Comments Posted By mannning
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 475 Comments

MITCH DANIELS AND 'ROWDY' CONSERVATIVES

Weeks ago the Republicans published and sent to Obama a booklet that spelled out ideas for healthcare, and a number of other issues that Obama should consider. Show me a citation that is from the MSM on this dated at least before Feb 14th.

Comment Posted By mannning On 24.02.2010 @ 15:04

Rowdyism is wrong, for sure, but principled opposition is quite called for today. If one goal of conservatives (even RINOs) is to unseat the Democrats and Obama as soon as possible, then each and every shortcoming, every broken promise, every failure, and every overreach of the Democrats must be loudly shown, cataloged and opposed. Then, a better set of conservative solutions for the public good should be proposed and publicized as widely as possible.

Such solutions have been offered continually by Republicans, but have not been publicized as widely as they should be, and we can blame the MSM largely for that. These offerings have been withheld from adequate and honest public exposure, analysis and comparison. For shame!

Comment Posted By mannning On 24.02.2010 @ 12:54

CONSERVATIVE REALITY CHECK: WE STILL AREN'T VERY POPULAR AND ARE LOSING THE NEXT GENERATION

There is really only one way that conservatives can vote and that is with the GOP if they want to unseat Obama and company. That is also true for Independents that are not happy at all with what has happened this year under the Democrats.

It is possibly the case that the GOP will pick up many votes primarily as a protest against Obama, et cie, almost without respect to its platform, so long as it is sufficiently conservative or non-liberal, and not Democratic-lite.

The GOP itself seems to me to be realistically pushing the SSM issue under the rug where it should be, which will reduce this conflict for some voters. They may well reduce the rhetoric on abortion also, which is another of the controversies with heavy religious implications, and it appears to be one of the main blocks for the young against the GOP. The moral basis for this can be challenged, of course.

We do have a lot of Cassandras around.

Comment Posted By mannning On 22.02.2010 @ 13:24

FIREWORKS AT CPAC

You assume that the past is good and the future is frightening

--MR

Such an illogical statement cries for comment. Any sane person understands that there is a past, a present, and a future. They know a lot about the past and can draw lessons from it. People are generally aware of the present reality they are immersed in, but are most certainly not aware of the totality of events, trends, and ideas that exist in the now. When it comes to the future, there are no certainties, only the guidelines and principles used of the present and past to help project and plan for the next period of life, whether it be a day/week/month/year/decade or whatever.

I see conservatism and conservatives themselves as actively and busily trying to plan, organize, integrate, measure and construct a future based upon well-known, reliable and unchanging principles that ensure a worthwhile life for everyone in our nation. Not in some silly fear or fright state, but in a very, very realistic, rational and positive state of mind.

Perhaps this statement of MR reflects more his own fright of the future, and his own fate...

Comment Posted By mannning On 22.02.2010 @ 22:30

MR:
The glaring fact is that you hate Christians!
This you have demonstrated with your statements and your obviously biased reading of your history books, and your egregious shortfall in adequate understanding of human nature, as well as religion.

Perhaps you should read more often than occasionally; you might learn something despite your quirky, atheistic biases.

Many young people go through the stage of rejecting Christianity, but eventually realize their mistake. Apparently, you haven't progressed that far in your journey. Perhaps you never will.

Comment Posted By mannning On 22.02.2010 @ 12:47

Dear me! MR is, of course, not a close reader. That statement of mine is simply a fact, not a belief. I cannot gainsay what beliefs others have. MR, you are showing your own prejudices and desires to denegrate Christians for their beliefs. Toleration is called for on both sides of this issue, but you have demonstrated conclusively that you have it not.

It is all about Christian morality, and no statement to the contrary will change it in the minds of a supermajority of the population. That was shown by the number of states whose majorities voted against SSM.

As to the attitude being driven by prejudices and desires, one might ask where such opinions originated, and why? Could it be the teachings of Christian clerics and Biblical scholars over some 3 or 4 thousand years? Could it be that Romans 1:26-28 was considered to be Paul's New Testament advice to the sect coming from God?

You consider the Bible a joke, while most of 300 million people don't, something like: "look at our boy there in the parade! He is the only one marching in step!" That statement alone marks you for what you are: a hater of Christians for your own reasons...

Comment Posted By mannning On 22.02.2010 @ 10:02

Some conservatives are driven by their understanding of the Bible and their religious leaders, which condemns homosexuality in several books---notably Leviticus and Romans.

Other conservatives, that happen to be atheistic in their religious outlook, are not bound by what the Bible and religious sects say, and can thus freethink their way out of the dilemma of respecting the customs and traditions of marriage versus a more open interpretation.

Still others simply wish that the whole issue would go away, disappear, and not come back.

There are also agnostic conservatives that wish to ride the tide of social change (read: the hedonistic tendencies of many to release all of the bonds of morality) regardless of the tide's breakaway impact on fundamental Christian moral values.

Those minorities that want to sunder the conservative cause by calling the stand of Christian conservatives for Civil Unions and not gay marriage to be wrong, are themselves being intolerant of a religious and moral belief system and a tradition that is widely and deeply held in the nation; perhaps by 80-85% of the population.

I fail to see the advantage of elevating this now to a divisive, emotional, political, legislated, special kind of morality issue for conservatives, rather than leaving it to be the fundamental religious issue it most surely is and will remain to be in our society.

The long term question is: whose morality will be followed, that of the continued relaxation of moral standards, customs and traditions seemingly championed by humanists and feelgood hedonists, or of reenforcing the Christian moral standards of our society?

In all cases where this has come to a vote, Christian morality has won handily.

Comment Posted By mannning On 21.02.2010 @ 13:34

PALIN AND 'PATRIOT SPEAK'

It is rather simple: Palin will run, or not. If she runs, she will become the GOP candidate, or not. If she is the candidate, she will win, or not, against Obama. If she is invited onto the ticket as a VP candidate, she will be on the winning team, or not.
We get exactly one vote apiece in the election; I will not vote for Obama/Biden, regardless of the invectives against Palin.

The most anyone can do now is to make her decision to run a bit harder, the primary decisions to vote for her harder, and the GOP decision to select her as the final candidate/or running-mate harder.

One can conclude then, that Palin-bashing now has this precise intent: rightly or wrongly, to make her road harder with the voters between now and 2012.

My guess is that her popularity with the masses of rightwing voters will not be shattered at all by her critics on either side. She will be outrun by Romney, however, for President (if he runs) as he has recognizably much greater governing experience, but she just might make it to his VP slot on sheer voter attractiveness.

Comment Posted By mannning On 16.02.2010 @ 14:22

SARAH PALIN AND THE ASPIRATIONAL POLITICS OF RESENTMENT

If I view Palin through my wife's eyes, I would speak of instant hate! No analyzing Palin's words, no listening before reacting, but simply total rejection up front. Those that vilify Palin are absolutely right to do so in her opinion! But then, the wife is quite left-leaning, so perhaps I have a small insight into why all of the negativity: irrational reaction to a woman with her attributes standing up to the nation and speaking her mind.
Never mind what she says, it is that she says it at all that seems to count.

Then they dig a bit to find reasons for their visceral reaction; and there are some, but not actually fatal ones. The biggest complaint is that she resigned her governorship. If I am properly informed, she faced almost certain bankruptcy if she didn't quickly make some money to pay off a half million dollars of debt. Her salary wouldn't come close, and there were several years yet to go in office.

Meanwhile, she was besieged by reporters and lawyers at every turn, vilified in the MSM, and probably knew in her heart just how unprepared and intellectually thin on the ground she was for national office at that time. Calling time out may have been correct for her. I cannot walk in her shoes.

I strongly suspect that her appeal will take her far, but in the end she will still be intellectually thin and not able to cope adequately with the pressures of running for president. Plus, the stigma of her resignation will stick to her. She would be a good person to have in support, however, for her vote-getting power. This just may be her real strategy: make herself necessary to the 2012 GOP ticket as VP once more(without saying so, of course).

Meanwhile, she is driving my wife crazy, to my huge amusement!

Comment Posted By mannning On 11.02.2010 @ 13:37

THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT AS ANOTHER 'GREAT AWAKENING?'

The Tea Party Movement that I know has had a number of positive accomplishments so far, including the education of a wide swath of our citizens on the Constitution, deviations from it in being today, government plans to increase their freedom to legislate as they see fit (largely bypassing the Constitution), who they are that want to take us in that direction, and what we ought to do about it.

It has given great heart to many citizens that see our government as hopeless, unresponsive, far too complex, and in the hands of people with wrong ideas. The very act of attending a TP and rubbing shoulders with other citizens that feel even approximately the same way is an affirmation for many that will last. (Of course, the devil is in the details.)

This alone makes the TPM a useful effort. It remains to be seen how the movement can be segued into a more effective and focused political role, either as a significant part of the Republican Party, or something else entirely. Real political power is not esily acquired nor given up.

Comment Posted By mannning On 8.02.2010 @ 16:53


 


Next page »


Pages (48) : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48


«« Back To Stats Page