Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Newt's Big Three...Part Two

Last week I posted Part One of Newt's Big Three issues that if all three are driven home before the election then Repubs will maintain control of Congress. Here are the three as a recap:

1. Promoting a proven economic prosperity agenda of lower taxes and pro-growth policies vs. the failed policies of higher taxes, more regulation and bloated bureaucratic structures of the past.
2. Left-wing San Francisco radical ideas vs. the values held by the rest of America
3. Defeating terrorism and the dictatorships who threaten America vs. appeasing and being defeated by them

Now here is Truth #2 reposted in full:

Any conservative who is considering staying home this fall has to consider the
consequence of their not voting.


The Democrats are set to put as third in line to be President the most liberal leader they have ever had.

These positions are so unpopular that virtually any Republican candidate, even in a
very moderate district, ought to be able to sharply draw the contrast.

If you go back to my newsletter of September 5 on the American Eleven, you will see the kind of solutions that are supported by the vast majority of the American
people.

Contrast that newsletter with Nancy Pelosi's voting record.

Nancy Pelosi legitimately represents the values of her liberal San Francisco
district.

They are simply not values most Americans can support or feel comfortable with in the powerful position her party is willing to give her.

America vs. the Pelosi Record at Home

Consider the following votes (all opposed by the vast majority of Americans):

-On July 31, 1996, Pelosi voted against the historic Welfare Reform Bill and later voted against its reauthorization;

-On July 19, 2006, Pelosi voted against protecting the right to say "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance;

-On Sept. 20, 2006, Pelosi voted against requiring that voters be identified so we could ensure only legal citizens are voting;

-On July 13, 2006, Pelosi voted against requiring English on ballots;

-On June 30, 2005, Pelosi refused to side with homeowners against the Kelo decision that allows cities to seize private property for profitable ventures, even though 365 members voted to stop cities from taking private property.

-Pelosi has voted at least 12 times against the death penalty;

-Pelosi was one of only 67 House members to vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA);

-Pelosi has voted at least eight times against banning partial-birth abortion, at least three times against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (Laci's law), and scored a perfect 100 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America;

-Pelosi voted against a bill that would "[b]ar the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent, guardian or judge;"

-Pelosi voted at least 31 times for using local or federal taxpayer dollars to fund abortions;

-and Pelosi received an "F" rating from the National Rifle Association.



If the Dems win the House in two weeks, Pelosi will be the new Speaker and these are the values she will bring to that position. If you are as much against these positions as I am, then it is very important that you vote for the Repub in your district and also make sure you get as many of your family and friends as possible to do the same.

10 comments:

Ian McGibboney said...

I detect the slightest bit of bitterness on Newt's part regarding the Speaker post. It's the only political post he refers to at length here, and that seems to be the only reason.

And when did it become okay among Republicans to urge each other to vote GOP merely as a way of voting against the other side? Isn't that what you guys constantly accuse the Democrats of doing? Seems to me that the mid-term election should be about more than that.

Cajun Tiger said...

Well Ian you are wrong again. If you read the whole article you will see that in Truth #1 he refers to potential chairman of Ways and Means committee and in Truth #3 which I'll post next week, he refers to potential Intelligence committee chairman. Nice try though.

Don't know which Repubs you are refering to but I've always said when in doubt vote Repub b/c 99.9% of the time that will be the best candidate for the office. I've held my nose before when voting for a Repub but when looking at the alternative, I had no choice.

Little Miss Chatterbox said...

I heard yesterday that a lot more democrats are voting against the Republican candidate instead of voting for the Democrat. Whereas the majority of Republicans are voting for their candidate. I know in my case that is true but there is also nothing wrong with voting to make sure the worst person doesn't get elected.

I'm becoming more impressed with Newt, especially his new book about God.

Ian McGibboney said...

CT, I didn't say Pelosi was the only person to whom he referred. But she is the only one that he systematically attacks throughout his whole screed. Everyone else is tangential.

As for my last point, I'm referring to your own quote: "If you are as much against these positions as I am, then it is very important that you vote for the Repub in your district and also make sure you get as many of your family and friends as possible to do the same." I've heard it time and again in guest editorials and in conversation. These are the same people who accuse Democrats of being "Yellow Dogs," but who have no problem voting Republican at all costs because partisan loyalty trumps political competence.

And while I can understand (if not agree with) conservatives' alliance to the GOP, I fail to understand why that allegiance is never questioned, even as today's neocons buck every principle for which the Republicans supposedly stand.

Cajun Tiger said...

Rangel and Hastings get their due, but as potential Speaker she will be the most powerful Dem in the country and rightly deserves being signled out. If the Dems were to take control she would be setting the agenda, so it is very important that people just the type of agenda she would be setting...a VERY LIBERAL one.

I absolutely stand by my statment. It would be very very rare that I would ever vote for a Dem over a Repub for two reasons. One they are rarely in line with my politics. Two even if they were in line, with the chambers so narrowly divided it is very important which side of the aisle they are on. For example if a John Breaux type conservative Dem was running against a very liberal Lincoln Chaffee type and that loss wouldn't turn over control of the Senate, I would probably vote for Breaux.

While I've been upset with several things the current set of Repubs have done that aren't as conserative as I would like, the alternative would be even worse. And as a whole the commmittee chairmanships are much more to my liking in Repub control than in Dem control.

Ian said...

Well, to me "liberal" isn't such a bad word. Especially considering that the far-right hard line hasn't done much but plunge this country into chaos both here and abroad.

The difference between you and I, CT, is what we fear most. For you, that's seeing an opposing party take power. For me, it's the continued erosion of American ideals by those you support at all costs. One seems much more unfounded than the other.

Ian McGibboney said...

This is a test comment. Apparently Blogger has decided for me that I want to comment as a different person. I will have deleted this by the time you get it.

Cajun Tiger said...

Yeah Ian...that's it...you busted me...my only fear is that the Dems take power...it has absolutely nothing to do with the policies the Dems would enact if they took power. Wait isn't that the entire subject of the post, what Pelosi would do if she were speaker. Guess I just posted that to hide my real fear.

Ian McGibboney said...

What about Democrat rule scares you so much? What could they possibly do to trump the fantastic policies of fear and aimless imperalistic war that our current administration has perpetrated?

Are you concerned that they will handle Iraq differently? I hope they do! Because Bush sure isn't handling it well. And he's absolutely closed to any new strategy. And he couldn't give a damn about conditions at home, unless it involves fetuses, vegetables or energy companies. It is definitely time for a change.

Cajun Tiger said...

Ian...if the Dems win and cut and run from Iraq, God help us. That is exactly what the enemy wants and Iraq will become 100x worse than Afghanistan ever was.

As far as the rest of your rant on Bush, I'm not even going to justify that with a comment.