, who explained that a marriage amendment would require 75% of the states to approve.

This leaves the question, will TEA Partiers and social conservatives hold to constitutional principles of the tenth amendment and agree with Cain and Paul on gay marriage?  Or will they see the issue in light of the moral majority and government’s role in promoting the general welfare through promoting the American family?  What do you think?  Leave a comment and let us know which direction you think conservatives will take.

In my opinion, Michelle Bachmann gave a great reply to this that most conservatives can get behind.  Essentially, it is a state issue, unless the courts over rule the people of the states on Federal Constitutional grounds.  Then an amendment is necessary.

Romney Sticks It To Dems at Values Voters Summit

Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts,...

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney

 

Bookmark and Share  At the annual Values Voters Summit in Washington, D.C., Mitt Romney csme out swinging and never stopped.  He opened up with a series of sharp quips that ranged from claiming that “Harry Reid’s, Nancy Pelosi’s and President Obama’s “numbers were going down faster than a Jet Blue flight attendents” to a fitting shot at President Obama’s new love affair with golfing and how “America is better off when he takes advice from caddy rather than his economic advisors.

What Values Voters really got a chance to see and hear though was a glimpse at a more relaxed, more fluid, confidentand hardline Romney than we saw in 2008.

In his speech, Romney called these fiorst two years of the Obama Administration, an abject failure.  He backed the claim up by listing a litany of things done by the Administration which have failed the American people in the area of the economy;

“Raising taxes on small businesses — hurt.  Hiking some taxes on investment by almost as much as 200% — hurt.  Pushing Cap-and-Trade — hurt.  Stalling agreements to expand trade witrh other nations — hurt.  Sharply slanting the playing field in favor of union C.E.O’s — hurt.  Handing GM to the U.A.W. — hurt.  The federal takeover of healthcare — hurt.   Trillions of dollars of new debt — hurt.  And the scapegoating and demonizing of the very people who we need to invest in people and jobs also hurt.” 

Romney added that we have  seen the most “anti-growth, anti-investment, anti-jobs measures in our lifetime.”

One of the most powerful lines caqme when Romney stated;

“We have seen the federal government decalre wars on drugs and we have seen them decalre war on poverty but this is the first time we have seen the federal government decalre war on free enterprise” 

The Romney speech was the work of a man who has seemingly become an experienced butcher and each of his points sliced into the Obama, Pelosi, Reid regime like a machete.  It was alos the work of a man whom you can tell is going to go after President Obama on the economy, which is Romney’s strong suit, unmercifully.

But Romney’s speech before a group of voters more interested in family values than economics, did not foucus only on the economy.  It simply demonstrated Romney’s ability to all the issues together as segued from the economy to human values and morality after pointing out that Barack went from being the man of “yes we can” to the man of “no he didn’t” and mentioned how “the man who said he would unite the country, turned out to be the most divisive in history”.

In general Romney offered a preview of a presidential candidate who is on message and focussed.  He also demonstrated the keen ability to tie his economic experience to the social issues that willmotivate the Republican base that he will need to inspire if he wants to be the Republican nominee for President in 2012. 

Below you will find the entire Romney speech on video.  Take the time to view it for yourself and I believe that you walk away with the sense that Mitt Romney is both hungry and polished.

Bookmark and Share

Santorum’s Speech to the Annual Values Voters Convention

United States Senator Rick Santorum, sponsor o...

Rick Santorum

Bookmark and Share Rick Santorum delivered a powerful speech at the annual Values Voters gathering of the Family Research Council.  He began by telling the audience that he disagreed with the so-called experts who are trying to tell Republicans to deal strictly with economic issues.  According to Santorum “the idea that values and moral issues are not part of integrated sets of issues that keep this country free and safe and prosperous is a very dangerous idea”  He added that we can’t go out on one wing of issues and expect to fly on just the wing talking about taxing and spending.   Santorum believes that at the core of all the issues is that government is taking freedom away. 

In the end Santorum layed out another very important point worth mentioning.  He warned that voters should not get down too down on Republicans after they take back either or both branches of Congress and do fail to produce dramatic change.  Santorum reminds us that on the November 3rd of 2010, Barack Obama will still be President and more than that, real change takes time.  Just as it did with Democrats who took control of Congress in 2006 but didn’t start dramatically changing things until 2008.  But Santorum punctuated his remarks by claiming that there were only three times in the past 100 years that “really big things happened”to change government…..The New Deal, The Great Society and the last two years of the Obama Administration. 

Santorum went on to explain that the key denominator in nthoise three cases wewre not simply a liberal President but were rather the  fillibuster proof margins that liberals had in Congress.  The point being that no matter what happens on November 2, 2010, republicans will not have the numbers to bring about the dramatic change that we want.  However if we remain focussed, come 2012 the numbers could be there and the opportunity to create the change we need in dramatic fashion will be in our reach.

Below you will find Santorum’s speech in its entirety;

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: