Friday, December 17, 2010

Sen. Scott Brown (R) Will Vote For Repeal

Senator Scott Brown, R-Mass, announced yesterday that if Harry Reid can get it to a vote, he will join Reid and other liberals in voting for repeal of the military policy of "Don't Ask-Don't Tell".

Brown will become the 61st vote, thus giving Reid, President Obama and others what they need to keep their promise to homosexual activists. The question now is; "Can they get the new stand alone bill to the floor before Congress adjourns?" If not, it is not likely to be considered by Congress again for some time---if ever.

John McCain and others have said they will do everything possible to block the repeal because they feel it is not in the best interest of our military readiness. Leaders in actual field combat agree.

Pray.

Also, be reminded. Many social conservatives rejoiced when Brown won the seat Ted Kennedy had held for so many years.

The argument is consistently made that a "moderate" Republican is always better than a liberal Democrat.

Are they? Better for whom? The Party? While there is a measure of merit to that view regarding fiscal issues, most people of faith become involved in political activism because of their deeply held social beliefs, as well as their fiscal beliefs.

Which brings me to this:

Brown is not with us on these issues. Nor will the next "moderate" Republican who seeks the Washington State Governor's office.

As the race for Washington State Governor begins, if it has not already unofficially begun, a few Christian leaders will be telling you a certain so-called "moderate" will be much better than Gregoire, Insley, or whomever.

Will he? Why? What is most important? Party? Or Principle?

Be sure.

Be Discerning. Be Certain. Be Prayerful.

_______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith and Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

15 comments:

  1. I don't like to come down too harshly on Brown. The simple fact is that DADT is going to end up repealed one way or another. If not this year, then next year, or the year after.It's pretty inevitable given our current social mores. Brown might be the deciding vote once, but he can't always be.

    The important thing is to do it in such a way as not to compromise our servicepeople. Honestly, I think the effect will be much less than it would have been a generation ago with the original law was passed. I'd feel better about it if there were a CIC in place who had the respect of the military, which isn't the case with Obama. (Nor was it with Clinton, which probably is why both sides had to settle for a compromise then.)

    One thing that i think is a positive sign is the current trend of homosexuals to try to present themselves as normal members of society. Their sexual habits may be sinful and their unions may not be actual marriages, but frankly, if they're trying to come across as normal, maybe we can share a country. I'd rather have them be neighbors with private sins than perverts waving their parts in the air at a Pride Parade.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good thoughts as always Gary. I've known the truth about so-called "moderates" for years. I hope Faith and Freedom Pac will be able to keep us on the straight and narrow and give us good info and insight about the candidates that people of faith can support in good concience; espeically with regard to the 2012 Gubanitorial primary that you mentioned.

    Keep fighting the good fight!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Opposition to repeal of DADT has nothing to do with concerns about "military readiness" or any other such canard, it is based solely on opposition to LGBT Americans and anything that can be seen as benefiting them.

    As for wanting a WA state Governor, who shares your anti-gay attitudes, not likely to happen. Oh they might win the primary as Ellen Craswell and others have done, but time and time again the people of this state have shown in statewide elections that they do not share your anti-gay bigotry. Even St Dino couldn't lie enough to cover his tracks and get elected.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gary, I think you raise an excellent point. Are we simply involved to advance a party and maybe find acceptance from those in power---I'm thinking of one pastor in particular--or are we involved because we want to change the culture. It is quite evident why you are involved. I hope many others will follow. Blessings to all of you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rob McKenna and Sam Reed do not support our core social values. Thank you for being a clear voice in the murky land of "moderate". If you really don't stand for anything, you can kind of stand for everything as needed at election time.
    Keep up the good work, Gary.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "CERTAIN" Christian leadership supported Mike McGavic a few years ago. I think yopu're talking about the same "leadership".
    God bless you. Stand tall and keep talking.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Go Gary!

    The farther right you can push your followers, the better. Your group isn't big enough to win a general election in Washington, but it's big enough to win primaries.

    So keep on bringing us the extreme right wing candidates. It helps the Democrats in the general elections.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Democrat. Moderate Republican. RINO. Does it matter if they do not represent our values?

    ReplyDelete
  9. We're big enough to win congressional elections, as the left-wing circles the drain.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I do wish to come down hard on Scott Brown. I remember the groundswell of contributions that poured in to Brown from all over the country, to get him elected, and then he turns out to be a RINO? He will face the Tea Party when he's up for re-election.

    ReplyDelete
  11. We have some big and critical decisions to make regarding support for candidates during the next two years. Keep the light shining Gary. Merry Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree with 9:16. Let's put our money( and vote) with those who really do support our values. It's difficult for me to see how just electing Republicans who don't support life and marriage helps the Christian cause.We should ask ourselves why we are Republicans. I am a Republican, but will only support those who are with us on life and marriage. I'm interested in Christian values, not building the Party.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Rob McKenna. Sam Reed. Scott Brown. I get it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Gary, thanks for putting this discussion on the table. It is an issue that many, including myself, must come to grips with. We have been told over and over that half loaf is better than no loaf. I'm not so sure anymore. I know Reed and McKenna have held themselves up as the only kind of Republicans that can win in Washington State. That may be true, although I'm not there yet. If it is true, what is our objective in being involved in the political process? Is it to simply move the Republican Party forward as they represent conservative values less and less? That is not my motivation. "What ever it takes to win" sounds a lot like the other side.
    You are very clear in your statements. I read your blogs every day and appreciate your consistent conservative and biblical position. Keep it up.
    A retired pastor.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I think we should get more involved in the Republican Party and work to change it. I don;t mean vote for RHINOs, but try to change the party itself.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.