Republican Party Candidates Cannot Win Without Voters Who Care About the “Social Issues” in America
Rush Limbaugh Radio
“But the court has spoken, and gay marriage is now the law of the land, and we must move on. We must drop it.” That is an out, I think. I think that’s an excuse. That’s an excuse for somebody who’s really telling you they don’t want the fight. And that’s not what we need, folks. I’m telling you, going into 2016 and beyond, we don’t want and don’t need people who are not willing to fight and stand up for what we believe in, stand up for the founding of this country.
“It’s now the law of the land” is an out.
Well, 20 minutes ago and 6,000 years ago, the opposite was the law of the land. Did the Democrats accept it? Did the gay activists accept it? No. They didn’t accept “the law of the land.” They’re not accepting anything that is the law of the land. They’re not accepting very much that is traditional. They’re not accepting very much that’s institutional. There’s an all-out assault and attack on everything, and specifically now religious liberty. Make no mistake about this.
I’ll get into this in due course as the program unfolds.
We telegraph that we just accept.
It’s like I told you the prominent Republican last week talking to me said, “You know, Rush, elections have consequences.”
“What does that mean?”
“Well, they won the election. They get to do what they want.”
“When’s the last time you ever heard a Democrat say ‘Ah, Republicans won. Elections have consequences. We’re not gonna fight their court nominees’?”
This is not good. This is not healthy. It’s a way out. And this whole “social issue” thing, here’s the bottom line. Look, at the risk of incurring the wrath of people on their own side of the aisle here, the simple fact of the matter is the Republican Party is not going to win another presidential election if it has as part of its official platform and behavioral characteristic the open disavowing of its voters who care about quote/unquote “social issues.” There’s simply too many of them.
Our posture each and every day is defense. We haven’t had the chance to move the ball forward. We’re defending an all-out assault on everything, I mean everything we hold dear. We haven’t had a chance to actually move the ball forward. Well, we have. We just haven’t availed ourselves of the opportunity. We have had the White House for eight years in this decade, but the fact of the matter is that the social issues are in play because the Democrats put them there, not us.
Given that, this court’s not even a court. It’s just a branch office — half of it’s a branch office — of the Democrat Party.
And so the question then becomes: “How do we deal with and react to and treat these decisions on high from this place?” Because they have purposefully and willingly assumed this lofty position where they’re going to decide political questions, not legal. And believe me, that is one of the reasons so many people who study this and follow it are really worried, angry, upset, what have you.
Because we’re not getting the law out of these people. We’re getting politics. As designed, by the way, by the left. This is exactly… They’ve corrupted as much of the judiciary as they can by putting fellow traveler politicians on courts as judges. Well, they were judges to begin with, but they’re political hacks first and judges second. And they’re all over the federal bench — both at the district level and the appellate level — and they end up on the Supreme Court.
It’s an example about how the court is purely political, and particularly the four justices on the left. And, by the way, look, I probably shouldn’t say this, which (chuckling) is the recipe why I say it. Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, these are the four justices. The first two are political appointments. I mean, they are there for the assured liberal vote.
The left engages in litmus tests when they come up to nominating judges and they only care about one thing: “Is this person a reliable vote on our politics?” That’s it. Now, they will mask that and disguise that during confirmation hearings and all that, and they’ll go through the motions of making it look like the jurist is eminently qualified, has the perfect judicial temperament (and all that rotgut). But the bottom line is you’ve got these four — Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, Kagan — and they are rubber stamps of the Democrat Party agenda.
Christians Are the Left’s True Target
CALLER: My question is, since the Supreme Court made their ruling, I’d like to ask you how many gays do you think will be demanding to be married in a mosque?
RUSH: I don’t think any.
CALLER: And why might that be?
RUSH: Well, the truth of the matter is that the gay community in America does not see militant Islam as discriminating against them.
CALLER: That’s true.
RUSH: Militant Islamists have not denied them happiness and good times and getting married and all. It’s Christians. It’s Christians. You might say, “But do they not know that homosexuals are put to death in Muslim countries?” Well, but it’s not happening in America. We don’t live in those countries.
RUSH: They’re not gonna go. They’re scared. They’re not gonna go into a mosque and demand marriage. It’s not what this is about. This is not designed to take down Islam. The target’s not Islam. The target is not religion per se. The target is Christians. And I am glad you called, because it’s an excellent point.