A radio commentator mentioned last week that Indiana Republican Governor Mitch Daniels may be one of the possible candidates for president in 2012. Curious, because I know little about him, I searched out information about Daniels this last weekend in the hopes of learning what his principles are. It turns out that Governor Daniels is under fire from conservatives right now for a comment he made about the need for a political "truce on social issues."
The social issues he is referring to are abortion and marriage. Conservatives believe that life should be protected, even from the moment of conception; and that marriage must remain traditional, and that homosexuals should not be able to use government as a means of changing language, and intruding upon an issue that is truly one that should remain outside of government control and definition.
Governor Daniels' position is based on the belief that they are divisive issues, and Republicans should really concentrate on the issues that "matter" when working to gain votes in the next two elections.
Daniels believes the Right should "call a truce on the so-called social issues" in order to focus more intensively on the nation's economic woes.
Anti-abortion groups, pro-marriage groups, and 2008 Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee pointed criticism towards Daniels, while the Indiana Family Institute gave Daniels a pass, saying, "He has a deep faith, he's totally pro-life, and he walks the talk. Daniels might get away with a truce for a year or two."
I have no bones with the argument that the tragedy of abortion cannot go unchecked while we get our financial house in order. I also agree that setting aside the marriage issue also can be dangerous. However, if Governor Daniels is looking at this from the perspective of a national candidate, he is right - just for the wrong reasons.
The only debate that should be entertained by national candidates regarding the social issues is how to eliminate federal funding, and federal intrusion, when it comes to these issues.
The issues should remain hot issues at the State level because these issues fall within the authority of the States.
The U.S. Constitution does not provide authority to the federal government on these issues. So, in a sense, Daniels is right, these issues should not be a part of the national debate. But his reason is wrong. If Daniels knew the Constitution, he would agree with me.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
The U.S. Constitution does not provide authority to the federal government on these issues. So, in a sense, Daniels is right, these issues should not be a part of the national debate. But his reason is wrong. If Daniels knew the Constitution, he would agree with me.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Social issues 'truce' for GOP? Huck no! - World Net Daily
No comments:
Post a Comment