JXTC Political - шаблон joomla Окна

OpEd: Lobbied for company that paid women 39% less than men

Did you, Virginia, know that Acme, a corporation that handed Ed Gillespie $3 million to lobby in Washington, has received over 50 warnings from the Environmental Protection Agency? Do you, Virginia, realize that Acme, the infamous corporation that made Ed Gillespie a millionaire, paid women 39% less than men? Well, the jobs that Acme haven't already outsourced to China. Ed Gillespie: betting against America--and women.

Source: The Federalist on 2014 Virginia Senate race , Jan 16, 2014

Accused of minority outreach? Guilty as charged

The 2000 convention in Philadelphia was a huge success, perhaps the most effective ever in terms of branding. We worked hard to recruit African-American, Hispanic, Asian-American, and women speakers and entertainers. At one point we did a remote feed featuring the Reverend Herb Lusk, a former Philadelphia Eagles running back, from his church in North Philly with his gospel choir in the background, and then cut back to the First Union Center, where we had a gospel choir on stage. It was one of the highlights of the convention.

The media were cynical. My friend Kevin Merida of the "Washington Post" said he couldn't help notice the abundance of blacks on stage but the dearth of them on the convention floor where the delegates were seated.

"If you're accusing us of reaching out to minority voters, guilty as charged," I said. "If black voters come away from this convention with the sense they are welcome in the Republican Party, we will have been successful."

Source: Winning Right, by Ed Gillespie, p. 31 , Sep 5, 2006

Courts should not encroach on definition of marriage

The feeling of being denied the opportunity [to have a fair debate] fuels much of the intensity in the pro-life community. The same is true when it comes to gay marriage. Ballot initiatives and state legislatures are addressing this issue all across the country, as is Congress. Having a reasoned public debate over the negative implications of such a significant change in a fundamental institution like marriage will result in the kind of accommodation and respect that a court can never achieve.

In the long term, I suspect supporters of gay marriage may gain control in the public arena, while supporters of abortion on demand without limits will lose ground. But to the extent courts encroach on the proper venue for policy-making, any ability to affect direction will be denied the citizens of this country.

Source: Winning Right, by Ed Gillespie, p.219 , Sep 5, 2006

 

 
Deciding marriage at state level is not gay-bashing

The Republican Party platform is clear. We believe "marriage" is the legal union of one man and one woman. Americans want to see changes in our tax code, changes in our schools, and changes in our health care system, but there is no public clamor to change the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman. In fact, polls consistently show that 2 out of every 3 Americans oppose recognizing same-sex marriage.

We cannot allow tolerance to be redefined as having to agree with one another on every issue. The 86 senators who voted in 1996 to allow states to decide for themselves whether they will recognize gay marriage rather than having that decision imposed upon them by another state's activist supreme court are not "gay bashers."

Author: Carter Huff Filed Under:
The Issues Hits: 1745