Thursday, November 08, 2012

Aborting the Republican Party

Our guest-essayist (and fellow Virginian) Egghead has some observations about the Republican Party in the wake of Tuesday’s election.

Aborting the Republican Party
by Egghead

In a past election year, an elected local government official invited me to join a new local women’s Republican group in a suburban Virginia town. Upon attending the meeting with great hope that the local Republican women would provide a forum for me to hear and discuss substantive issues affecting the United States of America, I was shocked to realize that the only issue that was relevant to the Republican club members was eliminating abortion.

Indeed, upon a vote of which Republican candidates were to be supported by this club, the women — along with a few men — looked only at the issue of abortion. Where more than one candidate was against abortion, the club members voted to support the candidate who would be stricter against abortion. I came away from the meeting thinking that the club should be named as an anti-abortion club rather than a Republican club. It also crossed my mind that it appeared that the club members would have voted to support any candidate with any political, economic, and religious platform if that candidate promised to act against abortion.

After my visit, I sent the club roster a thoughtful email about the dangers of Islam. The club president immediately contacted me and essentially forbade me to ever contact the members again via email. I mentioned that Islam is a huge problem facing the United States of America and that I was willing to try to arrange for James Lafferty of the Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST) to address the club. As I expected, years later, I am still waiting for that call to come.

Fast forward to this election. A highly educated upper middle class white female relative — near and dear to me — informed me that she had voted for Obama via absentee ballot. With dismay, I asked her why she had voted for Obama. Among her various reasons, the first reason that she cited was that Romney is an “as***le.”

“Yes, but what do you mean,” I asked.

“Well,” she replied, “Romney plans to take away women’s right to choose.”

“OK, what else?”

“Ann Romney is just a shadow of Romney and has no life.”

“Anything else?”

“Romney was born rich and has always been rich and does NOT understand the middle class. At least, Obama understands the desperation of the middle class. Michelle Obama remembers how horrible it was to go to public school.”

Much respectful conversation ensued where I tried to address her misconceptions about both Romney and Obama. Her initial defense was blaming me. “Why didn’t you tell me this before?”

“I did tell you, but you told me to stop emailing you information because you had a stressful job and you did not want to be depressed.”

Her secondary defense was saying that her vote didn’t count anyway. “I doubt that the entire election hinges on my vote.”

Ominously, her final defense was abortion. “Well, if the Muslims take over here, then I refuse to live that way. I will make sure that my children and I will pass peacefully.”

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are absolutely correct. The Republican party is obsessed with not killing babies, freedom and the ability to keep what you earned from those who would take it from you. So yes if I were you I would join a third party and thus fragment the only party that has a chance to fight against the Marxist/socialist Democrat party. Yes play the useful idiot and join a third party. What could go wrong???????

Frank Hilliard said...

I did a blog post on exactly the same issue this morning. Since when did sex become the dominating political issue in America?

Rollory said...

@Anon - That's right! Gaining power is more important than principle. Hey, you could be a Democrat!

Obligatory Solzhenitsyn: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/SolhenitsynLies.php

Abortion IS the killing of a human being. Sometimes, this is necessary, and less unjust than NOT killing that human being. In the case of rape, to inform the woman that she MUST carry the rapist's child to term - no. That is plain and simple insanity. It is further evil directed against the woman, and it rewards the rapist - it rewards evil. To not kill the child is in and of itself an evil act. It is not the child that must be punished; the child is not evil - not yet; but its mere existence under such circumstances is an evil fact, that must not be endured.

The child's death is the rapist's doing, and the rapist's responsibility, because it was the rapist's choice to create that child at that time and in that manner.

The mere existence of another human being does not obligate one to provide for them. That a man is starving on my doorstep does not obligate me to take food from my family to give to him. That the child happened to come into existence in that woman's womb does not obligate her to keep it, if its existence was contrary to her will and conceived in an act of evil. It's unfortunate, unfair, tout ce que vous voulez, yes - but life isn't perfect. We have choices like that sometimes, and no man worthy of the name would impose such a punishment on a woman he cares for as to force her to carry a rapist's child. As a man, his task is to crush the rapist's skull, and then do the same with the monster's illegitimate spawn, that its line be extinguished from the earth.

There's also the fact that tendency toward sexual violence does correlate to a certain extent with inherited traits, and the possibility that rewarding rape in this manner merely increases the tendency in the broader population. But that's the sort of cerebral argument that won't convince women.

Akin and Mourdock lost in areas that Romney/Ryan carried easily. There's a message there, that Americans aren't Taliban.

As for the Republican party, they're the retarded child marching in front of the liberal parade and pretending to keep it from going too fast. They're useless, and their practical results amount to nothing but steady treason. They have been deliberately complicit in the mass immigration (legal and otherwise) over the past 50 years, and now are somehow surprised at the results. It's time to obliterate them and start from scratch.

Anonymous said...

I've been following this story. The other day I listened to pro-abortionists being interviewed on the radio. What exactly is their argument? That women should be allowed to abort at will and that the state should cover the cost? How weird that women should be so vociferous in their demand for the right to abort their children. What's that all about?

And how does it relate to the significance this issue had in the presidential election?



Anonymous said...

Anonymous 10:06

The GOP is not about freedom, otherwise they'd get rid of the TSA, kill the NDAA, ban the use of drones by police forces across the country. In short this is a lie.

As for keeping ones money, that only applies to the rich. For the rest of us they've been real busy supporting trade agreements that have sent over 8 million jobs overseas. See it's really hard keeping ones wealth when you don't have a job and there aren't any to be found. Romney and the GOP don't see the disconnect. And immigration, well the GOP is as big on open borders as the Dimmycrats.

Anonymous said...

I think that one of the problems is that the Republican party is operating as a traditional political organisation.

But Obama is operating as a "charismatic leader" in much the same way as Adolf Hitler did. (Read Laurence Rees' new book on this - very interesting.)

No one operating within a traditional political (or military) framework could seriously oppose Hitler after he took power - because he was connecting with people in an entirely different way.

The Republicans' failure to deal with this same phenomenon led to their inability to defeat Obamsa.

If you're taking on a "charismatic leader" then you need a Winston Churchill figure. Someone willing and able to name that which is evil, and with the guts to stand against it to the bitter end. The Republicans had Mitt Romney

Hermes said...

How many more americans may have voted according to the same way of thinking as that of this woman?

As said before, a democracy without a sane demos is a direct path to anarchy and doom. It might be even worse than a dictature, because in this kind of insane democracy, the catastrophic downfall of the society is fully legitimated. The society itself has chosen it through their ballots, and not a single man, a dictator, somebody taking over power by force. This can be seen as a legitimated downfall, a freely chosen end of times. The demos, the people who in normal circumstances should vote for the best candidate to lead the country, that people have now chosen the best candidate to destroy their country. And they have done it out of what?

This is an absurd tragedy.

Reed said...

Thus it has been in Minnesota for too long as well. To reach the ballot as a Republican candidate on state level has meant being only and always against abortion. Slowly that one purity test is being eliminated. But in good Republican company, it's best not to admit to pro-choice sympathies. The club Republicans are self-limiting and -eliminating.

Anonymous said...

Rollory at 11/08/2012 11:13 AM said:

"To not kill the child is in and of itself an evil act...its mere existence under such circumstances is an evil fact, that must not be endured."

Lord have mercy.

Sagunto said...

"Her secondary defense was saying that her vote didn’t count anyway."

That's more like it. Good defense and, though she probably didn't realize it, so very true. So why did she decide to vote then? What motivated her to abstain from one of the few remaining rights, i.e. the right not to participate in this sort of sacrament of the State religion?

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

Paardestaart said...

I rest my case..

sgt.red.blue.red said...

I remember in the first or second grade, in Catholic school, a drawing of two paths, the road to Hell was smooth and like a superhighway. The road to Heaven was a rutty path, and full of holes.

This is the essence the differences between the two candidates. Obama and Romney.

Obama offers the palliative of money for nothing, free Obama phones, abortions on demand, the easy answers, at someone else's expense (taxpaying neighbors or the unborn child).

Romney offers the road that ultimately benefits society. Work ethic, pride in accomplishment, individual responsibility. This is a hard sell.

The results of Tuesday's vote sadly demonstrates the central tendency of today's electorate.

Kepha said...

The fact of the matter is that the pro-life movement, more than the Republican Party, is a "big tent". There are pro-life Americans who are actually pretty far to the Left.

I believe that the far bigger obstacle to any American conservatism is a media-academia-government complex that is lockstep in its Leftthink. It can't be shaken unless something like a 9/11 happens, and large swathes of the country realize that there's something radically wrong out there.

ib said...

What is needed is a party that is basically Conservative in nature minus support of the "religious" issues like no choice, anti-homosexuality and anti death with dignity. It would hold conservative values on all the other issues like, islam, the environment, education etc.. That's a party I could get behind. Mock me if you must.

rickl said...

Here's a comment I made earlier tonight at Neo-Neocon:

The Republican leadership has been telling fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, Tea Partiers, libertarians, constitutionalists, and those concerned about rampant illegal immigration that our views are not welcome in their party.

They tell us every day in every way that only “moderates” who can reach across the aisle, compromise with the leftist Democrats, and who support amnesty have any chance of winning elections. Our job is to shut up and vote for them, lest the Democrat boogeyman win.

I have said countless times that the Republican Party is becoming like the “conservative” or “right” parties of Europe. They have no guiding principles and do not question the vast scope and reach of the centralized state. All they want is a seat at the table of power. It matters little to them in the scheme of things whether they are temporarily in the majority or temporarily in the minority. The Tories of England never advocate for the privatization of the NHS or the legalization of firearms ownership. Such topics are considered beyond the bounds of rational discussion.

Is it any wonder that more and more people are tiring of this charade and are tuning them out?

Romney was my last choice in the primaries, and I was far from alone. He was a standard-issue establishment moderate. At the time I swore all up and down the internet that I would not vote for him under any circumstances. I know I was not alone there, either. In the end I swallowed my pride and voted for him. I’m sure many others did as well, but I’m equally sure that there were others who stood their ground and didn’t.

I’m done with the Republican Party after this. I mean it this time.

—-

Having said all that, I’m increasingly certain that the Democrats committed vote fraud on a massive scale. Remember how one of the first things Obama did was to put the U.S. Census under the direct control of the White House? I’ll bet that they knew precisely which precincts around the country to target for shenanigans, whether it be ballot box stuffing for Democrats or making Republican votes “disappear”.

Welcome to the Third World, folks.

Anonymous said...

Sagunto: "So why did she decide to vote then?"

Your guess is as good as mine. :)

Egghead

stg58 said...

Indeed, upon a vote of which Republican candidates were to be supported by this club, the women — along with a few men — looked only at the issue of abortion.

So, if abortion was their only issue, why vote for Romney? Romney is pro-abortion. The two pro-life primary candidates were Santorum and Paul. Did those republican ladies support either of them?

Anonymous said...

There is one other thing, and I am amazed that not a single Republican had something to say about it. Because just as democracy has been debauched by the demos, capitalism has been drowned in a cesspool by the capitalists.

The revulsion against the banksters and the Goldman-Fed two way corridor, and the offshoring of jobs, and stocks pump and dump, and naked puts, and robo trading, and $1.3 quadrillion in derivatives, and one brokerage after another involved in major fraud is so great among the people that even middle-of-the road Americans are increasingly turning to socialism out of hatred of what capitalism has become.
A party that aims to protect and promote capitalism , which is what GOP is supposed to be, should have made it a linchpin of its platform to clean this cesspool. It should have sworn to the people heavy punishments to all the malefactors -- not one of whom has been punished with more than a light swat. And especially Mitt should have taken this to heart, as quite a few people hate Bain and its leveraged boyout business too -- on which the BHO campaign made lots of political capital.

How can the GOP be so stupid as not to see that it is the party that should have promised to clean up capitalism with a discerning hand, rather than leaving it to Obama's Marxists.
Takuan Seiyo

Anonymous said...

stg58: "Romney is pro-abortion."

Just your use of the word 'pro-abortion' is very telling.

Are you implying that Romney wants every woman to have an abortion?!

Here is a list of proposed laws that - like it or not - scare a lot of women: War on Women

Egghead

Mo Wagner said...

Establishing a new "Common Sense" party in America is long overdo. We all know that immigration needs to be reformed and our borders secure. A woman's right to choice makes sense if she is raped or her life in danger. Morally, abortion is wrong on all levels. Economically, it was the one variable that stopped major crime from increasing in American cities. The data supporting this was published in a book entitled "Freakonomics" in 2005. An economist discovered that women forced to have a child made poor mothers. Many of their offspring suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome, were crack babies, and later became criminals. A common sense party would create a balanced budget. And ensure that our elderly who paid into social security will receive it upon eligibility without means testing or massive cuts. Welfare, food stamps, WIC would require both parents to work for it. And receive one dependent rate only, the same treatment our military members receive. Rewarding people to have babies results in more government dependency, housing shortages, and generations of welfare recipients.

Unknown said...

To make abortion a central issue of the Republican Party is insanity. But there is a way out: the Republican Party platform on abortion should be to take the issue out of the Federal Government and take it back to the States were the people can decide, State by State. The Left talks diversity, and the Right talk democracy, well, let's call their bluff. Will it happen? Not a chance. Everyone is stuck in cement, one way or another.

Anonymous said...

Republicans fail to see and illustrate the bigger picture. The argument could have been made that our debt enables China: It enables China to violate human rights, force women to have abortions, etc.. By owing and by continuing to borrow from China we are muzzled.

We could have made the argument that open borders allows sleepers to cross, endangering everyone: Hispanics, Muslims and every citizen. Also, open borders facilitate a majority of males to cross. We could have logically and convincingly explained how this endangers all Hisplanics, Muslims, and every citizen.

We could have explained to citizens what the NDAA means, the extended Patriot Act and a multitude of other intrusive, non-constitutional policies, procedures and regulations.

But no. We allowed the left to make the election about being a "war on women" and tried to negate that concept with one argument only: the economy, which just wasn't enough.

I agree with the author that the scope of argument/cause is far too narrow.

Anonymous said...

First they came for the unborn...


I did a blog post on exactly the same issue this morning. Since when did sex become the dominating political issue in America? -- above poster

In and around about 1968. The destruction of the family, European women turning on their tribe and aligning themselves with minorities and Marxists who would destroy us, sexual promiscuity, the personal is the political, etc.

Emjoy.

EV

Anonymous said...

"To not kill the child is in and of itself an evil act...its mere existence under such circumstances is an evil fact, that must not be endured." Lord have mercy. --- Rollary

Indeed.

Eugenics never went out of style with the Nazis who also killed off bad genes and those with likely poor prospects for the good of humanity, no less.

You cant separate abortion from what ails us. Killing our offspring, kills our tribes prosperity and future survival.

Foolishness and rage against God and nature abounds.

EV

Anonymous said...

They have been deliberately complicit in the mass immigration (legal and otherwise) over the past 50 years, and now are somehow surprised at the results. It's time to obliterate them and start from scratch. --- Rollory


We aborted the future of our culture and our future labor force of our tribe.

Blaming immigrants is easy. The fault lay elsewhere. You either have the guts to look at the reality of what ails you....or you join the Left in attacking those who champion European Civilization.

Godless Hedonism stemming from Nihilism, rejection of God's law, and the embrace of evil and sin have led us to this calamity.

The men you abhor are those who actually champion our survival as a people and going concern. You paint them as backwards misogynists.

When you treat your offspring as a nuicance to be eliminated for the promotion of your own pleasure, we arrive at the place we are at, inevitably.

And so it goes...

The Final Solution, never goes out of style.

EV

Anonymous said...

Takuan gets it.

People are sick and tired of crony capitalism that has ruined our economy. Bush and Clinton deregulated the finance and investment sectors and all we got were a .Dot com and house bubbles that wrecked our economy and the taxpayer was forced to bail out billionaires and the banking sector.

We got bond rating agencies giving AAA to F grade securities so Goldman-Sachs could sell them to pension funds.

We got raving idiots like Corzine who destroyed a futures firm and took a billion dollars of investors money for himself before he bailed.

Romney should have promised to put some fat cats like Corzine in jail and impose the corporate death sentence on a host of Wall Street firms for fraud.

He should have kept his mouth shut on the auto bailout, which was BTW chicken feed compared to the trillions Wall Street got and which has done nothing for the country. Had he just done the this, he would have won Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.

He could have gotten the youth vote simply by allowing graduating students to file for bankruptcy to discharge student loans after say a period of 7 years.

No he listened to a bunch of insular millionaire GOPers whose failed policies litter capitol hill. who told him to let the automakers die, get rid of long term unemployment insurance. Do nothing about all the jobs shipped to China and the foreign workers imported here to replace American jobs. And kiss the a** of illegal aliens.

Yeah, lets alienate the White working and middle-class(which the GOP doesn't even acknowledge as existing), scare the unemployed, etc.

This is a party that doesn't listen and only cares about power.

Let it die. They are a disgrace to the people of the country.

Anonymous said...

Please spare us on the Auto Bailout. It was a bankrupcy where the government provided credit to GM to keep it afloat through the process because the credit markets were frozen and so it couldnt be done in the private sector. This is exactly what Romney proposed he would have done, excepting one thing, he wouldnt have controverted bankrupcy law and the rights of creditors to hand the company to the UAW.

This was a naked power grab, where Democrat union cronies dipped their hands into the Southern workers of Toyota, Nissan, BMW, Mercedes pockets to support their lavish pay and benefits. Robbing the poor to pay the better off.

What happened with GM is corruption....plain and simple. Political supporters got paid off, and everyone else had the rule of law yanked out from under them to do it.

The truth shall set you free.

Confiscating the means of production and transferring ownership to the "proletariat," in contravention to the rule of law, isnt something to laud.

You either have principles that apply to everybody or you dont have principles, merely expediency. The ends justifies the means.

EV

Jonny said...

The Republican Party Establishment is run by the same Leftist-Globalist-Multiculturalists that run the Democrat Party and basically all the ruling parties in the Western world.

The Republican Party masquerades as conservative in order to win the conservative vote over to the NWO agenda. The Democrats do the same for their constituents, to win them over. The masses on either side generally no nothing of the true agenda, because they are blind and misdirected by peripheral issues of a tactical nature - like abortion, gay rights and gun control.

The GOP focuses on abortion so that the GOP voters don't worry about all the other things that might interfere with the NWO agenda. Democrats do the same.

They are all stupid. None of them notice that there will be no CHOICE about anything once the globalists win.