GH Republican to Religious Conservs: Get Lost

GOP Elephant

If you’re a religious conservative and a Republican, you may want to buckle up. At least one high profile member of the Grays Harbor Republican Party doesn’t want you around.

This post was originally published on May 22, 2013. “Suzy” is a Grays Harbor Republican. “Joe” is a Mason County Republican. If you want to know more, email me at Conservelocity@gmail.com. – Ed

***

A black and white photo of Newt Gingrich has been roaming Facebook lately.  It features Gingrich, hands folded, with the caption:

“These scandals are not the random act of a few bureaucrats who got out of hand. These scandals are in fact the natural manifestations of Obamarama.”

The photo isn’t particularly flattering, but what picture of Newt is? When “Joe” (not his real name) posted it on his Facebook page, “Suzy” (not her real name) chimed in with:

Can we just cut the religious right and all it’s (sic) creepy manifestations out of the Rep party? This guy with his Jesus pic dumped his first wife for some blond helmet head who probably had to submit to some kind political marketing test as part of the pre-nup. Stuff like this makes me want to throw-up. No. No. No. A thousand times no. Will the real leader PLEASE step up?

Here’s Joe’s response:

Joe: “To answer your question Suzy, NO! we cannot. If those that wish to remove Christians from this party and this nation are successful, than the Republican party and this nation will soon come to a very unpleasant end. You may not agree with the Christians, (and this is the only party that allows for you to disagree with the majority and remain in good standing), but without them there is no conservatives, no Republican party and no country.”

Suzy Suplay: “… helmet head is the 3rd wife–She’s Catholic so it’s all Kosher. Who said anything about getting rid of Christian principles? Just want candidates who are LOW KEY about faith and don’t pose for creepy messianic pics like this. Faith should inform a politician’s (or statesman’s) vote once in office. He shouldn’t use it to win an election. He has a very low opinion of the American voter if he does. And he does. How is this any better than Obamarama?”

I don’t usually jump into this sort of Facebooky discussion. But this was a target-rich environment. I couldn’t resist.  Here goes.

Hey, Suze:

“Faith should inform a politician’s (or stateman’s) vote once in office. He shouldn’t use it to win an election. ”

Now there’s a non-sequitur if I ever heard one. For example, what’s “low key” to Suzy may be nose-bleed volume to Bertha. And vice-versa. Also, if a candidate’s faith “should inform him/her once in office,” why not when they’re RUNNING for office? A candidate who divorces/divests himself from their faith while they’re running and then re-marries after they’re elected? That’s like Buster courting Beatrice until the wedding day, then saying “I do” to Matilda.

What kind of candidate is that?

BTW Suze, ever meet a genuine atheist or agnostic who holds to “Christian” principles? Me neither. Most on the “religious right” – whatever that means – hold to and promote “Christian principles.” Get rid of them, and guess what else gets deep-sixed?

Here’s an idea for you, Suplay Suze: How ’bout every candidate keep his/her mouth shut about their faith, period? Even better, don’t mention any core principles or values outside the four walls of the church or synagogue. That way we can all enjoy a faith-free public square and no one has to know any minor details like a candidate’s inner convictions, moral compass or guiding principles – assuming they have any. It’s so much easier to brainlessly back whatever chameleon blends into the political landscape best for the sake of political expediency, aka: to get elected. – Sarcasm –

I’d feel so much better backing a sappy stealth candidate with Jell-o for backbone, saying whatever s/he has to just to get in office. Wouldn’t you? And if that’s “low key” faith, what good is it? (What’s “high-key” faith?)

Scissors Clipart

Suzy Suplay: “Can we just cut the religious right and all it’s (sic) creepy manifestations out of the Rep party?”…

“Creepy manifestations” as in….. ?

“Cut (it) out…” and replace it with what?

Earth to Suze:

If we’re going to start cutting people out of the party, why stop with “the religious right”? Can we just cut Catholics, Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, teachers, lawyers, plumbers, doctors, actors, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, white collar employees, blue collar employees, single moms, single dads, blue-eyed ppl, brown-eyed ppl, dog lovers, cat lovers, butchers, bakers, candlestick makers…. and all their “creepy manifestations out of the Rep party”?

A Slippery Slope

Once you start down that slippery “cut out” slope, where do you stop? And who decides? Based on what? By the way Suzy, what happens when the scissors start dangling over your head?

Flip side: maybe the IRS is hiring? Suzy’s “cut out” mentality fits hand-in-glove with IRS auditing and harassment based on the target’s political and religious beliefs.

Suzy caps it off with, “How is this any better than Obamarama?”

Does she need a road map?

 

 

Map photo credit: public domain

 

Scissors photo credit: public domain

Advertisements