Earth to GOP: Get a grip
Fellow conservatives, please stop obsessing about what other adults might be doing in their bedrooms, so long as it’s lawful and consensual and doesn’t impinge in some obvious way on you. This obsession is socially uncouth, politically counterproductive and, too often, unwittingly revealing.
Also, if gay people wish to lead conventionally bourgeois lives by getting married, that may be lunacy on their part but it’s a credit to our values. Channeling passions that cannot be repressed toward socially productive ends is the genius of the American way. The alternative is the tapped foot and the wide stance. …
By the way, what’s so awful about Spanish? It’s a fine European language with an outstanding literary tradition—Cervantes, Borges, Paz, Vargas Llosa—and it would do you no harm to learn it. Bilingualism is an intellectual virtue, not a deviant sexual practice.
Which reminds me: Can we, as the GOP base, demand an IQ exam as well as a test of basic knowledge from our congressional and presidential candidates? This is not a flippant suggestion: There were at least five Senate seats in this election cycle that might have been occupied by a Republican come January had not the invincible stupidity of the candidate stood in the way.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Threadwinner
Norwegian on November 13, 2012 at 11:49 AM
I agree with this to some extent, except for the issue of gay marriage. Conservatives don’t seem to have an issue with same sex couples being together, they have an issue with trying to change the definition of marriage. I have seen very few conservatives oppose the idea of civil unions. We always hear about how the right needs to compromise. Well how’s this for compromise: same sex couples can get all the “rights” they are seeking through civil unions, just let us keep the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
HarryBackside on November 13, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Dear A$$Hat,
You get a grip! I don’t oppose gays or gay marriage, I oppose unelected judges making that decision for the people who elect legislators to make the laws about such things.
I too love the Spanish langauge. I like Hispanic people. But if you think I’m excited about replicating third world economies here, with bloated social programs and inbred corruption like that in Spain and all its former colonies in the New World, you’ve got me wrong. I’m happy to do away with immigration restrictions and grant every illegal who is here now a work permit that allows them to stay. But, your “path to citizenship” plan is a non-starter. Look at every single country on the planet (including those from whence Hispanics have fled) and you will find immigration restrictions that require residents to prove they have financial resources that will keep them off the dole, and only then can you apply, much later, for citizenship and the vote.
I agree completely that our Senate candidates this time around were as bad as any I’ve seen. I’m not limiting that judgment to Tea Party endorsed candidates either, if that’s where you’re headed. On the IQ test, I’m 100% there, as a qualification to vote. From what I’ve seen in Congress and on-the-street interview, it may be a millenium before the Dems win another election. Bring it on.
2ndMAW68 on November 13, 2012 at 11:51 AM
No – the argument is that a country has a right to know who is present within its borders and who gets to come and go. There are Libertarians that make excellent arguments (though not always ones I agree with) against this without having to lie about their opponents being racist anti-immigrants.
Here’s a newsflash, those immigrants (illegal and legal) don’t dream about having their kids be busboys and chambermaids either. For the legal immigrants, it’s usually seen the exact same way as the native population sees it, as a first or second job….a stepping stone to something better (my little brother started as a busboy and now he’s an accountant).
For the illegals, it’s usually the job that you can get that will look the other way on the fact that you can’t legally work in the country…..that one job doesn’t do much, but, if they work 2-3 of those jobs they are able to cover their expenses and send money back home that goes a LOOOOONG way.
I have no problem with the concept of working hard and supporting your family, but, you need to follow the same rules as everyone else. “The line was too long” is not a legitimate excuse for cutting in line at Disneyland or at the border of the United States.
JadeNYU on November 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Why not civil unions for all and let the churches worry about “definitions”?
rhombus on November 13, 2012 at 11:54 AM
Conservatives are losing the abortion debate because they are trying to get everything in one shot. Partial birth abortion is an extreme position, yet the procedure is gaining support. The left gains ground because they are willing to play the long game, and get what they want by winning small battles first. Conservatives want to win the war in one fight. I think we know which strategy is winning.
HarryBackside on November 13, 2012 at 11:55 AM
You lost me right there. Where ever did you get the idea you are a conservative?
Browncoatone on November 13, 2012 at 11:57 AM
If we have to give up our moral and ethical convictions to win elections, then may we never win ever again. Let people live in the moral sewer they will create for themselves.
I’m not going to be judged by fellow conservatives or liberals or anyone else when I die and face my Maker. I am neither perfect nor the smartest thing going, but there are certain eternal things that I will hold onto to the bitter end.
Period.
Mommynator on November 13, 2012 at 12:00 PM
First the guy who wrote this is not at all on OUR SIDE. But when the Democrats lost in 2001 and then 9/11 hit and Iraq was approved by Congress, they moderated by bouncing Dean with an over-publicized scream. Instead, the DNCe pushed Kerry, thinking they could sell a military guy. It’s hard to see this as a compromise but we’re looking at it through our prism. It was the Democrat establishment that helped take down Dean.
rhombus on November 13, 2012 at 12:02 PM
And then after running “two moderates” because they thought it was what the people wanted(sounds kinda familiar doesn’t it) they ran a full on leftist.
melle1228 on November 13, 2012 at 12:05 PM
RINOs lose with these candidates, and Dems win even with fake Indians, and fake war heroes.
RINOs like Bret are the problem.
faraway on November 13, 2012 at 12:09 PM
People like Bret are unable to effectively communicate conservative values… because they clearly don’t believe them.
This is why we lose.
We must have effective leaders and pundits.
Bye, Bye Bret.
faraway on November 13, 2012 at 12:11 PM
I would be happy to if it ended there. But it does not end there. Gay activists don’t simply want to be left alone or allowed to marry. They want be celebrated, to be in the spotlight, to be thought of foremost in everything. I for one, am tired of having it shoved down my throat.
stvnscott on November 13, 2012 at 12:28 PM
This is a VERY big part of it.
Bush 2 believed in conservative values for the first four years…and then lost his pea-pickin’ mind.
McCain didn’t believe in conservative values, his war career notwithstanding.
Romney didn’t believe in conservative values.
MelonCollie on November 13, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Conservatives want to drag gay couples from their homes? Stop them from registering their wedding at Target?
And tell that to the non-existent Catholic adoption agencies in MA. Or the growing number of private citizens who have been successfully sued by gay couples.
gwelf on November 13, 2012 at 12:30 PM
Establishment moderates like Bret Stephens can write this “reasonable” tripe because he knows he’ll still have a job for the next four years. Bret, most of us who don’t have the protection that you do in your insular, elitist media world, we are really afraid of how we’ll be able to feed our families and make our house payments for the next four years.
And it’s not because we’re all one-toothed Neanderthals, either.
Right Mover on November 13, 2012 at 12:31 PM
I’ve heard this solution to the gay marriage conundrum, and I wonder why we don’t run with this:
The state issues to two unrelated people a Certificate of Partnership, which satisfies the state’s interests. Marriage is something one seeks from a friendly religious congregation, JP, or ship’s captain.
For those who see religious propitiation as a function of law, it isn’t so good—but for the majority of anti-gay-marriage folks, this keeps gay couples from being able to sue religious congregations into compliance. The overwhelming majority of marriage-minded gays will run off to their local Metropolitan Community Church, have their weddings, and trouble the straight world no further.
Sekhmet on November 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Over 30 states have outlawed the issuing of gay marriage licenses. Yet these finger-in-the-wind pundits never opine that the Democrats should get with the program.
Whenever a conservative who holds traditional views on gay marriage is elected we never hear these pundits acknowledge it and wonder if this is a way to success for the GOP.
Also, Stephens is acting like Romney/Ryan ran a campaign based on teh ghey marriage!!!1!!1!1!. They didn’t – they ran a campaign based almost exclusively on the economy.
gwelf on November 13, 2012 at 12:35 PM
Excellent point. Whenever we run a moderate who loses it’s always the conservatives who are to blame. So next time we need someone more moderate than Romney I guess.
gwelf on November 13, 2012 at 12:37 PM
Hammer… meet head of nail….
44Magnum on November 13, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Gay marriage is a red herring. What they really mean is ABORTION. We should stop objecting to ABORTION so that Bret Stephens and his ilk don’t have to be so embarrassed around their friends. PS: Who the heck is Bret Stephens?
joe_doufu on November 13, 2012 at 12:40 PM
If Americans actually had freedom of association, they wouldn’t care so much about gay marriage because they wouldn’t be forced to live in the same community with it. As things stand though, we’re forced to accept whatever community the government imposes upon us. That’s why there’s so much upset about the subject.
Now, is the government going to drop affirmative action and other state enforced rules of assocation and forms of power over the citizens? No freaking way.
Django on November 13, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Didn’t Romney win independents? Yes he did. Did Romney turn out the conservative base? All the votes haven’t been tallied yet but it seems he didn’t do any better – and probably worse – than McCain.
So is Stephens advising the GOP to move further from it’s base and target base Democrat voters? Single women who look to big daddy government to be their providers? We can’t compete with the libs in the hand-out racket.
gwelf on November 13, 2012 at 12:44 PM
A pretty-boy, elitist Wall St. Journal hack with predictable contempt for conservatives and glowing praise for the liberals he and is paper purportedly oppose.
Right Mover on November 13, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Bret will continue to get free liquor at cocktail parties after this article.
faraway on November 13, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Hey Bret, when are the Obamabots going to stop obsessing about what is going on in our kitchens?
john1schn on November 13, 2012 at 1:01 PM
Hey Bret, when are the Obamabots going to stop obsessing about what is going on in our places of business?
john1schn on November 13, 2012 at 1:02 PM
Hey Bret, when are the Obamabots going to stop obsessing about what is going on in our living rooms?
john1schn on November 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM
Hey Bret, when is President Kools going to stop worrying about how WE live our lives?
john1schn on November 13, 2012 at 1:04 PM
Even better
HarryBackside on November 13, 2012 at 1:25 PM
Earth to GOP: “Stop banning lady parts!!!”
Axeman to Stephens: Nice straw man army. Obama might have a place for you.
Axeman on November 13, 2012 at 1:43 PM
Bret Stephens seems to think Mitt Romney was some kind of hard-right social conservative ideologue.
What was the Romney attitude towards the Tea Party? “Keep them at arms length. We don’t want to be embarrassed by associating with them.”
What was the Romney attitude towards the base? “Of course they’ll vote for us no matter how far to the left we move. Who else are they going to vote for?”
So how well did that work out for them?
At a guess, I’d say the attempt to appeal to the independents probably lost 5 votes from the base for every 4 independent votes it gained. It was not a winning move.
Sure enough, we already have people advising that we’ll never win another election unless we run even further to the left than Mitt Romney did. Those people will never learn. I hope the rest of the GOP is a little smarter.
tom on November 13, 2012 at 1:46 PM
Perhaps the 22nd amendment won’t apply if WE run Obama next time! (or something). Perhaps Al Gore’s not busy.
Axeman on November 13, 2012 at 1:46 PM
If we are going to require our candidates to pass an IQ test, then let’s also mandate that voters pass a current events/civics exam to cast a ballot. People who think Benghazi is the latest Hollywood heartthrob do not need to be having a voice in which direction this country heads in, thanksverymuch.
NoLeftTurn on November 13, 2012 at 2:17 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2