Posted on 11/19/2008 7:55:57 AM PST by TitansAFC
Edited on 11/19/2008 8:02:40 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
And quite a few fiscal conservative candidates have abandoned any sense of values.
Great post Nathan. I share your philosophy to a great extent.
It was just a bad joke :)
I’m impressed—V! Robert Englund before he became freaky Freddie. Actually, and I know this is going to sound pretty off-the-wall, I think science fiction has influenced our culture more than we realize. My experience is primarily with Star Trek and the guy who thought that one up was a humanist. In Star Trek, there is no need for religion. People are basically good and problems can be solved by cooperation and mutual respect. The universe is a natural, fragile wonder that is waiting for us to come together and explore. Because society has reached enlightenment, there is no need for money. Disagreements rarely escalate because rational people have no need to impose their personal dogma on another. Ethics are situational and no laws are absolute. Any sort of sex is just fine. I think a lot of people want to live in a Trek-like world and think liberalism is the way to achieve it. I also think a lot of the talk about bipartisanism and reaching across the aisle is a form of humanism. I think putting so much trust in a ‘benevolent’ government (a la Starfleet) is a form of humanism. Thinking that jihadists are simply misunderstood and we need to try harder is, too. So is thinking that America’s greatness is relative and that we shouldn’t try to impose our way on others.
lol...they have probably gotten an ear full already.
The crew at NRO is far too kind and gracious. The fact is, Parker had no standing among conservatives. Most didn’t even knew her name. Precisely because she lacked talent and charm.
Like David Brock, she’s made a name for herself by denouncing people who never gave her the time of day.
Why not unite under the banner of full support for conservative positions on social issues?
1. A strong defense does not equate to military interventionism.
2. The core problem with the Republican Party is its habitual disenfranchisement of social conservatives.
3. What exactly is a term like “limited government” supposed to mean? It is relative to the point of being meaningless.
True.
On what, then, will you not compromise?
Where the reality of truth is not put forth, a false and destructive pretense calling itself truth will prevail.
Witness the election of Obama.
With regards to what specifically do you put forth that claim?
McCain didn't view Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama as ideologically different from himself because they are not. The election was a fraud. Both presidential candidates were liberals.
The only good person in the race, the only one worthy of respect, was Sarah Palin.
You are wrong on both counts.
Good points.
Want to be even braver?
Mention the unpopularity of the Iraq War to those within the Republican Party who are in favor of it, but who say that conservative positions on social issues should be tossed to “win elections”.
I’m saying it. Am I the only one who will?
That misrepresents both worldviews at the same time.
yeah.. sure I am...
have a nice day
In Kathleen’s diatribe she refers to those who prefer a more private religion..or words to that effect. I have heard this before from politicians. “My faith is private and I would never impose my personal beliefs on anyone else”. The translation of all this dishwater is “My ‘faith’ is so private and is buried so deep down inside of me that it has absolutely no effect on anything I say or do. I certainly would not let it affect any of my decisions!”
I don't think that wanting a candidate who is NOT an active enemy of the U.S. Constitution is really the same as demanding perfection.
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.