USAT: Many Wary Of GOP'S MORAL AGENDA (The Tide Has TURNED!!!)

[Beetwasher]

This is the big mo we've needed. The Schiavo case was a huge wake up call. Can the Dems run with it? That remains to be seen, but if they are going to do something, they better start soon and go at it HARD.

Many wary of GOP's moral agenda
Poll: Public disliked Schiavo intervention
By Susan Page
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The controversy over Terri Schiavo has raised concerns among many Americans about the moral agenda of the Republican Party and the political power of conservative Christians, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll finds.

In the survey, most Americans disapprove of the efforts by President Bush and Congress to draw federal courts into the dispute over treatment of the brain-damaged Florida woman. She died last week.

Some old stereotypes about the two parties have been reversed:

•By 55%-40%, respondents say Republicans, traditionally the party of limited government, are “trying to use the federal government to interfere with the private lives of most Americans” on moral values.

•By 53%-40%, they say Democrats, who sharply expanded government since the Depression, aren't trying to interfere on moral issues.

--snip--


http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050406/1a_offlede06.art.htm

The Dems theme should be, and I've said this before, "The Dems are the party of FREEDOM from Gov't interference in your personal life and for PROTECTING individual rights and the sanctity of the Constitution. The Repubs are the party of BIG BROTHER GOV'T."

Right now, this tact can be very, very effective, but it has to be repeated AD NAUSEUM and it has to be stated SIMPLY BUT LOUDLY FROM NOW ON AND FOREVER and the message has to be totally consistent and coming from the mouth of EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DEM REPRESENTATIVE EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TIME THEY OPEN THEIR MOUTHS ABOUT ANYTHING.

The Dems should NOT be talking about morals. Let the Repubs keep talking about morals, the Dems should be talking about FREEDOM FROM GOV'T INTERFERENCE IN PEOPLE'S PERSONAL PRIVATE DECISIONS.

[TahitiNut]

1. Please, let's shit-can the "constitutional rights" phrase.

The Constitution has NOTHING to do with establishing 'rights' and EVERYTHING to do with LIMITING federal government power to infringe on our INALIENABLE rights.

It's pernicious meme to employ the language of the fascist right in elevating the mechanisms of government above the very rights of people to establish that government. Absolutely no power of government can legitimately rise above the inherent rights of the people.

[Beetwasher]

2. True, But

You have to speak the language of idiots if you want to communicate w/ idiots. You and I know that the we are not GRANTED rights by the constitution, but Joe Idiot (the majority of Americans) does'nt know the difference and it's too late now to start educating them as it will only serve to confuse them. The points must simple, understandable and evoke emotional reaction from Joe Idiot. Joe Idiot understands constitutional rights. If you start throwing the word inalienable at him, his brain might short circuit or he might think you're talking about immigration.

[TahitiNut]

7. I support 'individual rights' or 'human rights' or 'individual liberties'

All of these will evoke the wanted visceral twinge, I think.

Reinforcing the foundations of their misapprehensions doesn't serve the longer-term goals of a free nation. "We The People" can never regain our control over our own government if we sacrifice this. Almost nothing is more fundamental to the "American Experiment" than the acknowledgment of the primacy of a People's inherent right to establish their own government and the subordination of that government to human rights. If we learn nothing else about American History, this is essential.

[Beetwasher]

9. Agreed

Perhaps individual rights would be a better term. Fixed.

[Dinger]

10. I Too Am Sick Of bu$h's Euphamistic Slogans/Labels (nt)

[flamin lib]

3. You may be right, Terri might be the tipping point.

My next door neighbor is a born again Christian and staunchly Pro Life. He was absolutely livid that Congress would get in the middle of this very personal and painful situation. He's ready to vote them all out of office if he can find a Republican alternative to sitting congress critters. Give me a few more months and I'll have him voting Dem!

[JamboGuide]

6. Ugh, there shoudl be a poll...

Do u think the Religious/CHristian Right has taken over the Rep. Party?

OR

Do u think the Religious Right and Christian voters have to much SWAY over the Rep. Party?


THAT i wanna see.

[gratefull4u]

4. I could not agree more!

So many times when I call talk shows, I can change the tone of conversation by saying, "I want the government to stay OUT of MY life"
then go into situations where they are trying to control all of us.
People somehow can't see that this government will eventually be in their personal life in one way or another. The kind of people who are falling for right wing brainwashing need very easy to understand phrases. I find this effective in helping them understand. Democrats need to stay clear of preaching and trying to kiss up to the right wing. The middle is much closer to our views and they just need to understand what our views are.

[roseBudd]

11. When they come after contraceptives then moderates will wake up

To a certain extent they are already beginning to show their true colors on contraception. Non-procreational sex is on their radar IMHO.

[ooglymoogly]

5. you got that right

[alcuno]

8. The problem is that many evangelicals believe that is a good thing.

They want the government to "help" them be better Christians. They need censorship and government intrusion to keep them on the straight (no pun intended) and narrow.

So when 55% say that Republicans are trying to interfere, a lot of those people don't think that's a bad thing.

[ginnyinWI]

12. not a problem

There's no way that they are all evangelical fundies, because the fundie vote was only 15-20%. I think.

[alcuno]

15. Right, but the 55% number makes it seem like they are all OPPOSED

to that kind of interference, when using your 15% number, perhaps only 40% oppose it or think it's a problem.

[merbex]

13. Totally with you on this

Why is it so hard for elected Dems to stay on a simple message such as this basic value we pretty much all agree on?

FREEDOM FROM GOV'T INTERFERENCE IN PEOPLE'S PERSONAL PRIVATE DECISIONS.

[Beetwasher]

14. Honestly, I Just Don't Know

I don't get it. It's so simple, so effective and yet I don't hear it coming out of their mouths. :shrug:

[ComerPerro]

16. Not only should we let the Republicans keep talking about morals

We should smack them down with their hypocracy. Their sins. Their immoral actions.

[Roland99]

17. I've been saying to let them hang themselves.

[Jesus Saves]

18. Republican morals are anti-family

They want to take end of life decisions away from families. Never forget that they called the Schiavo case murder. They weren't up for just changing the laws that give the husband the decision. Even if Terri's family had agreed with Michael it would still be murder in their fanatical eyes.

They are anti-family, period.

[Nothing Without Hope]

19. The Repubs can still get their support by convincing them that only THEY

can protect the country from the terra-ists. It's always worked for them, people give up their rights and privacy to feel safe.

So sure, work the "freedome from gov't interference" meme - but don't forget to

blast the GOP for INCREASING danger from terrorism!!!

Fear trumps loss of privacy every time - it's what the neocons count on. We have to beat them on that ground or we will lose. All the other issues are important, but the sense of safety is key -- and the polls still say the Repubs beat the Dems on ability to protect from terrorism.