Posted on 11/07/2004 1:55:26 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The transcripts show that John F. Kerry said the right things to connect with religion-minded voters, with his earnest speeches about God's work on Earth and invocations of faith and Scripture. Yet they landed with a thud on a populace conditioned to view liberal Democrats as faithless intellectuals.
No doubt Kerry's stiff New England style didn't help. This is not what religious faith looks like to much of the rest of the country, especially the South.
Yet one candidate's stiffness cannot fully explain the "God gap" that drives people of faith, and those more concerned with moral issues than economic ones, to vote disproportionately Republican. They just don't believe that the Democrats share their values. More than any other factor, this failure cost the Democrats the presidency and four Senate seats on Tuesday.
Democrats are getting free advice from all over. We do not agree with those who say the Democratic Party must embrace moral issues as now defined by conservatives and exploited by Republican strategists. Opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights will always be Republican issues, and the Democrats shouldn't want them.
What the Democrats should do is recast their own issues in moral terms. It shouldn't be hard. Democrats seem oblivious to their platform's moral potency: innocent children suffering because their families can't get health insurance; platoons of young men and women dying in a war that didn't have to be; the pillaging of God's green Earth. Those are "values" issues too, but the Democrats haven't figured out how to frame them that way.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
It's not about God, it's about basic, historically valid values. Self-reliance, honesty, necessary strength, protection of self, family and country and the freedom to live as we please so long as our neighbors are not unduly affected are some of the things this is all about. But as said elsewhere, if you have to explain....
When your solution is forcing government run healthcare, it might be. Durrrrr...
Also, they did frame Iraq in the way the author puts it. Bush still won. We're tired of hearing "my god, we gotta get outta here!" every time a soldier dies in a war setting. If we want to crush these people, we have to accept the fact that it will involve seeing our youth come home in coffins. We have, otherwise the results would have been radically different on Wednesday. These people deserve their irrelevancy, they're still mired in it.
But let me guess, "That wouldn't fool us, they can say anything, their records say otherwise" would be a lefty response. Well, guess what, we believe the same thing. Is the light bulb turning on yet?
Thank you, that was very gracious. I truly do appreciate it.
But they always have to lie about the facts.
Numbers don't lie but liars can figure.
There aren't 50 million people w/o health care.
They count people who lose health care but don't subtract them when they get coverage.
They don't mention the vast number of young Americans who don't want to buy health care because they have "better" things to do with their money.
They don't mention that no one is refused health care and it is as simple as signing up for indigent health care - but that is even too much trouble for some.
There is room for improvement but the situation is nowhere as dire as the left paints it.
That's just one example.
That's because charity is the polar opposite of the sole thing government does well. Government wields force. It's the only thing it does efficiently. Charity is about everything but force, so every private charity will always out perform government.
There's been a clerical error here: That was my post-election column from 2002. My post-election column from 2004 goes like . . . well, actually, it goes pretty much the same. It'd be easier just to take the second week in November off every two years and let my editors run the timeless classic whither-the-Democrats? column. All that changes is the local color.
Without positioning themselves in God through faith in Christ, they will merely fall into moral degeneracy. All socialist regiemes fall into this trap eventually and become notably arrogant, militant, and bloodthirsty in that degeneracy.
"Of course Christians should render unto Cesar, but faith based charities all do a better job than the government. I am not a Pat Robertson fan, but when we are in Va. Beach we see truck after truck on the road, going out to help others less fortunate."
Very correct, but to base this in the Bible. These democrat preachers argued as follows. Jesus spoke of helping the poor. Paul talked about how Christians should support government since it was established by God. From this they concluded that one should support high government taxation to provide for those less well off. They also argued Christians should support higher taxation even if the government was corrupt and wasteful, increasing the level of taxation to offset the corruption and waste.
But these democrat preaches ignored the Parable of the Talents. In this parable, the man who failed to act as a good steward had wealth taken from him and was driven from the house.
That said, I fully expect to see the arguments of these democrat preachers at the national level.
"You know, they are running out of things to call us."
You underestimate the resourcefullness of democrats.
Agreed!
As I read your reply I felt that I had read that information before....
Ah, David Horowitz....a very smart fellow!
Good ideas - loot the taxpayers wallets, kiss up to terrorists and establish fascist government control of private property. Sounds like a winning campaign strategy. Go for it.
"It is a world that could only come into being through a re-structuring of human nature and of society itself."
You may differ but I see all of them as able to exist outside of a theological base.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.