Can you believe ANOTHER GOP busted for child sex offender? Is this what GOP calls "Family Values"?
"Randy" Ankeney, the convicted sex offender who just a few short years ago was a rising GOP star in Colorado, is being held on a $1 million bond in Larimer County. Ankeney, 35, who was arrested Wednesday, is facing 5 counts of sexual assault on a child, 3 counts of sexual enticement of a child and 1 count of sexual exploitation of a child. The felonies, if he is convicted, could send him to prison for life. The charges come less than 15 months after the former attorney, head of Gov. Bill Owens’ economic development office in Colorado Springs & graduate of the Republican Leadership Program, was released from prison after serving a 2 year sentence for attempted sexual assault on a child. Former friends liked to point out that Ankeney was so committed to the Republican Party that he named his dogs Reagan & Nixon. SEXUAL ASSAULT ON KIDS... NOW THE "FAMILY VALUES" OF REPUBLICANS?
The premise alone of the question is ridiculous. Not only that the Republican Party has moved too far right, but that there is something you can “do about it.”Actually, the Republican Party has moved quite a bit left — but the Democrats have moved much further left and much faster.Just think— only 10–15 years ago, the entire Democratic Party considered illegals a huge problem and that they need to be arrested and deported immediately with no path to citizenship — you can see videos of Hillary. Obama Shumer and Pelosi all echoing this position. At that time gay marriage was an unpopular idea even among Democrats. Also, welfare reform was considered a very good thing and seen as a great success (it was). Until 2012 Obama for instance was against gay marriage. Hillary didn’t embrace it till 2013. If in the year 2000 you told people that a state like NC that tried to curb men from using women rooms would be vilified andSo, the Republicans haven’t moved too far right. The left has raced to see who can move the stupidest amount to the left. And, instead of allowing people to debate policy on gay marriage, illegal immigration, etc the left now brands anyone who disagrees with them as homophobic, racist, misogynistic, etc. There can now be no debating legitimate policy questions that just 10 years ago were open to debate by all and frankly were hotly contested issues.Since then, Obama gutted welfare reform and ramped up entitlements to anyone that could sign their name. It is now considered racist to call someone an illegal. Gay marriage is mainstream and anyone opposing it is considered homophobic no matter what their true feelings about gay people. Discussing entitlement reform ? Racist.It is sad, but the problem isn’t Republicans being too right wing. It is the Democratic Party becoming the party of looney left wingers. There is no way Donald Trump ever wins a national election without the Democratic Party leaving behind their core supporters — blue collar and middle class voters with more traditional values.quora is a liberal place so I feel compelled to add that I am not a traditional conservative. I am really Libertarian. I have been in favor of gay marriage for 25 years long before it was fashionable have been for drug legalization for even longer and am not a fan of social conservatives. However I decry the rise of political correctness and anti free speech hysteria we are all being subjected to. Sad that I need to add this
Do all Republicans believe the earth is 6000 years old?
Well, I am an Independent (conservative) and no, I do not necessarily believe that the earth is only slightly over six thousand years old. Although I am a Christian, I personally believe that the Bible might be misread when it comes to the rational of the creation story. I do believe that the one I call God did begin the process of creation and did design what would come. However, the timeline is the issue. The six thousand year timeline stems from the number of generations and the age of individuals when they died that is listed in the Bible from the time of Adam to the present day. It is my speculation that Adam may not have been the first man...but was instead the first man God had chosen to have an ongoing relationship with. Thus the concentration of Adam and his progeny etc. It is not beyond my belief that God may have spent millions of years on each of his creation projects...and that creation continues through today. My personal theory is that the use of Day one, Day two etc. was God's way of explaining his actions in such a way that early man could understand. I have no problem with man evolving. After all, God is no dummy. It only makes sense that after each mutation, God would tweak that organism to bring about his next living thing etc. It does not make sense that he would reinvent the wheel per se each time. As a conservative, I am not anti science. We have made great strides. However, not even science is perfect Changes are seen every day that discounts a theory that was considered fact just a few years ago. Man in my opinion does not have the ability to fully understand God's work...although he will continue to try. I have no doubt that if God had chosen to create all things in six days, he could have done so. In fact, he could have done it in a nanosecond. But, the Bible is clear that God does not work according to our timeline but by his own. He would have had no reason to get things accomplished quickly...as he is timeless.
Would a Republican president ever nominate someone to the Supreme Court without knowing for sure how they stand on Roe V Wade?
Regan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor: "Although I am personally against abortion I would never allow my personal feelings to interfere with my solemn duties as a jurist and my responsibility to uphold the Constitution." Clinton appointee Ruth Bader Ginsburg: "I don't have to answer that. I won't answer that and you can't ask me that..." Obama appointee Sonia Sotomayor: "I would hope my being a wise Latina woman would give me a richer perspective in making decisions than a white man..."
Is Ron Paul just another bought and paid for member of the GOP? Whether you like his policies and ideas or not?
He's bought and paid for at least a little bit but that hardly even matters. He is inflexibly devoted to his whacked out Ayn Rand objectivism / libertarian ideology so even if no one is paying him to do it, he is in any event a special interest agenda driven automaton. Paul furthermore (despite his best attempts as credible deniability) has a sordid history of racism, homophobia and misogyny. I understand he has a very loyal (and equally disturbed) following but if Paul ever actually made it into a general election, his baggage would make him probably the most disastrous and humiliating electoral defeat of all time.
No. I don't believe so. I'm one of those guys who would bail if a cronyist or establishment candidate were put up. As a moderate Republican, these are my current thoughts:Trump v Clinton – stay home or vote third party in protest, take my money out of the stock market and keep it a mattress somewhereTrump v Sanders – SandersCruz v Clinton – CruzCruz v Sanders – CruzRubio v Clinton – RubioRubio v Sanders – RubioWhy? See my answer to Why does the GOP loathe Hillary Clinton so much and not Bernie Sanders? At the end of the day, Trump and Clinton are corrupt crooks. Sanders I just disagree with, but would loan him money if he asked. Cruz is a Constitutionalist idealist – meaning his whole thing is reasonableness. Rubio is supported by the establishment, but they worry about his conservatism, and he's not really establishmentarian, meaning he's not going to spend 8 hours a day digging a pit for his own base the way the GOP has. But in that pile, the elephant in the room is the corruption. Ever heard the phrase "better the devil you know than the devil you don't know?" That's my point. I'd rather the reasonable person I disagree with on every conceivable metric than the crook who happens to vote the same as I—because at the end of the day it's all about what they do when they're no longer beholden to platforms and promises, what they're going to do to cover their sins when they are dropped into the big leagues. As the conservatives love to say "when the phone call comes at 3 am, who's going to take the time to pray first" versus who's just going to order the strike because they're groggy and they hate those people anyway or who's just going to let the embassy burn, cover it up, and lie to the American people about a video tape because she doesn't want to risk looking bad. That is all that matters to me.