This billboard by the Republican Union PAC is popping up in various places across the country:
Its part of an effort to encourage pro-life and pro-marriage Americans to support Republican candidates this fall.
"Republican Union PAC has spent $950,000 on billboards, it said in an FEC filing yesterday. The billboards are going up in five key states — Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia — and will encourage political independents and conservative Democrats to consider voting Republican, Harmon said."
60 Comments
Now that's what I'm talking about.
The swing states will determine the election, and these issues are crucial for turning out the Chik-Fil_A....er.......Tea Party.......er........
People who know that Moms are female and Dads are male vote.
Would rather they aired political ads on it but this is a start.
The perverts saw on Wednesday, August 1st that the vast majority of the people of this nation are not Godless and they do not support destroying the intent of institutions created by nature and natures God - they also know that we the people saw it too.
The Marxists running the Democrat's went all in because they know they may never have a better opportunity to destroy this nation from within then they have right now; they may never again have as many corrupt jurists and politician’s waiting to cover up their crimes against humanity as they have right now.
It is to us to end them; not for our sake, but for the sake of future generations that will judge us as weak and faithless if we were to fail.
Let's go for the Gold people.
This is a smart use of funds, and it's only the beginning.
This assumes the election will be won on social conservative issues, which is far from certain. The Republican nomination certainly wasn't. We'll see in the fall. The US electorate is so unpredictable.
Not sure it will be a decisive issue at the ballot. Churches might better spend this money on charitable causes, to help those hurt by the Bush meltdown.
Social conservative issues certainly didn't win the Republican nomination, did they? Social conservative still don't like the nominee.
The Republican Union Pack:
Spokesman Bo Harmon said that the PAC has raised more than $1 million. He declined to reveal any of its donors, who will be disclosed on FEC reports later this year.
Because it’s a super-PAC, Republican Union PAC can accept donations in unlimited amounts from any source. (Thanks, SCOTUS, for allowing big money to buy elections... disclosure later, when it's too late).
I think it is safe to say that, just so long as we are doing the opposite of what Claude suggests, we can't be too for off.
Yes, Rick, don't consider facts, think about them, weigh the pros and cons, and then make an informed decision. Just blindly follow your leaders or preconceived ideas. Way to go! I'm not expecting people here to take what I say for granted, just to open their minds to other things than FoxNews and NOM, and look to what good exists elsewhere.
Claude: Wjhat I take for granted is that your nation is guilty of enforcing homosexualist propaganda and role-playing upon innocent children, which is a crime against humanity, and which will, you may be absolutely assured, be met in the end with full and just retribution.
It is the unshakable duty of every parent in America to utterly crush the SSM movement, and so deprive them of the legal tool- redefined marriage- by which to begin their mass child abuse in our public schools.
Good move. Let Romney zero-in on the economy (while rejecting the recent lies about him being responsible for a woman's cancer death), and let members of conservative/Republican coalitions publicize the marriage issue.
I mean, Romney and the RNC should mention their commitment to marriage; but they have to demonstrate their concern about the economy. Others can put up billboards and ads to give the extra spice for the social issues.
LOL, Rick, great point.
Who's foolish enough to take their enemy's "advice"?
Claude is pathetic. He really thinks that he's educating us. Some SSMers, like Spunky, are far more impressive than Claude, but are more down-to-earth. They also don't try to blanket each thread with numerous posts, eventually becoming so obnoxious that they end up getting banned (I think that's what happened with Claude before).
Ash
I agree with you. Romney needs to focus on the economy and jobs as those issues are of paramount importance. There are many capable social conservatives who support Romney that can speak about social issues like marriage.
Obama would like nothing more than distraction from his utter failure to turn the economy around.
@Claude
"Social conservative issues certainly didn't win the Republican nomination, did they? Social conservative still don't like the nominee."
Values voters are the key voting bloc that needs to be engaged. There are two notable elections that I know of where they propelled the GOP to victory.
1994 and 2004. If Bush had gone about his attacks on Kerry differently, no doubt his margain of victory would have been much larger.
Just because the values oriented voters within the GOP don't like Romney, they like Obama even less and that will be reason enough for them to come out and vote for the Nominee. The values voters in general, the ones that only vote when they've had enough of the government pushing them around will surely come around this time.
Zack, social conservatives do not deserve the title "values voters" more than other voters. We all have a valid values system. All you achieve is showing contempt toward those who have a different values system or who are different.
Liberal values have been the cause of all the despair and hopelessness in the world because they are based on co-dependency instead of independence through provident living, lust instead of true love, covetousness instead of charity, and slavery vs. true agency. They promote vice instead of self control, laziness instead of hard work, and dominion vs. freedom. Countries who espouse liberal values cannot sustain themselves.
Liberal values promote legalized plundering and greed of the fruits of another's hard work. Old as Cain, are liberal values.
DoE: You are describing the philosophy of Wall Street, rather than the values of social democracies and liberalism.
A country like Canada, with a well regulated free market economy has survived the 2008 financial meltdown much better than the laissez-faire US, where greedy CEOs have made a killing while main street has lost.
Thank you, Claude, but the USA isn't a democracy--it's a Republic....at present run by Democrats promoting legalized plunder via crony capitalism. We'll try to change that this fall. Thank heaven for our Constitution!
DoE said "Liberal values have been the cause of all the despair and hopelessness in the world". She doesn't mention muslim fundamentalism, the genocidal Khmer regime, the White Supremacist South (speak of slavery), the Inquisition (yes... the Catholic Church actually torturing and killing people like scientists). These did not have liberal values and have been responsible of much despair and hopelessness.
Liberal values are anti-Christ values, so you've made my point. Thank you.
DoE: You also omit to mention the Holocaust (while Pius XII was looking the other way and Benedict XVI was serving in the Hitler youths), Stalin's, Franco's and Idi Amin's fascist regimes, Pinochet and the Generals in Chile, to name a few. Not liberals... and responsible for much despair.
Liberalism is tyrrany--again, you make my point. Thank you.
DoE: I can make the distinction between the teachings of Christ and the crimes of the religious hierarchy.
Wow! DoE actually says that the US isn't a democracy, as though being a republic is incompatible with being a democracy. From her last 3 posts, it is clear that she does not want a democratic system, but a theocratic totalitarian republic.
The US Constitution is heaven inspired....
Claude, you're so much fun to debate!
From Dictionary.com:
de·moc·ra·cy
[dih-mok-ruh-see] Show IPA
noun, plural de·moc·ra·cies.
1.
government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2.
a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3.
a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
Claude,
Canada ceased to be a democracy when the Canadian Supreme Court invented a constitutional right to change what constitutes a marriage in opposition to that nation’s history and traditions. This tyranny was compounded when the State of Massachusetts used Canada’s Supreme Courts treason as the rational for mandating marriage corruption for the people of their State in opposition to its history and traditions as well.
You have gotten where you are today via willful subterfuge.
Claude, you almost nailed it!!! You're amazing!! " From her last 3 posts, it is clear that she does not want a democratic system, but a theocratic totalitarian republic."
Well, I confess to looking forward to the 2nd Coming of Christ, & while I'm not sure that He'll refer to his Kingdom as a theocratic totalitarian republic, I'm sure it will be pretty amazing & just.
In the meantime, I love our Constitutionally protected govt., and will try to protect it from enemies of the state, including tyrants peddling identity politics. The USA is the freest country on earth, and worth protecting.
Awesome dictionary skills, BTW.
DoE: Freedom of conscience and religion are guaranteed in our Canadian Constitution (not just worship). Please check your facts before posting.
Ask Catholic schools if they enjoy freedom of religion. Your leaders are breaking your laws. A travesty...
"social conservatives do not deserve the title 'values voters' more than other voters."
Claude, values voters refers to average person who doesn't vote every single election. These are the people who show up once in a blue moon. These are your average church goers, the stay at home moms and the 9-5 dads who try to support their families. The ones who understand our Judeo-Christian values and are not political.
" We all have a valid values system."
But there is only one set of values that are American values. The ones that we were founded on. Liberal-Progressive Values are not American Values.
"All you achieve is showing contempt toward those who have a different values system or who are different."
Liberal values are the antithesis of what this country stands for. I don't hate them, but their values are not reflectant of America as a whole and never will be.
Hey, I feel for you. Obamacare is trying to pull the same stunt. We're working on that, just as I'm sure you're working to allow Catholics to teach Catholic doctrines on sexuality in Catholic Schools--what one would expect in a country with genuine freedom of religion, and not just paying it lip service...
Oh and the United States is a Republic, not a Democracy. Our Constitution specifically states we are a Republic.
@ Ash
While I appreciate the compliments, I'd prefer they not come at Claude's expense. It's not the first time you've taken a shot at him and others either.
I've enjoyed our discussions about Regnerus' study, and I think you are far and away the brightest NOM supporter on the blog. However, I lose respect for you when I see you insulting others, even if the rest of your argument is sound.
I hate responding to your compliment with criticism, but there probably isn't a better opportunity to say this.
Also, I too wish Claude would condense his comments into a few, longer posts. And while I can't speak for him, my guess is that he is trying to avoid the moderation filter, something I have found infinitely more annoying than excessive comments.
They do enjoy freedom of religion. They are not allowed to engage in illegal discrimination, stepping on other peoples' freedoms. If two freedoms clash, as often happens in disputes between individuals and/or institutions, there are tribunals and courts to decide, just as there is in the US. Our systems are fairly similar, if you take the time to read and compare.
So, church doctrine on sexuality is considered illegal discrimination? Canada is promoting discrimination--against freedom Of speech and conscience. Sexual identity promoters are more equal than Catholic clergymen. Everyone in Canada is equal, but some are more equal than others. Animal Farm, friend. Can't have it both ways.
Zack, Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy (figurehead only) and the US is a Republic. However, both countries elect their legislative and executive branches through a democratic process (through a variety of mechanisms, including the presidential college, plurality or majority in parliament, etc). Again, a Republic does not preclude a democratic process to elect a government.
Did anyone claim that a Republic does not preclude a democratic process? Nice save, Claude.
What kind of a "democratic process" is that, where each corporation is secretly free to 'vote' on each candidate or cause by donating huge amounts of money to one side or the other?
That's a plutocracy.
And it's not "democratic". In a democracy, the people have to have the power. Corporations aren't people.
Preserve Marriage... I agree that the conservative SCOTUS's so-called Citizens United decision has given plutocrats unlimited power to buy elections, and big corporations tend to favor Republicans over Democrats (unions cannot match Wall Street in that regard).
Transparency and disclosure are essential to the restoration of the democratic process. And that includes NOM, who should disclose its big donors to ensure that people know who they are really supporting.
Preserve Marriage. We may disagree on marriage, but we do agree that Romney's "corporations are people, my friends" is a total hyjack of the democratic process, in the US Republic.
Only those in bed w/Democrats enabling crony capitalism. Most businesses in America are small business owners, struggling to defy the odds under Obama's tyranny.
What Claude describes is liberalism.
BTW, I've donated to NOM, but not as much as I'd like.
. Will be a bigger donor, hopefully.
What Claude describes is state-mandated child abuse.
Those who, with Claude, defend homosexualist evil, in indoctrinating innocent children in "role playing" psychological abuse of children in "six genders", is a crime against humanity.
Let us all do our utmost to see that the criminals responsible are brought to justice.
"Oh and the United States is a Republic, not a Democracy. Our Constitution specifically states we are a Republic."
We are a representitive democracy, which could also be called a republic. There are such a thing as synonyms, you know.
@Son of Adam
When Ben Franklin was asked by a elderly female what form of government they created as he was leaving Convention Hall Franklin reportedly replied:
"A Republic, but it is up to you to keep it."
@Son of Adam
I'm goin off what the Constitution reads.
Where in the Constitution does it say that we are not any kind of democracy?
The principles of good governance apply to all of humankind. But some places are hostile to those principles. Some places are lax. Others have structures to account for the good and the bad of human nature.
The asserted supremacy of identity politics is a corruptive force that undermines the principles of good governance by directly attacking the foundations of the supportive structures that were hard won by civil society.
The SSM campaign's argumentation and its ways and meanscontinue to demonstrate that the SSM idea begins with a governmental takeover of civil society by way of attacking foundational social institutions ... and that is not limited to marriage. Hence the SSM campaign's demonstrated reliance on the abuse of judicial review and on the abuse of executive policymaking. It goes deeper and SSMers cannot resist making that their basis for more and more excuse making.
Meanwhile the billboard approach of marriage defenders encourages more freedom speech and rightly serves the particular marriage issue during a more general election campaign. The election is in a presidential year, sure, but the marriage issue touches on local elections as well, of course.
@Son of Adam
Article III section 4 of the United States Constitution:
"The United States shall gurantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive against domestic violence"
That doesn't quite answer my question.
Republic: a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
Democracy: a government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
See the overlap?
@Son of Adam
You asked me where in the constitution does it say we are a republic. I believe I gave you the appropriate response.
And yes I do see the overlap. At the federal level we are a Republic in that we have elected representatives to vote on national issues. While at the local level we are a democracy.
Is that where you're getting at?
Actually, I asked you where in the Constitution does it say we are NOT a democracy. Big difference. And a Republic can be considered a representative democracy.
@Son of Adam
Fine.
Claude, As with most liberal, knee-jerk, uninformed reactions, when you can't argue the facts, you argue emotions. Churches try not to get the word out...because they are Christians. And try not to attack those who are non-religious...not righteous....they love the sinners....they hate the sin.
Jesus said to the woman found in adultery...."Go and sin no more. This shows your attempts to hate…your number of posts on this site. You protest too much.