David Brooks, as is so often the case, manages to get something right that his New York Times readership may ignore because of his lede:
There’s a big difference between the Republican and Democratic campaigns: The Republicans have split on policy grounds; the Democrats haven’t. There’s been a Republican divide between center and right, yet no Democratic divide between center and left.
But when you think about it, the Democratic policy unity is a mirage. If the Democrats actually win the White House, the tensions would resurface with a vengeance.
The first big rift would involve Iraq…
Brooks has somehow missed the fairly obvious divide among Democrats in this campaign on the issue of Iraq.  Sen. Hillary Clinton’s failure to repudiate her vote in favor of the Authorization for the Use of Military Force — and her dissembling attempts to explain it away – is one of the reasons her candidacy has been as inevitable as the Titanic was unsinkable. That position not only enrages the Left, but also causes them to reject her argument that she is better qualified by her experience.  Anyone knowing this will dismiss his column after two grafs and MoveOn to something else, thereby missing points that have more merit.
For example, Brooks points out that if either Clinton or Obama moved ahead with plans for a quick withdrawal from Iraq, he or she would instantly make it “the consuming partisan fight of their presidency,” not to mention drawing opposition from Arab leaders, important sections of the military, and nonpartisan military experts. Conversely, if a new Democratic administration recommends a long, slow conditions-based withdrawal — and even Obama left himself that opening just last Sunday – the left wing of the party would revolt (insert your own punchline here).
Brooks notes a similar problem with domestic spending:
It’d be 1993 all over again. The new Democratic president would be faced with Bill Clinton’s Robert Rubin vs. Robert Reich choice: either scale back priorities for the sake of fiscal discipline or blow through all known deficit records for the sake of bigger programs. Choose the former, and the new president would further outrage the left. Choose the latter and lose the financial establishment and the political center.
All of which points to one of the fundamental dynamics of the 2008 campaign — voters across party lines are pursuing a mirage of changeyness where bipartisanship reigns and the “moneyed special interests” vanish. It is why Sen. John McCain is the all-but-certain GOP nominee and a major reason why Clinton now finds herself in an uphill struggle against Obama — a candidate claiming he will be the Unifier despite having an even more left-wing record than Clinton.ÂÂ
No candidate has been willing to deliver real “straight talk” to the public in this regard. Ironically, “straight talk” is cited in the exit polls as one of the most desirable qualities in a candidate, but it is clear that the candidates do not think they are getting “straight talk” from the voters on that point, either.
Brooks misses the real point because he starts by claiming that there is a mirage of Democratic policy unity, even though the rift on Iraq comes up in every Democratic debate. He is missing the real mirage for one of his own making.
Update:  I may have been too hard on Brooks.  In the sequel to the pro-Obama focus group who could not name a single Obama accomplishment, the group could not name a policy difference between Obama and Clinton, either. Those folks will have to stumble through the Brooks mirage before they get to mine. Brooks may figure the typical New York Times reader is that dumb also.
Karl – Those pro-Obama focus groups are priceless. If you even need to know why Barry O is the quinessential empty shirt, one need look no further than why people are supporting him. The name one accomplishment, Part 2, is every bit as entertaining as the 1st time around.
BTW – You are the fucking man on the primaries. This is go-to kind of reading, way ahead of other places in blogland, and miles ahead of the dead tree and MSM. Keep up the great work.
Obama Khan: Or, A Vision in a Dream
Wrapped in an enigma, with a creamy nougat center
Most of the pundits opining on Iraq continue to miss the big point about Iraq. The far left doesn’t have anywhere hear the public support for a quick withdrawal at all costs position. They continue to shout about polls showing a majority of Americans dissastisfied with the war while completely missing the part that many of those people would not support such an eggregious withdrawal.
The adults in the Democratic party know and understand this, which is why they have been unwilling to push the defunding initiative, prefering to stick to the slushier “new direction” meme. Pelosi recently snarked that the surge had “failed” but not because of the troops, prefering to lay the bullseye on the Iraqi’s lack of political progress. No one with a “troops out in six months” platform has a chance in hades of being elected and they know it.
The Kos Kiddies, Move-onerons and DU-ites will be marginalized whoever wins the presidency and they will continue to have no idea why.
have u considered…that this is a feature and not a bug?
obama isnt coopted by the lobbyists and locked into policy commitments.
a beautiful empty suit exactly like jfk.
lulz…think about it!
that devil karl rove sold ur conservative souls to the fundies…..and now theyr voting for huckabee!!!
/giggle
vote for mccain, tools
after all, like gw said, hes PROLIFE.
zomg!
like i said on the other thread, Obama can be adaptive.
a feature not a bug.
like….u guyz wont vote for mccain cuz his accomplishments==very bad baggage as far as true conservatives are concerned.
obama can be flexible, opportunistic and exploitive.
he is demonstrating that in his campaign.
no one owns him….yet.
Yeah, I saw that priceless FNC focus group where the grip jammed the mic into each person’s face just just long enough so the camera could catch thier deer in the headlights look before moving to the next doe-eyed Obama deer for the same look. Sean Hannity got a laugh but that’s a trick question even for Obama-God himself. I, on the other hand, could have delivered.
He danced with Ellen. He toked weed in highschool. He beat a last second stand in, Alan Keyes, for a Senate seat. He wrote a book about Audacity. He won a Grammy for reading his book. He made Hillary cry. He had sex at least twice with his wife. He voted “no” to the war. He won all the small states on Super Tuesday. He raised money with a website. He played basketball in high school. What more can one man do?
He voted “no†to the war.
Before he was even a Senator! I mean, you gotta admit that is pretty damn impressive!
lulz that focus grup was so twodigit.
Obama is the FIRST BLACK MAN TO MAKE SERIOUS RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY.
isnt that an accomplishment?
“like i said on the other thread, Obama can be adaptive”
Just because you said it, doesn’t make it so. nishi, why vote for Obama? You keep on pushing him, but then offer no support of “why” to vote for him, other than you feel he isn’t bought. Oh, and you seem to loathe Bilary.
I just don’t see the commitment to drug experimentation that I’d hope to find in a presidential candidate. Sorry.
Be sure to check that “Sell By” date…
ah
fair enuff
bilary is dangerous for this country vis a vis national defense.
here is a wee thot experiment for u
try to think of a situ, any situ where bilary wud put the good of the country above their own interests?
consider:
bill gave kim jong il the two nuclear reactors in 1994 that are kims chief weaponized uranimum producers after congress told him not to. bill was angling after that nobel peace prize, an it completely contaminated all his interactions with kim.
serial traitor sandi berger is currently advising bilary’s campaign an will likely resume his position as natl sec advisor.
some of the 26,000 documents bilary is supressin have to do with bill’s systematic destruction of our HUMINT programs in the lead up to 911. basically he raped the black budget and had big gaudy defenscon builds that netted him congressional support an votes……cuz fundin field operatives in Karachi isnt in anyones constituency.
sadly, if we had a spent a few $ on HUMINT we wud have known Uncle Saddams WMDs were fakes an window dressing for the iranians.
that is just a sampling
bilary cares fuckall about this country, the prime directive, or our troops.
they just want to salvage the historical record for impeachedpresidentclinton
and why Obama?
hes in my tribe.
the tribe of high IQ and g.
read his books.
hes a believer….he thinks he can make a difference
an i think hes intelligent enuff to adapt if hes elected.
and also
I Want Something Else
Obama over Billary because Billary is horrid and cancerous. Then Obama versus McCain, what then when moving to Cabo isn’t an option?
McCain is going to overthrow at least a dozen tin pot dictators, which is way cool, but the dollar will be worth half-a-peso by the time he’s done.
Obama will remake America into something slightly less Socialist than modern-day Bolivia.
We’re in for a ride.
Obama will remake America into something slightly less Socialist than modern-day Bolivia.
oh mighty god of thunder…how do u kno that?
Obama has no track record.
i really gtg
ttyl, droogies
Well, I’ll be voting for Obama once.
Texas has an open primary. You show up, they ask you which ballot you want. I’ll be asking for a Democratic ballot, and voting for BO.
It will provide me with the delicious experience of voting against Hillary! twice. In an election where I have nothing whatever to vote for, it will provide a little ray of sunshine in what is otherwise unrelieved gloom.
Regards,
Ric
exploitive
He’s packed and he’s holding, he’s smiling, he’s living, he’s golden and
he lives for me, he says he lives for me, Ovation, he’s got his own motivation, he comes round and he goes down on me.
nishi:
Honestly, I can’t tell what it is you believe–other than your IQ is high.
A lot of my students write in text-speak, not because it’s edgy, but because they have no idea how to punctuate or spell.
… and that’s how I look at Obama. He’s not intentionally being evasive so that he can remain “flexible,” he’s just evasive.
Possibly nishi is blog-commenting from a cell phone. Or possibly her typing skills suck.
My daughter has CP, though, and she still manages to type grammatical, complete sentences.
omg im gonna get fired
happyfeet, dont u see?
that is a superpower on its own.
He’s the one they’ve always warned us about I think. It can happen here really, in some hopeychangey iteration I can’t really imagine because he won’t say. I just know that is doesn’t really work this way nishi, and I see this a lot. This is what you do when you know you need a HUGE opening weekend cause you know the movie won’t have any legs.
that *it* doesn’t really work this way
No, he’s not.
And if you wonder where people get the impression he’s a closet socialist — the Che images decorating his campaign headquarters might be a hint.
This is a good post Karl — I agree that Iraq is a third rail that the Dems won’t substantively address. They’ve already had a chance, and they pissed it away. I don’t expect “straight talk” from either Dem candidate, just a lot of shadow boxing. My big objection to Hillary is that incubus husband of hers; if she were as calculating as people seem to think she’d have ditched him years ago.
That’s not Obama’s campaign headquarters, that’s a Obama campaign office in Houston. Even if he were a closet Che-o-phile, he’s plenty smart enough to keep it in the closet.
Interesting thought. Given the almost unprecedented carnage in credit markets, given that the Fed’s back down to only 3% above zero and thumbing the button (think Japan; think economic positive feedback; think addiction) given we’re $9T in debt, and given simply staggering domestic spending already, what would a radical Socialist Democrat do to occupy his messianic, hard leftist, let’s-finally-legalize-envy time?
The WOT is an external problem but economic cancer eats the core. It’s always the economy, Obambi.
Maybe even this country will eventually say enough and then we, hopefully, have the mother of all stonewalled administrations.
JHoward:
If only… *sigh*
NY Times readers don’t think of themselves as dumb. They think of themselves as the elite. They’re just waiting to be told what to think by dumb elitist pundits employed by the Times, also where to eat, what books to read, where to vacation, what movies and plays to see, and what products to buy or avoid. How anybody could consider such people dumb is beyond me. Clueless is a much better description.
Distinction without a difference. If it were a Republican candidate’s office and it were a picture of Hitler, that candidate would (appropriately) catch heat until they distanced themselves from it. For one, they’d be expected to clean house at that campaign office.
But Hitler’s not “cool” or “hip,” Rob, you ‘thug, you!
JD, Do NOT go to the Drudge Report. You could go mad.
well….theres that language thing.
last night in hiphop class we were learnin a new dance, an one student said thats thuggish!
which in dancespk means very good.
Ok, nishi thanks for the reply, as empty as it was. You didn’t have to “sell” me on not voting for Hilary. That comment was spot on, though. It’s the second one that left me wanting. Other than patting yourself on the back on how high your IQ was and saying that Obama has a high IQ, too, I’m not sure the point of that comment. So you “think” that he will adapt, but you question Thor on his point of Obama being a socialist? I guess as long as you relate to him (identity politics?) it doesn’t matter what his policies are. I guess I thought you were a classical Liberal, or a conservative. Obviously not. BTW, that’s not a judgement.
JD,
Thanks.
nishi,
No, it’s an indicator of how unserious a lot of people are.
I voted for Hillary today. I’m not proud of it, but since you are all good people you deserve to know about the filth you let hang around you here.
I was going to throw my vote Barry O’s way, but then my wife informed me that Hillary needed my help today. What can I say? She’s pretty and she smells nice. My wife that is, I have no idea what Hillary smells like.
You take that back!
Having a high IQ doesn’t necessarily mean he’s adaptive, nishi. Besides, where do you get the notion he has a high IQ? Did somebody publish some of his test scores or something?
happyfeet – Which part? The part where Fuckabee refuses to get the hell out of the race? The part where women are getting all wet and throwing their panties on stage during Barack’s speech? Or the part where Hill/Bill is about to embark on an all out offensive against Barry O?
Jim – nishi and the like conflate him being good at delivering speeches with intelligence. They claim he has a high IQ because describing him as articulate would be racist.
Oh. Don’t go to this part. You’re welcome.
Oh, feets! Today had to be the day that I’m drinking Apple/Grape juice rather than green tea. I’ve soaked some files by spraying the purple mixture after clicking on that link. Danny Thomas would be proud.
JD: BWAAAAA HAHAHAHA!!!
Given that nishi writes like a (barely) functional illiterate, I doubt that’s it. Probably thinks Obama’s smart because everybody says he is.
You guys are sick and disturbed individuals. And if that picture does not explain, in graphic terms, why midgets and dwarfs are so scary, nothing will.
May your road to hell be paved in broken glass and cayenne pepper.
Oh, JD, i’m still laughing my ass off. Tears are streaming down my face. All I can think of is a room full of guys that look like him constructed as your own, private hell.
I’m dying, here…
I’m just glad nishi wrote a lot of the comments here – so I didn’t have to read as many as I thought I might. Thanks, nishi.
That is soooooooooooooooooooo very wrong. Am I the only one that think that it incredibly freaky, and more than a little bit creepy? At least it did not have clown paint and Bozo shoes on.
Because his D so resembles Teh Slickmeister’s D.
Of course.
I practically threw myself in front of your monitor so you wouldn’t have to see that. There’s just no helping some people.
Assuming they’d ever seen it before it showed up on TV. I doubt we’re going to see any “after” photos of that office, sans the Che poster, though.
Distinction without a difference is my favorite oxymoron, though.
Thanks for your concern, happyfeet. My therapist has been able to squeeze in an emergency appt this afternoon, and with the joys of modern BIG PHARMA products, I may be able to sleep eventually this week.
So, hf, you still feel ok outing little nishi?
JD, “Dwarfs are very upsetting“. that line popped into my head a few weeks ago, anyhoo, you aren’t alone. ;D
Me hf? Outing little nishi? I don’t understand. I think she’s fun. I don’t think I feel ok outing little nishi. I don’t think I would have ever ever been in favor of that. Let nishi be nishi is kind of where I stand on the whole issue.
I don’t think anyone should do anything precipitous.
I’d wait for little nishi’s view on this troubling matter, except I wouldn’t read it anyway. Those pictures were bad enough.
Am I the only one that think that it incredibly freaky, and more than a little bit creepy?
I can’t stop wondering where the trainer’s thumb is in that first picture.
Oh. I didn’t follow you, J. There was this guy named Lewis talking smack a few days ago and he seemed kind of like a dick and I thought maybe that’s what you meant but I wasn’t sure. Nishi really is a varietal of goodness I think though.
Perhaps a small varietal? Anyway, thanks – the need to lift has strangely come over me, so I must quickly find my Masters of The Universe garb and…..
errm….its high IQ an g for my tribe.
g is sort of measured as the correlation coefficient between brain modalities…loosely analogous to problem solving ability.
look how far Obama’s campaign has come if u doubt me.
since u asked…ima hereditary republican.
i grew up with guns, dogs and ponies….sorry if that offends.
i competed in the pony club mounted games an tetrathelon (runrideswimshoot) when i was 12.
of course i have guns.
the last thing my grandfather said to me was kate, always vote republican.
i hav voted for bush 2x…the first time it was legacy i think…my first vote..the second time it was that he was the best choice for nat’l security.
i work in the defense industry.
a military customer who shall remain nameless paid for my research assistantship in grad school.
my desire to see Iraq thru has motivated my support for GW
however…i had to accept the bush admin supressing my other affiliation….science.
the perfectly odious bioethics council (a star chamber for bioluddites) and the incredibly offensive adminstration position on schiavo and the snowflake embryos has been very hard for me to stomach.
but now i think…iraq is succeeding..and no new adminstration will be able to undo that.
for a lot of reasons
so i am free to vote for someone i believe in, free to vote my conscious.
it is liberating.
consider….the ability to inspire is a verifiable superpower. jfk had it, reagan had it.
im bettin it is a superpower for good.
perhaps Obamas lack of firm position is deliberate.
Interestiong background. Thanks for the info. I agree with you to a point in regards to a new administration not being able to undo the good that has been done and the progress that has obviously been made. I do think that he can do some damage, though. I guess I’m just inspired impaired as empty suits just don’t inspire me. But if that’s your bag, that’s ok. I do know enough of his policy preference to nix him as a viable candidate. “perhaps Obamas lack of firm position is deliberate”. I don’t doubt that it is. But, I’m thinking for different reasons than you may be thinking.
And no Reagan, to me, wasn’t an empty suit. His conservative values matched up pretty well with mine. Then again, he wasn’t the perfect candidate for me. Of course it’s a moot point in regards to Reagan as I wasn’t old enough to vote for him, either time.
nishi
There are plenty of Vietnamese and Cambodians that would beg to differ, but for their being massacred.
The thing about being a blank-slate candidate, when he’s appealing to certain segments of the electorate, is that — if he wins — they’re going to expect him to keep promises he never made except in their imaginations. And when he can’t, they’ll turn on him. He will be torn to shreds, rhetorically, by the very mob that brought him to power. With a little help from his Clintonista rivals, of course.
it isnt the same Karl and u know it.
from wat i read of history we were only a prop to hold up the roof long enuff for the french to hightail it out of there.
we have shown…the Iraqis the way to accomplish wat they need to do.
at some point it up to them.
our goal was never to “spread democracy and freedom”.
there is no altruism in nature. (that is Sir Richard btw)
we meant always to destroy the substrate that nutured stateless terrorists.
Iraq was the optimum risk/threat assessment choice.
McGeehee they will certainly try.
but i think in 4 years even, bilary will be too old.
hil is 60 now…and she isnt aging well.
i liked reagans values…the old guard at work speak well of him.
he was their Shane, he came in and cleaned up the town.
but i think…reagan was adaptive.
Damn, those were near full sentences, nishi. I was just hoping you’d “show your work” a bit.
I’ve known and associated with a number of people who would probably be considered “high IQ.” None of them were lawyers. If I knew the guy personally, I might even agree with you, but deciding that at a distance with no real familiarity seems like mostly a wild-ass guess.
Now, refusing to be pinned down to a position is sometimes a positive trait, that’s true.
nishi
Actually, the US was as successful against the VC as it has been against AQI now. But we yanked the funding and logistic support for the South Vietnamese Army and left the vulnerable to the NVA, supported by the Chinese. The Dems at the time whined about the corrupt gov’t in the South.
Here, you could pull out, allow AQI to regain a foothold or empower the Mahdi Army with Iranian backing. The latter would then push the Sunni countries (SA, Jordan, etc.) to back Sunni militia or AQI, creating a bloodbath and possible regional war, disruption of international oil markets, etc. The Dems would again blame the corrupt local gov’t.
Different, but not as different as you think.
…loosely analogous to problem solving ability.
look how far Obama’s campaign has come if u doubt me.
I am not sure if I understand your point (grammar is a communication problem solver you seem to fail to recognize) but Obama’s skill is in avoiding problems, not solving them.
Good marketing and speech-writing != Intelligence
Um, I wasn’t talking about setting anyone up to run against Obama in 2012. I’m talking about sheer unadulterated spite.
Where you or I have blood running through our veins, Hillary has pure 200-proof spite. Explodes into flame on contact with oxygen. She doesn’t need a payoff — if she blames Obama for her not becoming president when she wanted to become president, destroying him will be its own reward.
i guess i wasnt clear enuff…Obama used bricolage, he subverted the existing party caucus machinery to beat down bilary.
brilliant IMHO.
btw im not tryin to solve problems. i dont think im gonna change anyones minds.
im not out to persuade.
its obviouso to me, u can see or not see.
i used to try to persuade ppl oh….that a blastula wasnt a “human life”, or that we should have built a Large Haldron Super Collider here, or that we shud use government fundage to replace the existing stem cell lines which are devolving, or that terri schiavo was a carrot……
but there isnt any point really.
Obviously you’re trying to precipitate them.
Obama used bricolage, he subverted the existing party caucus machinery to beat down bilary.
brilliant IMHO.
I just don’t see him subverting anything, he has just been incredibly lucky to face off against weak opponents at every turn of his career, and is a really good preacher. From where I am sitting he has been anything but subversive.
It just seems you admire Baracky’s bricolageyness more than you really seem to make a case that there’s any kind of super-wonderful reason to get on board with it really. Hannah Montana is really a lot bricolagey too but everyone understands pretty intuitively she’s not something everyone has to embrace.
Who says that the “spread democracy and freedom” bit is altruistic? In fact, it is the solution to the problem in the third sentence quoted.
She is half Billy Ray Cyrus, isn’t she? Good point.
You wouldn’t convince me to vote for Obama, but you might convince me he’s a smart guy.
I don’t care about blastulas one way or another. Schiavo? I would have said rutabaga–it’s just a funnier word in my opinion. I’m a-ok with stem cell research, not so much with spending tax money on it, but that’s more of a question of whether there’s any Constitutional authority for such spending. I feel the same way about art, for that matter.
Super colliders are just cool, that’s all there is to it.
By the way, the concept of bricolage isn’t exactly new or revolutionary to a poor country boy from Appalachia. We just called it “making do”.
Who says that the “spread democracy and freedom†bit is altruistic? In fact, it is the solution
no, it is A solution, not the solution.
it was just deemed the most costviable in this case.
oh happyfeet im not persuading anyone…im sayin why i am.
i recognize the glamour….i am affected.
i want to believe.
u guyz dont.
i guess im a defector now.
my poor grandfather.
do u think he will haunt me?
I thought the reason I wasn’t embracing Hannah Montana was that she’s a minor.
and that is why…i will vote for Obama over mccain.
:)
i think…to get the fundies on board for a repeat of the rove coalition…u guyz will have to have huckabee too.
now that is teh suxor.
oh yah..i also tried to persuade ppl that the harmony database was an empty sack.
how did that turn out anyways?
No. I think it’s interesting, but I’m working on how to express it better, what I think of Obama. My sketch of it so far is that I really can’t but think that the same media we’ve seen in full-on tantrum mode since Katrina will bring the same intensity to being not allied with an Obama Administration, alloyed with it, really. I just think that and a people’s army of che-lovin’ two-digits is really kind of unsettling.
well not empty…it was full of chaff.
Do you know of some other solution(s) that would render that one an option among others? Until I become aware of another possibility for achieving that end, I’ll stick with my terminology, thankyewverymuch.
Well why don’t we just name Hillary’s accomplishments? Wouldn’t that be a rather short list? Her experience seems every bit as weak.
well pablo..the guyz at work have in the past reccommended “…..fusing the arabian penninsula into a plain of black glass and slantdrillin under it…”
or we cud have empowered a “benevolent” strongman like we did with the shah….. or outright conquest with a puppet leader an make them into puerto rico…..theres loads of options.
Well, I’ll admit that genocide would do the trick, but it really isn’t the outcome we’re looking for. And the Shah type of deal objectively doesn’t work (see also: Pakistan), so that’s out. Any others?
…to get the fundies on board for a repeat of the rove coalition…u guyz will have to have huckabee too.
What is it going to take for people to understand there is no such voting bloc? I am getting really tired of hearing newspeople and pundits yapping about the “evangelical vote” when poll after poll show there is no such thing.
also we considered Iran instead. and Saud, and Pakistan. there are….problems… with those scenarios that rendered them less attractive.
and also we believed in the faux WMDs.
cuz no HUMINT, see?
Moe then who is votin for Huckabee?
and rove hisself says that was a strategy.
more succintly, who refused to embrace mitt.
Hannah Montana is really a lot bricolagey too but everyone understands pretty intuitively she’s not something everyone has to embrace.
Amen, brother happy. But I dare you to try to preach that around my house. The little one would have you hung by your toenails.
BMoe – They have to keep that bogeyman image out there so they can flog it every time they lose an election.
pablo, duuuuhhhh
my point is if communism wud have solved the problem and been more costviable we wud have done that.
Moe then who is votin for Huckabee?
FairTax supporters. The Traditional South. Social Conservatives of various Religions. And now, a lot of AnyBodyButMcCains.
and rove hisself says that was a strategy.
Was.
more succintly, who refused to embrace mitt.
People who were supporting Fred, or Rudy, or any of the other candidates. It would have been a very different race if any single NotMcCain had run against McCain from the beginning. Instead they were splitting votes on the right side of the party while McCain built a huge lead with the left and independents.
My point is there is no cohesive Evangelical bloc. Or fundie bloc, for that matter. Most blacks would fall under that umbrella, as would hispanics and blue-collar union types. And there are many more “mainstream” religions in the south that hold social conservative views. It is not as easy as saying you are against abortion and gay marriage and all of a sudden you have an instant constituency, is all I am saying. People are a little more complex than that.
And there are many more “mainstream†religions in rural America that hold social conservative views.
That is what I meant to say.
Well, yeah, one of the candidates delivered straight talk. But he didn’t bring the fire, apparently. And the latter wins out. Again.
well…..is “Life” a conservative value?
is “no-gay-marriage” a conservative value?
i dont think those are in the constitution.
#100
Read the preamble.We hold these truths ……….etc.etc.
no they r not.
mighty fierce extrapolation there rusty.
that is my beef with the republican party.
it has become convolved with “xian values”.
it wuz a rhetorical question.
All men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights … life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
As Dutch used to say, “There you go again”. David Brooks, I don’t know of a single person voting for Barack who will be the least bit bothered by Sunnis and Shiites continuing their civil war without us. You should really get out more. These people are living in 200 B.C. and no amount of American casualties will bring them into the present. They need to fight it out among themselves and perhaps reach Enlightenment.
Rusty, JD — those are in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
Yes indeed M, but they are also implicit in the constitution it’self. Why else have a ‘Bill of Rights’ unless those three were a given. I find it interesting that ‘happiness’ was substituted for ‘property’ in the final edition. Both having different meanings then than now.