Calling for a “debate” when what you really want is surrender.

John Huntsman’s daughter is following in her father’s footsteps appearing on MSNBC to rip on Republicans as the “party of no government.”

“No government!” No Republican I’ve spoken to has ever called for this point of view, but some people, or anarchists groups and individual alike, who are also associated with the LEFT have. Are they confused by the concept and the meaning of the words, “Limited government?”

Apparently John Huntsman’s daughter and others alike have no real concept of reality of politics, or differences in policies of the two parties’ either. Because it has been the Democratic Party leadership and political office holders of that same party that constantly say “NO” to what you can have, or not have.

Take for instance; who limited people from buying 64 oz. soft-drinks, sugar, salt, and whether parents should pack their kid’s school lunch for them? How about the gun issue…Who’s in favor of saying “NO”? On ammo and magazine size? On condoms and other birth control… No one should be able to say, “No I’m not going to provide or be buying yours.” so being able to say “NO” to that, is more of the Democrats saying, “You can’t say “No”, but more of saying, “NO” to choosing for yourself! Confusing I know but please follow the questions and which party is saying “No”. Who says “NO” to personal responsibilities of free choice, and rewards irresponsibility? On Obamacare… Democrats said, “No!” to the freedom of you choosing for yourself. On free markets deciding winners and losers, yes democrats said, “No, then go ahead and barrow money from the bank of china to bail out companies that should have gone bankrupt. The list goes on and on, so just scratching the surface on the socialist party of “No” is also magnifying the party that is in favor of bigger government. Now was that the Democrats, or the republicans?

On Illegal immigration the GOP is saying, “NO”! But that means that the Democrats are saying “No” twice as much in related subject matter. “No” to securing the borders—thus national security, and “No” to voter ID’s, to securing our election out comes. Both are related to the immigration issue.

John Huntsman’s daughter goes on to say, Lincoln would be “calling for a debate” on immigration and gay marriage–as though no debate is happening right now. I guess she is adopting the language of the left, which is to call for a “debate” when what you really want is surrender.

Ps. Just a side note; Lincoln was a Republican, who was saying “YES” to ending slavery. The Democratic leadership were not only supporting, but profiting off of slavery, and they said “NO!!!” to ending it. Does it take a war for the Democrats to finally realize that it isn’t good to force people against their will in making a choices, forcing them into something morally wrong? Isn’t it funny that Democrats are now trying to compare themselves to a Republican, as a political party whose policies for the most part is at odds with the Republicans.