Comments Posted By FaradayCage
Displaying 1 To 2 Of 2 Comments
"THE RICK MORAN SHOW" - LIVE: DECISION '08 NEW HAMPSHIRE
Man, Rick and Rich are teh awesome!!!11!one! In standard English, I heard more realism and clear-eyed assessment of the NH situation in the first hour than on any other outlet, such as talk radio or TV. Whether it's Hugh Hewitt cheerleading for his boyfriend, or Mr. Medved sniffing Huck-A-Glue, or the usual bootlicking from the MSM, this Rightwing Nuthouse podcast made those guys sound like sour notes on a two dollar violin. Well done.
Comment Posted By FaradayCage On 9.01.2008 @ 02:40
FACING UP TO THE UNBEARABLE TRUTH
What kind of compromise can be reached? We had Bush run as an explicit evangelical Christian; remember how he was lambasted for it in the major media? He signed the bill to veto partial birth, we still have the Hyde amendment, he appointed some solid judges. We have the taxpayer-funded faith-based initiatives. Bush has said the philosopher he admired most was Jesus. It's implausible to argue that the evangelicals have been told to shut up, or that they have been ignored. I thought one compromise was Rudy. How? Rudy is plausible on fiscal matters and national security, as plausible as any of the other GOP hopefuls. Rudy promised to appoint the kind of judges who would be in a position to overturn Roe. Those kind of judges would also refrain from "discovering" a right to "gay marriage" in the Constitution, despite how Rudy may feel about the matter. Presumably this sort of thing ought to be settled with legislation, and that's where Congress comes in, not the Executive. Rudy is fine with school choice (Christian schools would be possible), and is an avowed enemy of the teachers' unions. You know, those teachers who inculcate the "wrong" culture in the children of the evangelicals?
But there is very, very little any President can do to outright eliminate abortion or gay marriage with the flick of a pen. In other words, the idea was that Rudy could appeal to the broader electorate in the general, while doing in the White House just about everything any President could about evangelicals hot-button issues. The President simply hasn't the power to eliminate abortion or kill gay marriage in its cradle. In theory, an evangelical could vote for Rudy, saying to himself "He can put the right people in place to make progress for evangelical concerns, yet simultaneously earn the votes of those culturally different than ourselves."
Well, Rudy has faded in the polls, and evangelicals don't buy this idea of compromise. So what do they want? What will they give those of us who don't agree with all of the evangelical agenda? Where is their offer of compromise?
Compromise means "No one gets everything they want." Evangelicals ought to consider that if they demand that the final GOP candidate begin every press conference saying "All abortion must be stopped immediately, and the same goes for gay marriage, Darwinism, and drinking on Sunday," they will be out of power in national politics until the next century.
Comment Posted By FaradayCage On 4.01.2008 @ 17:19
