Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor S
SOURCE
Many Republicans are very poor actors when it comes to emotion-based social issues, and they keep muddying what could be a very clear message about finances by constantly inserting social hot-button issues into the debate. Planned Parenthood is not a real fiscal problem. In the long run, it accounts for a pittance of what we spend, and serves as a distraction from the real problems of social security and especially medicare. This is not an endorsement of providing public funds to support Planned Parenthood, just a reasonable observation.
The issue of government in funding organizations such as Planned Parenthood is a real topic worthy of a significant debate, but it is a philosophical debate about the role of government in society and it should be addressed as such. Inserting social and philosophical topics into a fiscal debate only leads to embarrassing moments like the one Kyl just had.
This is how the Republicans will the lose the moderates, and hence the election, in 2012. Unless they start following the example set by New Republican leaders like Paul Ryan and Chris Christie, and leave the social issues to be addressed on their own merits.
|
In my view, the problem is that the social conservative movement within the Republican party, a movement that I rather dislike, controls a significant amount (honestly probably a majority) of the funding for most Republican candidates. I would trace this phenomenon back to the time of Barry Goldwater warning of the negative consequences of "selling out" the party to evangelical Christians.