John R. Houk
© May 1, 2012
My son Adam is an absolutist when it comes to voting. He wants a candidate that meets the values of Conservatives and Biblical Morality. If the person fails that litmus test he is not worth voting for.
Now here is the difficulty Conservatives like me run into with that litmus test. The opposing candidate in Barack Hussein Obama is openly pro-homosexual activism, pro-Moral Relativity, pro-abortion, anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian State, pro-Socialism; anti-Christian and many other disagreeable pros and antis that drive me crazy. President Barack Hussein Obama is a disastrous President for the future of America in the realm of Biblical Values, Free Market Capitalism and Constitutional Liberty.
It is quite evident that Mitt Romney is going to be the GOP Nominee for President for 2012. The social values of Romney are questionable as evidenced by not actively fighting against homosexual activism and against abortion while he was Governor of Massachusetts. The institution of Romneycare places a dent in his Conservative ethics.
During the Primary stage of Romney’s campaign he went out of his way to assuage Conservatives about these huge question marks. It is apparent now that some true colors of Romney are being displayed by hiring homosexual activist Richard Grenell as a Foreign Policy and National Security advisor.
It is idiot moves like this that are going to keep away Conservative Republicans away from the polls on Election Day 11/6/12. In such a scenario the horror of reelecting Barack Hussein Obama looms.
My son Adam is so disaffected by having Romney give a nod to the homosexual lifestyle by hiring Grenell that he believes Conservative Family/Biblical Values should utilize the power of a Write-in Candidate. This would result in the same horror as Conservatives not going to the polls – Obama gets elected.
Frankly I am so teed off over Romney’s total disregard for Family/Biblical Values Conservatives I am tempted to join my son and write in a Candidate who undoubtedly may or may not be actively running. I am guessing from past emails my son would advocate abandoning the Republican Party and begin looking at the very small Conservative Party which posits all the Conservative principles from fiscal responsibility, to limited government, tax reform, Family/Biblical Values and so on.
At this point I was going to display what the Conservative Party stands for. Then I discovered that there are two Conservative Parties vying to replace the GOP. I am going to lead off with the Conservative Party USA and then follow up with the American Conservative Party.
___________________________
The Conservative Party USA will rectify the consistent failures and corruption of the current two-party system. CP-USA will impose fiscal discipline, restrain the reach of the federal government as outlined in the Constitution and defend America’s traditional family values.
The American two-party system is broken. It has become a system of elite political insiders who only serve the special interest groups that help keep them in control. Some elites call themselves “Democrats” while others call themselves “Republicans”.
The elite of the two major parties continue to fail America based on our spiraling national debt, trillion-dollar annual budget deficits, off-budget Earmarks, escalating illegal immigration, weakening Dollar and loss of traditional American values. They are stealing America’s future because they are only dedicated to getting re-elected.
The elite of the two major parties continue to fail America based on our spiraling national debt, trillion-dollar annual budget deficits, off-budget Earmarks, escalating illegal immigration, weakening Dollar and loss of traditional American values. They are stealing America’s future because they are only dedicated to getting re-elected.
The Conservative Party USA is emerging as America’s real “Second Party” because true conservatives, Independents and Tea Party activists will soon relegate the GOP into political irrelevance. Republi-Dems are two sides of the same losing coin.
The Tea Party is mainly united by fiscal conservatism; the desire to get Congress to follow the Constitution and spend the people’s money wisely. However, the Tea Party is not united by a socially conservative agenda because its membership consists of a broad spectrum of political views.
Who will address important social issues consistent with traditional American values beyond the fiscal and monetary problems facing America today?
Critical moral, social and Constitutional issues must also be considered. These include: Illegal Immigration; Welfare; Gay Marriage; Gays serving openly in the Military; Abortion; Religious Freedom; Saving American Jobs; The War on Drugs; Maintaining a strong Military; Affirming States’ Rights; Clarifying the 14thAmendment on “Anchor Babies”; Stopping the Discrimination of Affirmative Action, to name a few.
America will not survive if it abandons its traditional values for the sake of solving only fiscal problems… we assert that both traditional values and fiscal solutions are equally important.
What happens to the Tea Party and like-minded groups beyond budget and fiscal issues?
The Conservative Party USA is the next evolutionary step of the Tea Party because it combines fiscal restraint with traditional American values that are outlined in a clear Platform and is managed by a strong leadership team that has a unified, long-term vision for America.
____________________________________
American Conservative Party
Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 August 2011 18:15
The ACP Creed
WE BELIEVE:
· Unalienable rights to life and liberty are given to us by our Creator; these rights exist separate from, and are superior to, government.
· Individuals are responsible for securing the blessings of liberty through the exercise of their rights.
· The individual is sovereign over one's person; their labors constitute a foundation for private property that is not subject to the demands of others.
· Governments are formed by the will of the people to secure and defend human liberty.
· Law exists to support liberty and mediate disputes where conduct of one infringes upon the rights of another.
· The armed forces and law enforcement exist to bolster private defense, not supplant it.
· The American Experiment was born out of these beliefs and it has resulted in a bountiful gain for the human condition.
FOUNDATION:
From this Foundation, all principles flow:
The individual is sovereign
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just limited powers from the consent of the governed
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish the Constitution for the United States of America." What does this mean? Simply put, that the formation of a legitimate government can only occur when the citizens themselves choose to surrender a portion of their inherent authority. The citizens may chose to give, but the government cannot chose to take (or keep) authority against the wishes of its citizenry."
Principles of the American Conservative Party
From our Principles, our Policy Issues will be derived:
FEDERALISM AND SOCIAL ISSUES
We reject the practice of using Government powers for any purpose of social engineering, and we uphold the principle that the individual is sovereign; where social conduct involves personal choices, the People are best served when those choices are embraced and defended at the family and community level.
AUTHORITY OF GOVERNMENT
· The citizens of the United States are the sole source of power and life of the United States Government. All powers and authority not explicitly given by the citizens to their representatives remain with the states or the people thereof.
· The United States Government has the authority and obligation to protect its citizens and their liberties from all actual and perceived threats regardless of the source, location or scope.
LIMITATIONS ON GOVERNMENT
· The federal legislature may make no law that abridges or limits the Constitutional rights of an individual.
· No state may abridge a citizen's right to life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
· Property currently owned or controlled by the Government is held in Trust for the citizens
· Regardless of compensation, no property shall be forcibly taken by government for private use or profit.
CITIZENSHIP
· Any child, born of a citizen, shall have all the legal rights of a citizen born or naturalized into the United States.
· Persons who are not citizens or resident aliens of the United States have no right to petition or benefit from any agency of the government except for petition of entry or asylum.
· A child born in the United States to non-citizens is not a citizen.
CITIZEN RESPONSIBILITIES
· Each adult citizen is responsible for the health, education and welfare of himself or herself and their family.
· No adult citizen may call on the resources of another citizen or group of citizens without their explicit, expressed consent.
· No citizen or group of citizens, by expression of any character or physical trait, may call upon the resources, nor abridge the rights, of another citizen or group of citizens without their explicit, expressed consent.
· It is the responsibility of every citizen to participate in the political process.
_________________________________
Both of these Conservative Parties appear to be good alternatives if the GOP fails to live up to the base that will enable the return of a majority Republican Congress. I get the impression the Conservative Party USA is the better of the two so far because they seem to have a greater affinity for Christianity and an appreciation of the Social Conservative portion of the Tea Party Movement.
Much to the chagrin of my son I am still voting for Romney for President. Obama is that bad for America. However, if Romney goes out of his way to support the homosexual agenda and the murdering abortionist crowd, it will be the last time I vote Republican even if it means a Socialist Dem takes Office. Perhaps it will take the evil of Socialism to vote for a Conservative political party to get Conservative voters to leave the GOP if it fails this time around.
Here is the link my son pointed to me which is an article by Bryan Fischer at Renew America about Romney hiring homosexual activist Richard Grenell.
*****UPDATE AFTER COMPLETING MY THOUGHTS*****
Richard Grenell has resigned as Romney’s advisor for Foreign Policy and National Security. The Washington Post headline runs as follows: EXCLUSIVE: Richard Grenell hounded from Romney campaign by anti-gay conservatives.
It is not surprising that WaPo uses an invective like “hounded” in reference to Conservatives. It is my opinion I am not the only Conservative that was a bit miffed that Romney was affirming the homosexual agenda by hiring a homosexual activist like Grenell:
Richard Grenell, the openly gay spokesman recently hired to sharpen the foreign policy message of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, has resigned in the wake of a full-court press by anti-gay conservatives.
In a statement obtained by Right Turn, Grenell says:
I have decided to resign from the Romney campaign as the Foreign Policy and National Security Spokesman. While I welcomed the challenge to confront President Obama’s foreign policy failures and weak leadership on the world stage, my ability to speak clearly and forcefully on the issues has been greatly diminished by the hyper-partisan discussion of personal issues that sometimes comes from a presidential campaign. I want to thank Governor Romney for his belief in me and my abilities and his clear message to me that being openly gay was a non-issue for him and his team.
According to sources familiar with the situation, Grenell decided to resign after being kept under wraps during a time when national security issues, including the president’s ad concerning Osama bin Laden, had emerged front and center in the campaign.
Pieces in two conservative publications, the National Review and Daily Caller, reflected the uproar by some social conservatives over the appointment. (WaPo article by Jennifer Rubin; 5/1/12 03:00 PM ET)
I am still cross posting the Renew America article for it is worth the read.
JRH 5/1/12
**********************************
Adam Houk intro thoughts:
Until we stop voting for people into office that are willing to change their values at the drop of a hat, we will always be getting these kinds of candidates to vote for. The only way to show the public that they are losing valuable votes is to put it on record by making a write in.
Email sent: 4/30/2012 4:12 PM
____________________________
Even gays say I was right: Grenell hire was all about homosexuality
April 27, 2012
Follow me on Twitter: @BryanJFischer, on Facebook at "Focal Point"
It turns out that I was dead right that Mitt Romney's hire of a homosexual activist was all about homosexuality, not foreign policy.
How do I know? Gay activists are saying so, and so is ABC. So there. Told you so.
ABC's has a feature piece today with this title: "Mitt Romney's Appointment of Gay Aide Richard Grenell Signals New Attitude." New attitude about what, pray tell?
ABC says that Grenell's sexual preference for men was not an issue "until a gay-bashing radio host at the American Family Association wrote in his blog that by appointing Grenell, Romney was telling the so-called pro-family community to 'drop dead.'" That would be me.
Then ABC laments, "CNN amplified that message from Bryan Fischer by inviting him on for an interview," in which I said, "The homosexual agenda represents the single-greatest threat to religious liberty and freedom of association in America today."
You can ask the faith community in Hutchinson, Kansas about that statement, by the way. The city council there is about ready to order churches to host gay weddings regardless of the First Amendment and all that rot about freedom of religion.
ABC goes on, "The problem, gay Republicans say, is not that homophobes like Fischer are still around but that a person's sexual orientation is still newsworthy enough to provide a cheap story or mini-controversy."
For the record, I am not a homophobe but a homophile. I don't have any fear whatsoever of homosexuals. I love them enough to tell them the truth about their lifestyle and to hope and pray for their deliverance.
And I have to laugh when I read ABC saying that sexual orientation is "still newsworthy enough to provide a cheap story." Oh, you mean like a story headlined, "Mitt Romney's Appointment of Gay Aide Richard Grenell Signals New Attitude?" You mean that kind of a "cheap story," the kind you run on your website?
And then ABC's veil comes off and we find out that it believes exactly what I said from the beginning: this was a message hire, a dog whistle on Romney's part to homosexual activists.
"Grenell's appointment also signaled that the Romney campaign had fully moved on from the primary in which the former Massachusetts governor vaulted to the right wing of his party to win conservative voters who were less likely to support gay rights."
"Fully move on" from what? Well, from any pretense that Romney had any commitment to social values in the first place. Even ABC says the Grenell hire throws that foolish inane idea down the disposal.
In other words, according to ABC, Romney has gone full Etch-A-Sketch on the values issue. That stuff about social conservatism was so much shameless pandering to naive Republicans. Gov. Windsock has now shifted directions with what he perceives to be the prevailing breeze.
Further confirmation comes from the homosexual publication, the Washington Blade. The Blade breathlessly opens its story on Romney's new hire this way: "With Romney poised to wrap up the Republican nomination — and ready to pivot to the general election contest — his campaign announced the appointment of a gay man, Richard Grenell, to serve as national security and foreign policy spokesman."
Pivot from what? From the silly notion that Romney cares about social values.
The Blade tacks this all down: "Meanwhile, Romney's decision to hire Grenell, who's gay and a former Bush administration official, as his national security and foreign policy spokesman, was viewed as a pivot to the political center now that the primary season is ending." (Emphasis mine.)
So even homosexual activists are saying that the Grenell hire represents a lurch away from all those evil pro-family conservatives who believe in the moral value system of the Founding Fathers. Even gays are celebrating the message from Romney here: I'm with you, not with those Neanderthal homophobes on the right.
The Blade spends much time discussing whether or not the Log Cabin Republicans will endorse Romney. The sole sticking point is his support for a federal marriage amendment, but as homosexual activist Jim Driscoll says, that support is meaningless since nobody thinks he's serious about it.
"...[I]t seems to me that there's very little chance that that marriage amendment can pass. It's kind of a dead issue. I don't see that it has any momentum. And I suspect that while [Romney] formally favors it, he's not going to lift his little finger to do anything to see that it passes."
In other words, it's a meaningless bone he has thrown to gullible pro-family types who believe his rhetoric instead of examining his record.
When it comes to Romney's actually record, another gay activist, Bob Kabel, says there is a lot there for the homosexual lobby to like:
"Romney has a good track record as governor of Massachusetts on gay issues, including appointing a number of openly gay officials in important positions. Other than on marriage, which we have a strong disagreement about, he is actually quite good on gay issues."
The founder of the Log Cabin Republicans agrees. Rich Tafel says, "Mitt is a moderate, which is [why] he's had a tough time this primary." Even under the most charitable interpretation, he's saying that Romney had to fool GOP voters into thinking he is something he is not. And sadly, this mendacity on his part appears to have worked.
Tafel adds, "He has a history of supporting gays and appointing them, which makes him unique among the GOP candidates." In other words, says this gay activist, Romney is the only GOP candidate who is totally in the tank for the gay agenda.
Bottom line: Gov. Romney better do another pivot, back to the right, in a big fat hurry or he — and the GOP — will lose the evangelical base, and with it, the election.
It turns out that I was dead right that Mitt Romney's hire of a homosexual activist was all about homosexuality, not foreign policy.
How do I know? Gay activists are saying so, and so is ABC. So there. Told you so.
ABC's has a feature piece today with this title: "Mitt Romney's Appointment of Gay Aide Richard Grenell Signals New Attitude." New attitude about what, pray tell?
ABC says that Grenell's sexual preference for men was not an issue "until a gay-bashing radio host at the American Family Association wrote in his blog that by appointing Grenell, Romney was telling the so-called pro-family community to 'drop dead.'" That would be me.
Then ABC laments, "CNN amplified that message from Bryan Fischer by inviting him on for an interview," in which I said, "The homosexual agenda represents the single-greatest threat to religious liberty and freedom of association in America today."
You can ask the faith community in Hutchinson, Kansas about that statement, by the way. The city council there is about ready to order churches to host gay weddings regardless of the First Amendment and all that rot about freedom of religion.
ABC goes on, "The problem, gay Republicans say, is not that homophobes like Fischer are still around but that a person's sexual orientation is still newsworthy enough to provide a cheap story or mini-controversy."
For the record, I am not a homophobe but a homophile. I don't have any fear whatsoever of homosexuals. I love them enough to tell them the truth about their lifestyle and to hope and pray for their deliverance.
And I have to laugh when I read ABC saying that sexual orientation is "still newsworthy enough to provide a cheap story." Oh, you mean like a story headlined, "Mitt Romney's Appointment of Gay Aide Richard Grenell Signals New Attitude?" You mean that kind of a "cheap story," the kind you run on your website?
And then ABC's veil comes off and we find out that it believes exactly what I said from the beginning: this was a message hire, a dog whistle on Romney's part to homosexual activists.
"Grenell's appointment also signaled that the Romney campaign had fully moved on from the primary in which the former Massachusetts governor vaulted to the right wing of his party to win conservative voters who were less likely to support gay rights."
"Fully move on" from what? Well, from any pretense that Romney had any commitment to social values in the first place. Even ABC says the Grenell hire throws that foolish inane idea down the disposal.
In other words, according to ABC, Romney has gone full Etch-A-Sketch on the values issue. That stuff about social conservatism was so much shameless pandering to naive Republicans. Gov. Windsock has now shifted directions with what he perceives to be the prevailing breeze.
Further confirmation comes from the homosexual publication, the Washington Blade. The Blade breathlessly opens its story on Romney's new hire this way: "With Romney poised to wrap up the Republican nomination — and ready to pivot to the general election contest — his campaign announced the appointment of a gay man, Richard Grenell, to serve as national security and foreign policy spokesman."
Pivot from what? From the silly notion that Romney cares about social values.
The Blade tacks this all down: "Meanwhile, Romney's decision to hire Grenell, who's gay and a former Bush administration official, as his national security and foreign policy spokesman, was viewed as a pivot to the political center now that the primary season is ending." (Emphasis mine.)
So even homosexual activists are saying that the Grenell hire represents a lurch away from all those evil pro-family conservatives who believe in the moral value system of the Founding Fathers. Even gays are celebrating the message from Romney here: I'm with you, not with those Neanderthal homophobes on the right.
The Blade spends much time discussing whether or not the Log Cabin Republicans will endorse Romney. The sole sticking point is his support for a federal marriage amendment, but as homosexual activist Jim Driscoll says, that support is meaningless since nobody thinks he's serious about it.
"...[I]t seems to me that there's very little chance that that marriage amendment can pass. It's kind of a dead issue. I don't see that it has any momentum. And I suspect that while [Romney] formally favors it, he's not going to lift his little finger to do anything to see that it passes."
In other words, it's a meaningless bone he has thrown to gullible pro-family types who believe his rhetoric instead of examining his record.
When it comes to Romney's actually record, another gay activist, Bob Kabel, says there is a lot there for the homosexual lobby to like:
"Romney has a good track record as governor of Massachusetts on gay issues, including appointing a number of openly gay officials in important positions. Other than on marriage, which we have a strong disagreement about, he is actually quite good on gay issues."
The founder of the Log Cabin Republicans agrees. Rich Tafel says, "Mitt is a moderate, which is [why] he's had a tough time this primary." Even under the most charitable interpretation, he's saying that Romney had to fool GOP voters into thinking he is something he is not. And sadly, this mendacity on his part appears to have worked.
Tafel adds, "He has a history of supporting gays and appointing them, which makes him unique among the GOP candidates." In other words, says this gay activist, Romney is the only GOP candidate who is totally in the tank for the gay agenda.
Bottom line: Gov. Romney better do another pivot, back to the right, in a big fat hurry or he — and the GOP — will lose the evangelical base, and with it, the election.
_______________________________
Egad! Romney Hires a Homosexual Activist
John R. Houk
© May 1, 2012
_____________________________
Even gays say I was right: Grenell hire was all about homosexuality
(Unless otherwise noted, the opinions expressed are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.)
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
No comments:
Post a Comment