Posted on 03/08/2007 10:38:58 AM PST by neverdem
Edited on 03/09/2007 3:38:37 PM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]
Recently, several conservative politicians, moralists, and evangelicals have been embroiled in scandal. As congressmen, Tom Delay and Duke Cunningham had publicized brushes with ethics laws, while their former colleague Mark Foley and Ted Haggard, who was pastor of a large evangelical church, were implicated in embarrassing sexual affairs.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
--snip--
Debt, drink, drugs, gambling, lotteries, and sex all happen without much restraint or rebuke and our most prominent are often the most susceptible to these new appetites.
How about limited government? From the progeny of the Pendergast political machine in Missouri who was an artillery officer in World War I, to the smoking, highly skilled poker player who never served in combat, VDH picks a somewhat odd couple to idealize.
"I never trust a fighting man who doesnt smoke or drink." Attributed to Admiral William Halsey, courtesy Lexmark Corp. Quotation Server.
Ping
Your highly skilled poker player had rules about not gambling with those who could not afford to lose. When he did break his rule, he conspired with the other players to insure the destitute loser "won" his money back. And on top of which had the then Colonel Patton issue orders prohibiting playing of poker.
I do not see how a highly restrained gambler refutes VDH's assertion of "happen without much restraint or rebuke?"
Nor do I see Halsey as someone who would trust a habitually drunk or lush.
He's right.
The stinging truth.
Nor do I see Halsey as someone who would trust a habitually drunk or lush.
He's right.
The stinging truth.
Both of these Five Stars either tolerated or were addicted to the evil weed - tobacco. Heaven forfend! I can remember when the government gave me free tobacco.
Debt, drink, drugs, gambling, lotteries, and sex all happen without much restraint or rebuke and our most prominent are often the most susceptible to these new appetites.
VDH moralized about personal bad habits. The dems can always slide on hypocrisy and corruption. Pubbie moralizing always comes back to bite them. That tendency didn't help the pubbies in the last midterm election, e.g. banning online gambling. The GOP lost a number of small 'l' and big Libertarians, mostly in the midwest and west, losing Congress in the process. Their plan to turn out the base was a disaster, even if complicated by the war in Iraq, spending and corruption.
Smackdown! By Independents & Moderates
Libertarians Emerge as a Force (Losertarians deep-six the GOP)
I'd rather keep government small, as opposed to enabling the nanny state. Why do you think the left keeps comparing social conservatives to the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Islamists? They do that even as they effectively make common cause with our Islamist enemies.
At the same time you have politics as a moral crusade yielding second hand smoke bans and campaigns against man made global warming based on junk science. If junk science doesn't work, then it's for the children, or if it only saves one life. This how our liberties have been progressively diminished.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Amen.
Well the standards are definitely skewed. Republicans are called moralizers because they stand opposed to the slaughter of millions of unborn babies. This is more of a crime issue than a moral issue. Isn't it. And people seeking to maintain the centuries old definition of marriage (and sex for that matter) are hardly deserving of the slander they receive (Taliban).
I am not sure when it happened but at some point "morality" became a bad word.
Nevertheless, as to your charge agianst VDH: I don't see that he was moralizing about personal bad habits or anything else. He was merely pointing out the overwhelming hypocrisy of both sides. Do you deny that?
If social conservatives confined their zeal to just those issues, I don't think the pubbies might not have done so badly last November. But the GOP was also being unjustly hammered on embryonic stem cell research in polls by an uninformed electorate, and the GOP decides to ban online gambling. I'm no gambler, but I know gamblers took revenge on Election Day. South Dakota passed a law banning abortions even in the case of rape or incest. Guess what happened. South Dakotans Stand Up for Freedom and Privacy, Repeal Divisive Abortion Ban
Politics is the art of the possible. The pubbies worked real hard to lose last November.
That is why I said the stinging truth. Whatt he heack does the first part of your post mean?
Let me know if you want in or out.
Links: FR Index of his articles: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson
His website: http://victorhanson.com/
NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
New Link! http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/
One of those times when his article left me cold. Was not sure that I even want to ping to it. Can't be perfect every time, I guess...
"How about limited government?"
Another post where I get to make the "putting toothpaste back in the tube" analogy.
Please, be more specific, i.e. comment# 1 or 6. My general argument is that the GOP overplayed its hand by just trying to satisfy those on the religious right. They banned online gambling. The "libertines," libertarians and gamblers took their revenge on the last Election Day. I provided links for those who don't understand my comments about Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower and "Bull" Halsey, both of the latter achieving "Five Star" military rank as officers.
Yes, how about that quaint old notion?
I don't want politicians of any stripe being my nanny, I just want them to stop trying to rewrite the Constitution.
Of course it's a double standard. It's a very successful, institutionalized, well-established double standard and it stinks.
Nailed it much better than my attempts.
Are you under the same impression, and if so to what do you attribute it?
Furthermore, I think the same applies to Mark Steyn.
I am not sure that there is reduction of respect. Both of them have their biases, that are constant, and, at least with VDH, his FR critics are all the same, did not see many new names lately.
My own critique is that its impossible to write on the same high level of rhetoric all the time. When they get more money for more frequent publications lately (and I can't blame anybody for desire to earn more), the quality suffers sometimes.
My impression is that there are fewer replies to VDH (and Steyn) threads than was the case previously.
In this case there are only 14 commenting on the content of the article.
I think FR is becoming a less hospitible forum for neo-conservatives and their allies in the conservative movement.
"I just want them to stop trying to rewrite the Constitution."
Well said.
All I ask of my government is to protect the borders and enforce what the founding fathers left us, we can take care of the rest.
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.