MSNBC's Brewer: GOP Should Abandon ‘Morals and Values’

[Dos Equis]

Yes.  That's the ticket.  Stop talking about "morals and values."   

MSNBC's Brewer: GOP Should Abandon ‘Morals and Values’
By Kyle Drennen | June 15, 2009 - 16:38

On Monday, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer offered some advice to Republicans: "Until they change policies – I mean, that's what it took for conservatives in Great Britain to win – is a real change in focus away from morals and values into things that affect people's daily lives.’

Brewer made the comment during the 2PM ET hour while discussing the future of the GOP with New York Times reporter John Harwood, who completely agreed: "Well, bingo, Contessa, that's exactly right." Harwood added: "The question is what is the right mix? To what extent are they going to focus on economic issues...Or do they focus more on national security...Or those social issues which have repelled some voters. But still motivate a lot of people in the Republican base." Brewer replied: "The one’s who probably vote Republican anyway."

The segment began by Brewer asking Harwood about his latest article in the New York Times, entitled "Rethinking the Reagan Mystique," in which he argued that some Republicans are calling for the party to move beyond Ronald Reagan. Brewer observed: "While there may be disagreement in the Republican about the best way forward, you know, it's been in this sort of Republican mantra to invoke Ronald Reagan's name often and loudly. That could be changing though."

http://newsbusters.org/

[2ND COMING]

Was that the whole quote or just a couple sentances?

I agree about being so heavily reliant on morals and values religion.

[Dos Equis]

Was that the whole quote or just a couple sentances?

I agree about being so heavily reliant on morals and values religion.

Don't know.

[240 is Back]

morals and values are important - but - disagreeing with repubs on them shouldn't exclude someone from the party.

Ridge and Crist and friends - who invite in moderates and even those who are pro-abortion or anti-war, have the right idea.

Cheney and Rove and their idea of "if you're not with us, you're a lib and we dont want ya!" aren't good for party growth.

[Straw Man]

when did the GOP ever have morals or values?

[BM OUT]

morals and values are important - but - disagreeing with repubs on them shouldn't exclude someone from the party.

Ridge and Crist and friends - who invite in moderates and even those who are pro-abortion or anti-war, have the right idea.

Cheney and Rove and their idea of "if you're not with us, you're a lib and we dont want ya!" aren't good for party growth.

I agree with that BUT I dont agree that someone like Powell should be included.If you cant even agree that lower taxes and less government is THE tenant of republicanism,then YOUR NOT a republican.

[Soul Crusher]

when did the GOP ever have morals or values?

The same time Ted Kennedy was leaving a drowning woman people to die in their car and Bill Clinton was usinig a cigar to stimulate Monica in the Oval Office.   

Or maybe it was when Barney Frank's boyfriend had a gay prostitution ring going out of Barney Franks' apartment.


Neither party has a monpoly on values or vice.  Both has good and bad. 

[MCWAY]

Yes.  That's the ticket.  Stop talking about "morals and values."   

MSNBC's Brewer: GOP Should Abandon ‘Morals and Values’
By Kyle Drennen | June 15, 2009 - 16:38

On Monday, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer offered some advice to Republicans: "Until they change policies – I mean, that's what it took for conservatives in Great Britain to win – is a real change in focus away from morals and values into things that affect people's daily lives.’

Brewer made the comment during the 2PM ET hour while discussing the future of the GOP with New York Times reporter John Harwood, who completely agreed: "Well, bingo, Contessa, that's exactly right." Harwood added: "The question is what is the right mix? To what extent are they going to focus on economic issues...Or do they focus more on national security...Or those social issues which have repelled some voters. But still motivate a lot of people in the Republican base." Brewer replied: "The one’s who probably vote Republican anyway."

The segment began by Brewer asking Harwood about his latest article in the New York Times, entitled "Rethinking the Reagan Mystique," in which he argued that some Republicans are calling for the party to move beyond Ronald Reagan. Brewer observed: "While there may be disagreement in the Republican about the best way forward, you know, it's been in this sort of Republican mantra to invoke Ronald Reagan's name often and loudly. That could be changing though."

http://newsbusters.org/

Brewer makes the foolish mistake of assuming that it’s an “either/or” deal. It's not. The economy issue is what got Obama elected, pure and simple.

The reason Reagan's name keeps getting invoked is because he had the WINNING formula. Look how easily he crushed Carter and mauled Mondale.

Winning elections requires two things: Keeping your base AND attracting moderates. The GOP CANNOT WIN without evangelicals and conservatives behind. That's a fact.

The GOP doesn't need to abandon 'morals and values', not unless they want the Democrats to stay in power, indefinitely. The moderates don't buy it and the conservative base thinks you've sold out. Thus, you get the lukewarm pre-Palin response that McCain got.

[Soul Crusher]

The GOP needs to embrace libertarian economic policies and adopt a live and let live ideology, fiscally, and morally.   

[Straw Man]

The same time Ted Kennedy was leaving a drowning woman people to die in their car and Bill Clinton was usinig a cigar to stimulate Monica in the Oval Office.   

Or maybe it was when Barney Frank's boyfriend had a gay prostitution ring going out of Barney Franks' apartment.


Neither party has a monpoly on values or vice.  Both has good and bad. 

when did any of those guys make it their platform to pretend to teach the rest of us moral values?

[240 is Back]

I agree with that BUT I dont agree that someone like Powell should be included.If you cant even agree that lower taxes and less government is THE tenant of republicanism,then YOUR NOT a republican.

Can an anti-war person be a repub?
Can a pro-abortion person be a repub?

The moment you say someone is excluded because of any issue, you're screwed.  The party is SUPPOSED to say, we want EVERYONE in.  I don't care if the person lives in SanFran and believes in global warming and washes nancy pelosi's car... if the person is anti-abortion and wants to vote repub, YOU TAKE THE VOTE.

When you say "I dont want this person in the party", you can't regain congress.

[MCWAY]

The GOP needs to embrace libertarian economic policies and adopt a live and let live ideology, fiscally, and morally.   

That won't work. Again, without the evangelical and conservative base, the GOP stands no chance in an election.

Republicans actually LOST some of those voters to Obama and the Dems last year. They must return to the basics to get them back.

Can an anti-war person be a repub?
Can a pro-abortion person be a repub?

The moment you say someone is excluded because of any issue, you're screwed.  The party is SUPPOSED to say, we want EVERYONE in.  I don't care if the person lives in SanFran and believes in global warming and washes nancy pelosi's car... if the person is anti-abortion and wants to vote repub, YOU TAKE THE VOTE.

When you say "I dont want this person in the party", you can't regain congress.

BALONEY!!! The Dems didn't do that; yet they regained Congress.

[Eyeball Chambers]

The Republicans should embrace their practice of preaching morals and values while being the most unethical immoral dirt bags in Washington.

(not that the Democrats aren't douche bags themselves.)

[240 is Back]

BALONEY!!! The Dems didn't do that; yet they regained Congress.

I disagree.  Obama wooed repub voters in a big way last year, and it worked.

[MCWAY]

I disagree.  Obama wooed repub voters in a big way last year, and it worked.

The "wooing" was due his emphasis on the economy, NOT by appealing to the morals and values part. Along with that, many Republicans weren't all that thrilled with McCain. That's why it took his picking Palin to bolster any interest in his candidacy.

[BM OUT]

Can an anti-war person be a repub?
Can a pro-abortion person be a repub?

The moment you say someone is excluded because of any issue, you're screwed.  The party is SUPPOSED to say, we want EVERYONE in.  I don't care if the person lives in SanFran and believes in global warming and washes nancy pelosi's car... if the person is anti-abortion and wants to vote repub, YOU TAKE THE VOTE.

When you say "I dont want this person in the party", you can't regain congress.

Listen,when Powell said that Americans want more taxes anf more government days before Cali. voted against more government and more taxes,he disqualified himself from ever having a say in republican politics.PERIOD!

Social and moral issues are entirely different.I think you can be anti-war and a republican,Ron Paul is.I think you can be pro choice and a republican,there are many that are.However,one thing you cant be for is higher taxes and more government.It would be the same as being a PETA member and only eating meat and wearing fur.There has to be certain tenants that are followed and less government and lower taxes is THE ENTIRE reason for republicans.If you dont stand with them on that YOUR NOT A REPUBLICAN!!!

[240 is Back]

The "wooing" was due his emphasis on the economy, NOT by appealing to the morals and values part. Along with that, many Republicans weren't all that thrilled with McCain. That's why it took his picking Palin to bolster any interest in his candidacy.

being anti-elective way in iraq was certainly morals/values based.

[Dos Equis]

The "wooing" was due his emphasis on the economy, NOT by appealing to the morals and values part. Along with that, many Republicans weren't all that thrilled with McCain. That's why it took his picking Palin to bolster any interest in his candidacy.

Correct.  For example, he talked repeatedly about tax cuts. 

[the_steevo_uk]

Yes.  That's the ticket.  Stop talking about "morals and values."   

MSNBC's Brewer: GOP Should Abandon ‘Morals and Values’
By Kyle Drennen | June 15, 2009 - 16:38

On Monday, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer offered some advice to Republicans: "Until they change policies – I mean, that's what it took for conservatives in Great Britain to win – is a real change in focus away from morals and values into things that affect people's daily lives.’

Brewer made the comment during the 2PM ET hour while discussing the future of the GOP with New York Times reporter John Harwood, who completely agreed: "Well, bingo, Contessa, that's exactly right." Harwood added: "The question is what is the right mix? To what extent are they going to focus on economic issues...Or do they focus more on national security...Or those social issues which have repelled some voters. But still motivate a lot of people in the Republican base." Brewer replied: "The one’s who probably vote Republican anyway."

The segment began by Brewer asking Harwood about his latest article in the New York Times, entitled "Rethinking the Reagan Mystique," in which he argued that some Republicans are calling for the party to move beyond Ronald Reagan. Brewer observed: "While there may be disagreement in the Republican about the best way forward, you know, it's been in this sort of Republican mantra to invoke Ronald Reagan's name often and loudly. That could be changing though."

http://newsbusters.org/

I completely agree with the MSNBC commentator. The sooner the Republican party stays out of people's lives and stops trying to dictate to them how they should live and behave the better. It is anything but conservative, they should be concentrating on ensuring the freedoms of the individual rather than this stupid moral crusade they've been on since the 1980's

Go back to being conservative (the sham the Republicans have been putting forward for the last twenty is years is anything but)...until then they're going to be stuck in the wilderness just like the Tories in Britain were until they woke up.

[MCWAY]

I completely agree with the MSNBC commentator. The sooner the Republican party stays out of people's lives and stops trying to dictate to them how they should live and behave the better. It is anything but conservative, they should be concentrating on ensuring the freedoms of the individual rather than this stupid moral crusade they've been on since the 1980's

Go back to being conservative (the sham the Republicans have been putting forward for the last twenty is years is anything but)...until then they're going to be stuck in the wilderness just like the Tories in Britain were until they woke up.

Your analysis makes no sense. You act as if the GOP has been down and out for decades. It has not. Again, it was just four years ago that the roles were reversed. The GOP was on top and the Dems were the minority party. The Dems didn't abandon their liberal philosophies, whatsoever. So why on Earth should anyone expect the GOP to do the same.

At the very least, all it takes is one party to screw up royally, in order for the other to capitalize and get back in the game. That's what happened to the GOP in 2006 and 2008.

And, as I've said multiple times, the GOP cannot, I repeat, CANNOT win without that evangelical/conservative base. The plan has to be: How to keep the base AND reach out to moderates. One without the other spells BEATDOWN (for either party).

[Soul Crusher]

Your analysis makes no sense. You act as if the GOP has been down and out for decades. It has not. Again, it was just four years ago that the roles were reversed. The GOP was on top and the Dems were the minority party. The Dems didn't abandon their liberal philosophies, whatsoever. So why on Earth should anyone expect the GOP to do the same.

At the very least, all it takes is one party to screw up royally, in order for the other to capitalize and get back in the game. That's what happened to the GOP in 2006 and 2008.

And, as I've said multiple times, the GOP cannot, I repeat, CANNOT win without that evangelical/conservative base. The plan has to be: How to keep the base AND reach out to moderates. One without the other spells BEATDOWN (for either party).

The first thing the GOP needs to do is adopt libertarian economic policies. 

[LurkerNoMore]

As if the repeated gay scandals, pedophile scandals, sexual deviant scandals - and more!- of the GOP wasn't enough to bring people over to Obama's side.  Even without a clear sense of direction and platform, even without the fact that Repubs dumped McCain after Palin doomed the ticket, even after the frustration of a lame duck President that did nothing for his own party....

Get a clue.

[MCWAY]

As if the repeated gay scandals, pedophile scandals, sexual deviant scandals - and more!- of the GOP wasn't enough to bring people over to Obama's side.  Even without a clear sense of direction and platform, even without the fact that Repubs dumped McCain after Palin doomed the ticket, even after the frustration of a lame duck President that did nothing for his own party....

Get a clue.

Again, coming from a party that sports the biggest WHOREMONGER to ever hit Washington, your words continue to ring hollow.

Throw in "Turbo Tax Timmy" (along with the rest of Obama's tax-dodging posse) and Joe "pay-your-fair-share-while-less-than-one-percent-of-my-income-went-to-charity" and you have a classic pot-kettle scenario.

And, as is often the case, your political memory loss surfaces. What's happening to the GOP is typical of what happen when a party is in the minority. Go back to 2005, and you'll see virtually the EXACT same thing was true of the Democrats.

[Soul Crusher]

As if the repeated gay scandals, pedophile scandals, sexual deviant scandals - and more!- of the GOP wasn't enough to bring people over to Obama's side.  Even without a clear sense of direction and platform, even without the fact that Repubs dumped McCain after Palin doomed the ticket, even after the frustration of a lame duck President that did nothing for his own party....

Get a clue.

Dont worry, you soon will know the feeling.  Obama's train is already falling off the tracks.   

[MCWAY]

Dont worry, you soon will know the feeling.  Obama's train is already falling off the tracks.   

He already knows the feeling from 2000.