Should we throw the social conservatives out of the party?

romney love of country 2Romney lost because of all the anti-gay and anti-abortion nuts in the party!”

You’ve probably heard some of your friends make similar statements. “Why can’t they leave those social issues alone?” they ask.

Most of the complainers are from the Northeast and the left coast, including San Francisco, where Democrats have ruled for generations and moral standards have fallen furthest. Those who express such disdain for social conservatives sincerely believe that if social conservatives are diminished within the party, then more Democrats and independents would vote Republican. Really? I don’t think so.

Neither party is homogenous — each has its diverse support groups assembled under its tent. It is probably the conservative evangelicals who the non-religious have in mind when they complain about pushing social issues. Self-described conservative evangelicals made up 27 percent of voters in 2012, and 80 percent of them voted for Romney, 19 percent for Obama. That group was 48 percent of Romney’s total vote – the largest single constituency in the electorate. While they obviously care about social matters, they also care about jobs, taxes, the deficit, Israel and other core GOP issues. As a group, they are not single-issue voters. But they are not likely to vote for a politician who insists on taxpayer-paid abortions. This group also opposes promoting the homosexual lifestyle and countenancing same-sex marriage. Catholics went for Romney by 19 points. Besides these religious voters, there are plenty of non-religious conservatives who agree on social issues. Ditching the social-issue Republicans would be death to the party.

Erick Erickson, a CNN pundit, looked at the Republicans’ loss in November, decrying Richard Mourdock and Todd Aiken as religious conservatives who lost. But wait – what about Tommy Thompson, Heather Wilson, George Allen, Scott Brown and all the other more liberal candidates who lost their races? Mourdock was beaten by a pro-life Democrat. And while rejecting Aiken, Missouri voters increased the majority of pro-lifers in their General Assembly.

“What’s really going on here is that the people who voted for Mitt Romney, but who disagree with social conservatives, have decided the social conservatives must be the problem,” Erickson wrote. “Romney won about a quarter of the Hispanic vote and a tenth of the black vote. Those numbers may not sound like much, but in close elections they matter. … Hispanic voters are the most socially conservative voters in the country. They have a connection to Republicans on social issues they lack on fiscal issues.”

Those who understand fiscal issues can look only to the Republican Party, because virtually all Democrats are for unlimited government spending, taxing and regulating. Individual liberty is defended by the Republican Party, while Democrats are for more government authority and less freedom for individuals.

The Democrats’ base includes, among others, welfare recipients, government employees, environmentalists, lawyers, academics, homosexuals, unionists and generally anyone or group wanting something from the government, even if it is clearly unconstitutional. The latter would include big-corporation crony capitalists, too.

The bottom line: If fiscally conservative Republicans push social conservatives out of the party, they will be responsible for weakening the party of fiscal sanity. This will ensure victory for those representing the opposite of what they believe. Parties have factions, and we must learn to work together with those we agree with most of the time. To do otherwise is political suicide. Too many believe that anti-abortion Republicans are a negative to the party, but without us, the party is hopelessly outnumbered.

Many otherwise intelligent people believe that killing helpless, unborn babies in the womb is a good thing. Illinois Senator Barack Obama even voted twice to kill them outside the womb after a botched abortion — a clear case of infanticide. Despots have murdered many millions of innocent men, women and children over the years, while liberal Democrats and so-called “moderate” Republicans have on their hands the blood of 55 million murdered persons on the way to being born. Think about it.

socialism is not freedomDemocrats say Republicans want to get into your bedrooms. How absurd is that? Yet many people, having heard that expression numerous times, begin to believe it or just accept it without thinking. Would someone please give me an example of how any Republican wants to get into someone’s bedroom because they oppose same-sex marriage or abortion?

Most of us Republicans are involved in grass-roots political activities for decades for one reason: freedom. If we do not defend our freedoms, we’ll lose them. In just the last four years of the Obama regime, the United States has fallen from fifth to 10th place in the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom published by The Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal. The Economic Freedom of the World:2012 Annual Report – co-published by Cato, The Fraser Institute and 70 other think tanks around the world — sees the United States falling precipitously down to 18th, accelerated by the federal government takeover of health care, banking, automobiles and student loans, etc. Obama’s inauguration speech threatened cap-and-tax legislation and continued unlimited spending, which would reduce freedoms further.

There will continue to be many meetings and discussions about what the party needs to do to put an end to the unlimited spending and onerous regulations turning us into a fascist state. A good start is eliminating the irrational thinking about social conservatives. Reagan said we need to bind with those who agree with us 80 percent of the time and show how a capitalist, free-market, constitutional republic is the best path to prosperity – as all of history has proven. That also means we stop putting up candidates like Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney, who are too much like Democrats to show any real contrast to the failing policies of the past several years.

And finally, think twice about purging social conservatives from the party. They played an indispensable role in November by re-electing the House majority and in electing 30 Republican governors and hundreds of Republican state legislators. Throw them out of the party? Insanity!

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed

George Blumel

George Blumel founded and ran businesses, served on boards of public and private companies and until recently, worked as a financial planner. He’s a life-long conservative Republican political activist, starting with the 1964 Goldwater campaign. He and his wife Sandra have lived in South Florida since 1973.
From Around The Web
About George Blumel

George Blumel founded and ran businesses, served on boards of public and private companies and until recently, worked as a financial planner. He’s a life-long conservative Republican political activist, starting with the 1964 Goldwater campaign. He and his wife Sandra have lived in South Florida since 1973.

  • Karl Dickey

    George! Good to see you on the Biz Pac Review. Excellent article, and you mentioned the answer to the key question in this article – "Most of us Republicans are involved in grass-roots political activities for decades for one reason: freedom."

    The main reason I left the Republican Party in '96 was because it had become the anti-freedom party, and perhaps I should have left sooner. I too considered myself a "Goldwater Republican" at that time. However it's exhausting to work on a Republican's campaign when they speak a message of freedom (libertarian) on the campaign trail, then when elected to office he or she becomes a draconian, big government type. During both Democratic & Republican regimes regulations were pushed down my company's throat and I personally kept losing freedom after freedom. At some point, one needs to consider whether belonging to a popular, powerful political party is more important than one's own principles. I made my choice in 1996 and not until the Republican Party becomes truly a party of freedom of business & the individual would I ever consider returning.

    I believe in freedom of the individual and freedom of economic transactions. I have done nothing illegal, am not involved in a criminal enterprise of any type, yet I am not afforded my freedom and privacy supposedly guaranteed me. I thought was also the belief of Republicans, however nothing could be further from the truth. The trampling of nearly each section of the Constitution by Republicans & Democrats is treasonous at best. Republicans as well as Democrats want to see what's in my bank account, the transactions I have been making, what I have or not have been smoking, eating and drinking. I have done nothing wrong, however I still must regularly report to the government information about me and my businesses which is none of their business. No thank you – that is not freedom, but it is the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. And yet, the masses lap it up happily while stupidly losing their freedoms year after year.

    It is nice to try to distance Republicans from Democrats, and there are differences, however both parties are guilty of making government bigger, more intrusive and less free for Americans.

    George, good like trying to turn that elephant around, but frankly, I'd find a party more in line with your values, as clearly the Republican Party left us both. I praise your effort, however some day you are going to have to realize the Republican Party is nothing but a power hungry, freedom sucking, big government, unprincipled monster. Your support financially and otherwise is only feeding the monster. Feed something you can actually be proud of.

    • Karl Dickey

      Beginning of last paragraph should read 'luck' not 'like'

      'good luck trying to turn that elephant around'

    • Narda

      I appreciate the fact that you left the Republican Party I'm in the process of leaving so now they along with the Democratic Party have become the party is a big government in there very little distinction between them I keep hoping that I can find a party that reflect the values the conservative values that I hold dear I will keep up the good fight hope you will too.

  • Jack Furnari

    Really good article George. I appreciate that you sent it to us.

  • http://www.posterchildrenfortermlimits.com George Blumel

    Karl, Narda and others frustrated by weaknesses in the Republican party have a point. But you fail to understand that the party cosnists of citizens who make it what it is. You could help mold the party more to your liking if you get in and help us accomplish a more conservative/libertarian force. Freedom is one side of a coin; responsibility is the other side. If you don't take some responsibility for making the party stronger on our issues then it won't be. Get in the arena and help us fight the statists,

    I must correct a serious error you make by stating that there is very little distinction between the parties. I'd ask you to go to the major rating groups who judge our Reps by their votes on the issues and you'll find that virtually ALL of the Repubs are rated much differently from All Dems albeit some Repubs are close to the Dems. You might note that we conservative/libertarian party members do rid ourselves of several each cycle. I would suggest checking the Heritage Action site for voting records. There is a huge difference between the parties; not enough yet but we'd do better with your help instead of your complaints.

  • http://www.nickadamsinamerica.com Nick A

    Great article, George!

    The family is the bedrock of society, and that is precisely what social conservatives protect.

  • Byron

    I see both sides of the discussion between Karl & George. When I think of the two dingbat Senators from Maine, the female clown from Alaska, plus the past goofy presidential candidate that we previously put up from Arizona, I tend to agree with Karl.On the other hand,I look at Hillary, Barack Huessin, Chuckie Shummer and Wasserman-Shultz and I am sadly forced to accept the lesser of two evils.

  • Richard A (ricardus)

    When the Republican Party strays from its conservative, Constitutional roots, it loses.

    All "rights" come from God and He did not grant special rights to women and special rights to gays. So if one is a true conservative and Constitutionalist, there can be no argument for "gay rights" and the "woman's right of choice" when it comes to abortion.

  • babs g

    George, our party is lucky to have your input. But I think we have to reinvent ourselves because a whole slew of my women friends changed at the last minute and voted for Obama (whom they disliked) and said tersely it was because of the abortion issue. And tonight I listened to Colin Powell tell why he has changed parties. If we are selling conservative ideas and the Constitution, we must be packaging it wrong.

  • Egon Martinovsky

    Good article George, thank you for your efforts. Without a doubt your point is essential towards a more conservative group of Republicans winning in the future. It's also a reflection of the infighting we are currently witnessing in the party. I am with you on this, we must indeed unite before we can defeat the Democrat/fascist steam roller.

  • Patty Morris

    Am all about following the 10 Commandments and the Constitution. Yes, I am a fiscal conservative, but you cannot take it with you. Paper burns and gold, being heavy, will fall out of the sky. ;o) Being born and having life now and in the hereafter in some place that is not hotter than Florida.. That is the party for me.

  • Mike

    Thank you for saying what needed to be said George. Excellent article! Let them try to push ME out.