A New Surge for Republicans
Brent Tantillo • February 8, 2010 • Uncategorized
Peggy Noonan believes the election of Scott Brown to the Senate in Massachusetts is ushering a new wave of republicanism: one that stays away from those sticky values issues, and focuses on fiscal responsibility. I doubt it. Americans are an inherently conservative people who love their liberty. They don’t like gay marriage, but they don’t want the government to go as far as tell them what they can and can’t do in their bedrooms. And that’s what Scott Brown believes. If the Republicans can wrap up this idea in a bow and sell it, then perhaps the Democratic Party will experience losses in November.
Comments
One Response to “A New Surge for Republicans”
Leave a Reply
I’m a registered Massachusetts Democrat and I voted for Scott Brown and so did my wife, my six siblings and their spouses and probably most of my 50 plus family members of voting age in the next two generations of my family. What’s more I contributed to Brown’s campaign and to two organizations endorsing him – the Coalition for Marriage and the Family and the Massachusetts Citizens for Life Federal Political Action Committee.
J did this because I’ve had more than enough of those elected members of my party who march in lockstep with Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and those people who want to profit from the laboratory production and ultimate destruction of human beings to be used to obtain stem cells as raw material for production and research. Scott Brown is pro-choice and supports Roe v. Wade, but at the level of practical politics he supported reasonable restrictions on abortion access that are compatible with the jurisprudence of Roe v. Wade. That is something the bulk of elected Massachusetts Democrats have not been willing to do.
I’m also badly disappointed with the way in which the bulk of the Massachusetts Legislature and Governor rolled over in support of the Goodrich decision in which the SJCourt majority took over the legislative function of government and redefined marriage (which from time immemorial described a relationship based essentially on the sexual complementarity of male and female) as a relationship with no essential connection to sexual complementarity and the procreation of children. I fear the substantive long term effects of decisions like Goodrich will be negative from the perspectives of both religious liberty and the well being of natural family life, and children. One immediately negative effect was the forcing out of the adoption business of Catholic Charities in Boston, an agency which pioneered in placement for adoption of hard to place children.
I hope Brown’s victory serves as a wake-up call to Massachusetts Democrats, and the Democratic party nationally to return to its roots (which it dramatically demonstrated it rejected when Governor Casey of Pennsylvania was denied a speaking role at the 1992 convention because he was not acceptable to NARAL) and truly support the most vulnerable of human beings and strong natural families.