I think there is a difference between being a 'Republican' and being a 'conservative'. Just like there is a difference between being a 'Democrat' and a 'liberal'.
I think when it comes to fiscal policy, I would tend to be more conservative, but when it comes to social policy, I am definitely more liberal. On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:21 PM, morgan l <greyk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is why I'll never be a "Conservative" no matter how much I agree with > 99% of the rest of their stance. > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larrycly...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> Interesting commentary about the recent speeches made by the 2 current >> republican frontrunners. >> >> >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/feb/23/republicans-religion-secular-america >> >> Republicans v secular America >> >> With blatant disregard for the first amendment, Republicans' >> intolerance of US secularism means things are turning ugly >> >> If you're part of secular America that is, if you're an atheist, an >> agnostic, a religious liberal or even a mainstream believer who thinks >> religion should be kept out of politics and vice-versa then you >> should be very afraid of what the Republican party has in store for >> you in 2012. >> >> No news there, you might say. The Republicans, as we all know, have >> been in thrall to the Christian right since the Reagan era. But >> there's something new, something more intolerant, something truly ugly >> in the works. And if you don't believe me, let's start with Tim >> Pawlenty, unassuming governor of Minnesota in his day job, >> fire-breathing Christian warrior and aspiring presidential candidate >> in his spare time. >> >> "I want to share with you four ideas that I think should carry us >> forward," Pawlenty said on Friday at the annual gathering of the >> Conservative Political Action Committee, or CPAC. After invoking >> "basic constitutional principle and basic common sense," he continued: >> >> "The first one is this: God's in charge. God is in charge ... In >> the Declaration of Independence it says we are endowed by our creator >> with certain unalienable rights. It doesn't say we're endowed by >> Washington, DC, or endowed by the bureaucrats or endowed by state >> government. It's by our creator that we are given these rights." >> >> Never mind Pawlenty's fundamental and no doubt deliberate misreading >> of the founders' intent. (Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the >> Declaration of Independence, is well-known for having cut up a Bible >> to remove all supernatural references to Jesus.) How, in practice, >> does Pawlenty envision "God's in charge" as a governing principle? >> >> Pawlenty didn't say. But he oozed mild-mannered hatred for anyone who >> doesn't share his beliefs. In a bizarre closing in which he invoked >> the civil war general (and future president) Ulysses S Grant as some >> sort of rough-around-the-edges, proto-Tea Party role model, Pawlenty >> trashed anyone who attended "Ivy League schools" or who go to >> "chablis-drinking, brie-eating parties in San Francisco". (You can >> watch Pawlenty's address at CSPAN.org, starting at the 1:38:30 mark.) >> It sounded like a parody of Pat Buchanan's famous 1992 "culture war" >> speech. Except that Pawlenty is one of the Republicans' two most >> plausible candidates for president in 2012. >> >> The other would be former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who fell >> far short of the prize in 2008, but whose legendary self-discipline >> has put him in a strong position for 2012. >> >> The trouble is that Romney has already declared war on secular >> America. In December 2007, you may recall, he delivered a speech in >> which he defended his Mormon religion at a time when he was under >> assault from evangelical Christians. It was, in many respects, a >> sensible plea for religious tolerance. >> >> Except that Romney called for tolerance only among believers, >> explicitly omitting non-believers. "Any believer in religious freedom, >> any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and >> ally in me," Romney said. "And so it is for hundreds of millions of >> our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion >> rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith." >> >> As New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote the next day, "Romney >> described a community yesterday. Observant Catholics, Baptists, >> Methodists, Jews and Muslims are inside that community. The >> nonobservant are not. There was not even a perfunctory sentence >> showing respect for the nonreligious." Brooks a conservative, though >> a secular one warned that Romney was calling for "a culture war >> without end". >> >> Romney and Pawlenty are the early front-runners for the Republican >> presidential nomination, and it's a good thing: the most frequently >> mentioned potential fringe candidates are even worse. If you have not >> seen Sarah Palin asking God to build a natural-gas pipeline in Alaska, >> well, do yourself a favour right now (see also her recent speech at >> the Tea Party convention). Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister, >> personifies the Christian right in its purest form. "I hope we answer >> the alarm clock and take this nation back for Christ," Huckabee said >> in 1998. There is no reason to think he's changed his mind. >> >> (I realise that I am leaving out Ron Paul right after he won the CPAC >> straw poll. As best as I can tell, Paul actually does believe in a >> secular government. But Paul is a libertarian who's entirely out of >> step with the Republican party, regardless of how adept he is at >> mobilising his devoted followers to pack events like straw polls. He >> was unable to establish himself as a serious candidate in 2008, and >> there's no reason to think he'll do any better in 2012.) >> >> Barack Obama, in his inaugural address, said that "our patchwork >> heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians >> and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and non-believers. We are shaped by >> every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth." >> >> It is that simple, inclusive vision that we're in danger of losing if >> Romney or Pawlenty or, God help us (so to speak), Palin or Huckabee >> is elected president in 2012. In truth, the founders made it clear >> in the first amendment that we need not just freedom of religion, but >> freedom from religion, especially given that 79% of Americans believe >> in miracles. >> >> "While we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess, and >> to observe, the religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we >> cannot deny an equal freedom to them whose minds have not yielded to >> the evidence which has convinced us," wrote James Madison. >> >> In contrast to Madison, the Republicans propose a theocracy of >> believers. It is an assault not just on anyone who isn't one of them, >> but on the American idea, and on liberal democracies everywhere. >> >> * guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010 >> >> >> -- >> Larry C. Lyons >> web: http://www.lyonsmorris.com/lyons >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/larryclyons >> -- >> The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do. >> - B. F. >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:312541 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
