Sam Leach - KEEP
-
mikeskapla:
Hi Sam
I don't think its so much the Democrats dissing the NASCAR crowd but more that they aren't catering to them enough. The Republicans are masterful at creating social divides on issues such as gay rights and abortion and play very well to social conservatives. Cheers! Mike
Hello Mike, You may be right, but I do hear a lot of looking down at the NASCAR crowd by many Democrats. If the Democrats would not play so much on the abortion and gay rights and move a bit closer center with their platform, they might do a bit better. Of course, their fate was being sealed when they started to run people out like the late Governor Bob Caseyt of Pennsylvania out of the party because of his pro life stance. It was really telling when Senator Kerry failed to directly answer the question in the town hall meeting if he would spend federal funds for abortion. They need to move closer to the center, the Republicans have been masters of it, and even President Clinton was able to do it which enabled him to be re-elected in 1996. Cheers! Samcat
-
Sam Leach:
Hello and thanks to Christina (harleyblues), Maccascruff, Samcat, Cesar, Glass_Onion, dB, Dmmedic, Kathy, Mike and Paulfan. (hope I've left no recent posters out). Just to let you all know that I've had the stiches out, the physios have signed me off - in record time they told me - and now recovery is full steam ahead. I'm so chuffed and glad it's over. Thanks to you all for your tremendous concern and kind wishes for me. I'll never forget this. Love, cheers and hugs. Sam xxxxxxxxxx
Good to hear you are up and about, Sam. SO what do you think of the Glazers trying to acquire the Red Devils?
-
Sam Leach:
Hello everyone !! A Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours !! And know that I'm thinking of you all !! Love and great big hugs. Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Happy Thanksgiving to you too. Wait a minute! I did not know that the British celebrated Thanksgiving.
Hope everyone has a great one! And if you stop in Florida, Sam, Let me know... If the Steelers make the Super Bowl, you can be sure I will be watching there in Jacksonville...
-
Sam C I don't think too mnay people (even Republicans) would agree with your point that the Republicans are masterful at running to the center. If you read most of the assesment of Bush's win -- they give credit for his victory for his move to run to the right and energize the religious conservatives -- haven't seen ANY articles saying that Bush's victory wasn't about exciting his base but winning over moderate voters with mainstream views. Not too many people see Bush as mainstream. In terms of abortion and gay rights -- I think its hard to argue that the Democrats were running on those issues -- but instead the Republicans were running against those issues. Running against gay marriages was a big part of Bush's platform. Kerry actually was on the record for being against legalizing gay marraiages, too -- but he wasn't out there talking up the issue -- because Democrats are generally more liberal on social issues. Bush was talking up that issue. Conservatives helped get a number of anti-gay marriage iniatives on the ballots of key swing states -- it wasn't pro gay groups putting those iniatives on. Bush's strategist Karl Rove is famous (and he will admit this, too) for getting the religious right fired up -- by pinning liberal social issues on the Democrats. In other words, the Republicans are masterful at using divisive social issues to stir up their base. They are bringing these issues up for debate much more so then the Democrats. People are arguing if anything that the Democrats need to move further to the right on social issues otherwise the Republicans will continue to dominate -- not becuase of their mainstream views -- the Republicans in power will acknowledge that the days of moderate Republicans are over and they way for them and the party to go is further to the right. The Republicans have what 3 moderate Republicans in the Senate? That I think presents an opportunity for the Democrats but we will see. Personally am socially pretty liberal -- if gay people want to get married so be it. However, that position clearly doesn't pervade the South. The Democrats are smart enough not to promote these issues -- but the Republicans have been even smarter in a sense by the fact that they do promote the issues -- they are running on an anti-abortion anti gay platform and it seems to be a winning formula for them. Happy thanksgiving! Mike
-
Sam C Actually to respond to your question about abortion. The large majority of Americans are pro-choice. So Kerry is closer to the center then Bush is on the issue. My point is again this election by just about every account wasn't about ordinary American voters prefering Bush -- because he was the more moderate one -- I almost gag writing that! I am a moderate -- I don't see eye to eye with Bush on much. Bush would gag on that word, too -- he doesn't see himself as a moderate. In fact, a lot of Bush people are gung ho about him becuase they say he isn't like his father who many deemed to actually be the last major Republican moderate who held power. Again, this election seemed to be about can Bush get his base more fired up then Kerry can get his. By Bush people's own account their secret was running hard to the right and exciting their base -- by using wedge issues such as abortion and gay rights. While the average voter is pro-choice -- the average Republican voter is pro-life -- it was the average Republican voter that Bush centered most of his campaign on. To his credit he did a good job of it.
-
In the UK, we don't really celebrate it but we embrace it nonetheless. I certainly have taken stock and made someone aware how much I love and appreciate them.
-
Sam C Of course this year we're celebrating Thanksgiving. That we don't have Bush as our political spokesperson. Cheers all. Sam.
-
Woooohoooo for Sam Leach!!
-
mikeskapla:
Sam
Actually to respond to your question about abortion. The large majority of Americans are pro-choice. So Kerry is closer to the center then Bush is on the issue. My point is again this election by just about every account wasn't about ordinary American voters prefering Bush -- because he was the more moderate one -- I almost gag writing that! I am a moderate -- I don't see eye to eye with Bush on much. Bush would gag on that word, too -- he doesn't see himself as a moderate. In fact, a lot of Bush people are gung ho about him becuase they say he isn't like his father who many deemed to actually be the last major Republican moderate who held power. Again, this election seemed to be about can Bush get his base more fired up then Kerry can get his. By Bush people's own account their secret was running hard to the right and exciting their base -- by using wedge issues such as abortion and gay rights. While the average voter is pro-choice -- the average Republican voter is pro-life -- it was the average Republican voter that Bush centered most of his campaign on. To his credit he did a good job of it.
Mike, Actually they are not. All of the polls I have seen are to the contrary, but of course one has to make sure what kind of questions and how they are phrased to ensure true accuracy. I don't trust polls as a general rule. As you know, many of the exit polls taken on the spot during the election favored Senator Kerry winning the election and we saw what happened to that. There was an energized base that hated President Bush and were going to make sure they could vote him out of office as well. Most of your Democrats are pro-abortion, and they are not too inclusive with any that disagree with them. I do know some who are pro-life, but do not use that as a basis for their vote. It was the independents who swung the election decisively (by that I mean more than 50 percent of the popular vote) and having discussed this with Dick Morris, the primary issue was security. Best, Samcat
-
Sam Leach:
Sam C Of course this year we're celebrating Thanksgiving. That we don't have Bush as our political spokesperson. Cheers all. Sam.
Quite true, but you have Blair, and from what I heard of what policies that the Queen read off to Parliament, you might be in more trouble than we are with President Bush... Good to see you up and about... Cheers! Samcat
-
Samuel Catalino:
Sam Leach:
Sam C Of course this year we're celebrating Thanksgiving. That we don't have Bush as our political spokesperson. Cheers all. Sam.
Quite true, but you have Blair, and from what I heard of what policies that the Queen read off to Parliament, you might be in more trouble than we are with President Bush... Good to see you up and about... Cheers! Samcat
Ouch... that must have hurt!
Anyone here out to get Martin while we are at it?
Sam, really nice to see you!
Sorry I haven't been around as much, so busy!
-
Sam C All right -- I won't argue this point further then this post with you because I don't even remotely agree with the notion that Bush won this election becuase of his ability to court independents -- Bush's own people agree with me -- that's where my opinion is primarily coming from. They flat out said that it was their strategy. If you want to check things out read Newsweeks portrayl of how Bush won -- read articles about Karl Rove. Karl Rove ran Bush's campaign not Dick Morris. If you prefer to think that Bush won becuase in your mind he is a moderate Republican who is wooing independent voters with his moderate mainstream views, then I don't want to take that image away from you -- becuase its something that you obviously want to believe. If you are open to an alternative idea (am in politics I do this for a living, I read and watch A LOT -- trust me 99% of the political pundits and Bush's campaign are saying it themselves -- it was a campaign primairly but not exclusively about motivating their base) go on the web and start doing searches on Bush's strategy and Karl Rove in particular. Yeah terrosim was an issue, too. It help Bush win some votes no question. However, if you notice where Bush's voters were coming from -- they weren't coming from our country's terroism danger spots -- Kerry routed Bush in California, Illinois and the Northeast. The states where Bush prevailed were the southern and mid west states -- the bible belt states. Now, I don't think that residents in Alabama are more scared of terroism then those in New York -- hence New York went for Kerry and Alabama went for Bush. We've argued some political points where I think there are good arguments on both sides of the issue -- alas tort reform. On this one, its not an argument -- it;s whats being said on both sides of this race. Your own favorite crew Bush and the gang support exactly what am saying -- they bragged about the fact that their campaign was about pushing their base. Go do a search on Bush and see how many times he calls himself a moderate and how many times a conservative. Go do a search and read what moderate Republicans are saying about how they are marginalized in their own party. The Republicans are unabashed about the fact that they are moving to the right. They aren't trying to cover it up. On these points am not arguing against Bush -- am telling you what Bush and his team are saying about themselves. If you think Dick Morris has a better perspective on the campaign then the people that actually ran it -- so be it. Hope you had a happy thanksgiving! Cheers! Mike
-
Have a great weekend, everyone!!
-
Sorry couldn't resist posting an article or two for Sam C -- sorry I know this is a music sight. Sam again I do agree that terrosim was an issue and it was the main card they played to win swing voters -- they really had to use that one becuase Bush did not represent moderate views on domestic and social policy so terroism was their trump card -- but by their own accounts their main strategy to win the election was to energize their base by going to the right -- here's an article that tells the story somewhat And they have always been wrong, no more so than today. The conservative religious movement has certainly moved into the background, but not because it is irrelevant. To a great extent, it has won the game. ?What?s different from the past is that it?s integrated into the Republican Party,? said Duane Oldfield, a political scientist at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., who studies the religious right. ?The Christian right has gone from being outsiders to insiders.? Beginning in the late 1970s, when McAteer recruited conservative religious activists Howard Phillips, Richard Viguerie and Paul Weyrich to help Falwell organize the Moral Majority, the Christian right made lurching inroads into the Republican Party, its prospects rising and falling with the successes and failures of its favored candidates. Even though they had reservations about some of Texas Gov. George W. Bush?s relatively moderate positions, influential conservative Christian figures signed on early to his presidential campaign, and they found a winner. In the 2000 election, Bush won 79 percent of voters who described themselves in exit polls as members of the ?religious right.? Political analysts said that most likely, he won even greater support from Christian conservatives, many of whom consider ?religious right? to be a pejorative and would not have identified themselves as such. Seeding the government Bush repaid the debt, weaving conservative Christian principles into the tapestry of his administration. Live Vote Which candidate would be more likely to advance an agenda attractive to religiously conservative people? * 38539 responses George W. Bush 92% John Kerry 5% Ralph Nader 1% Other 2% The movement goes beyond Bush?s making his Christianity a cornerstone of his public rhetoric or appointing stars of the religious right to high-profile positions ? for example, his naming John Ashcroft, the Assemblies of God-immersed son of a Pentecostal preacher, as attorney general. The president has seeded every corner of the executive branch with religious conservative representatives, most of them in important policy-making roles that don?t get much public attention. Bypassing Congress, where his Faith-Based Initiatives bill stalled in the Senate, Bush issued two executive orders embedding offices for faith-based initiatives in agencies across the government in the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Justice, Education and Agriculture and in the Agency for International Development. The administration has also made a practice of appointing conservative religious activists to regulatory and oversight boards that operate without public scrutiny. Typical of many of these appointments is that of Eric W. Treene, who was installed at the Justice Department as special counsel for religious discrimination. Treene, who was litigation director at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public interest law firm, is a favorite of conservative religious activists. Vote to see results Live Vote How important is a candidate's observance of traditional Christian values to your vote? * 39205 responses The No. 1 criterion 29% Very important 27% Not that important 13% ?Eric?s presence there sends a positive signal to people like me and other organizations who are concerned regarding religious issues,? the Rev. Robert Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council, told The Washington Times in 2002. ?I am not sure why the Department of Justice doesn?t show him off to conservative Christians. Treene?s presence sends a signal that it?s a friendly place for people like us.? The Bush White House is just as aggressive in its appointments to international agencies and boards. For example, in 2002, the administration sent a delegation heavily stocked with activists from conservative Christian organizations to the U.N. Special Session on Children, where it argued that the phrase ?reproductive health services? could be read to affirm the right to abortion and to support the distribution of condoms to teenagers. God on the Ballot Members of the delegation included Bill Saunders, a director of the Family Research Council; J. Robert Flores, who was then vice president of the anti-pornography National Law Center for Children and Families; and Paul Bonicelli, executive director of the National Center for Home Education, a division of the Home School Legal Defense Association. ?I think it?s probably good politics,? Oldfield said in an interview. ?The Republicans have been most successful when they can mobilize the Christian right in ways that aren?t visible to the general public.? Right woman in the right job If, as it has been said, leadership is about motivating human resources, then the conservative Christian movement has just the woman for the job. Kay Coles James has been vice president of the Family Research Council, a director of Focus on the Family and dean of the School of Government at Pat Robertson?s Regent University. Today she is director of the Office of Personnel Management ? the woman in charge of hiring for the entire federal government. James has a long and distinguished record in the Reagan administration and Virginia state government, and no credible critic has argued that her deeply conservative faith has had a measurable impact on government hiring ? indeed, the OPM bars any decision-making based on religion. At the same time, James has remained a vocal spokeswoman for conservative Christian principles, and she makes no secret of her consultation with religious advisers in her own job. ?I have spiritual mentors,? she said in an interview in 2002 with Leah?s Sisters, a Christian-oriented women?s outreach group. ?If I have to make a major decision, I consult with these people first.? Likewise, James noted in a commencement address last year at Pepperdine University that ?the strength I draw from God?s love is essential to my work in Washington. Although we speak in acronyms and euphemisms, I always go back to the Bible for the words that have the most meaning.? Leader of the flock James has been closely identified with Dr. James C. Dobson, a psychologist and evangelical lay activist who is one of a number of religious leaders who do not command the public spotlight in the manner of Falwell or Robertson but who wield enormous influence in the religious conservative movement. Correction An earlier version of this story incorrectly referred to Dr. James C. Dobson as ?the Rev. James C. Dobson.? Dobson, a psychologist and former associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California, is not an ordained minister. Dobson founded and leads Focus on the Family, one of the largest Christian ministries on Earth, with programs in nearly a hundred countries, and he is by all odds the most powerful Christian leader in the United States today. The ministry?s leading radio program, ?Focus on the Family,? is the second-highest-rated syndicated program in the United States, and its magazine of the same name is the second-most widely read religious publication, with a circulation of more than 3.3 million. Dobson?s column appears in hundreds of newspapers. Related stories More stories by Alex Johnson Focus on the Family practices the modern conservative politics perfected by Ralph Reed, the former executive director of the Christian Coalition, who is managing the Bush campaign?s Southeast operations. It seeks to build power from the bottom up, patiently growing local organizations and training Christian conservatives in the basics of mainstream politics. Dobson?s ministry alone runs local political operations in nearly 40 states, and in 2000, the year of the last presidential election, it reported lobbying expenditures of more than $4 million. Live Vote How much influence do politically active religious institutions like the Southern Baptist Convention, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Focus on the Family have on American politics? A great deal Some Not that much None Vote to see results Live Vote How much influence do politically active religious institutions like the Southern Baptist Convention, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Focus on the Family have on American politics? * 34331 responses A great deal 32% Some 54% Not that much 12% None 3% Not a scientifically valid survey. Click to learn more. As a nonprofit organization, Focus on the Family cannot endorse candidates, but Dobson has personally endorsed Bush ? a powerful statement from a man whose audience has been estimated at 200 million people. Today, the conservative Christian movement listens to leaders like Dobson and Charles Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries. They are intent on building a long-term political infrastructure and molding policy, and they are able to do so without the withering scrutiny that fell on media-focused evangelists like Robertson and Falwell, whom they have largely supplanted. The nexus of officials in the Bush administration and activists in the conservative Christian movement gives leaders like Dobson the strongest platform the movement has ever had. ?Some [of the older leaders] are fading,? Oldfield said, ?but that?s because George W. Bush is head of the Christian right
-
Another one -- this one is from the economist. One last point -- I do agree Sam C that terrosim was ultimately the biggest issue I saw the same exit polls that you did. My point is that the Republican majority -- & the Karl Rove Bush strategy was primairly driven by turning out more religious voters who are becoming more and more Republican. And George Bush and his staff would gag if you called them moderates they are unabased conservatives. And, again I voted for Kerry but I respect people's political beliefs -- that's what America is all about. Am just saying that if you want to think of Bush as a moderate -- you don't have too many people who would agree and Bush himself would disagree with you -- excerpt from the article This points to another new development. The election seems to have consolidated the tendency of the most observant members of any church, regardless of denomination, to vote Republican. During the campaign, a debate erupted among Catholics over John Kerry's support for abortion rights. Orthodox Catholics condemned his stance and one bishop even said he would deny the candidate communion (as a Catholic himself, Mr Kerry opposed abortion, but did not back anti-abortion laws). ?Progressive? Catholics defended him, but the election returns suggest that the orthodox position won out. That seems characteristic of all denominations. Mr Green subdivides each church into three groups (see table) traditionalists, centrists and modernists, according to the intensity of belief. Traditionalists believe in church doctrine and go to church once a week or more; modernists are more relaxed. The three most Republican groups are traditionalist evangelicals, traditionalist mainline Protestants and traditionalist Catholics. Modernists lean towards the Democrats. The election returns are consistent with this people who go to church once a week or more voted for Mr Bush by nearly two to one. This seems to supersede the historical pattern, whereby evangelicals have tended to vote Republican, Catholics Democratic and mainline Protestants (Lutherans, Methodists) have split their vote. The implication of these findings is that Mr Bush's moral majority is not, as is often thought, just a bunch of right-wing evangelical Christians. Rather, it consists of traditionalist and observant church-goers of every kind Catholic and mainline Protestant, as well as evangelicals, Mormons, Sign Followers, you name it. Meanwhile, modernist evangelicals (yes, there are a few) tend to be Democratic. What happens next? The big question for the next four years is what the traditionalist constituency will demand of Mr Bush, and whether he will give it what it wants. Already, self-appointed church leaders are queuing up to claim credit for the election victory and to insist on a bigger role in government. Mr Dobson told ABC's ?This Week? programme that ?this president has two years, or more broadly the Republican Party has two years, to implement those policies, or certainly four, or I believe they'll pay a price in the next election.? There is no shortage of politicians, holding some of the more extreme views of the Christian right, who can be counted on to back the church leaders to the hilt. Tom Coburn, the new senator from Oklahoma, has called not just for outlawing abortion but for the death penalty for doctors who break such a law. Another new senator, John Thune of South Dakota, is a creationist. A third, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, has said single mothers should not teach in schools. Evangelicals are already bringing test cases to ensure that school textbooks include creationism and censor gay marriage. AP Voting under the cross Such local efforts have been common for years. What now matter are the country-wide political views of Mr Bush's traditionalist constituency. On the face of it, these Bush-leaning traditionalists come from central casting conservative politically, rigid religiously, willing to mix up church and state. According to Mr Green's survey, nine out of ten of them say that the president should have strong religious beliefs, and two-thirds of them also believe that religious groups should involve themselves in politics. Yet the picture is more complicated than this makes it sound. For instance, in all the religious groups substantial majorities agree that the disadvantaged need government help ?to obtain their rightful place in America?. All favour increasing anti-poverty programmes, even if it means higher taxes. All support stricter environmental regulation. Large majorities say that America should give a high priority to fighting HIV/AIDS abroad. Religious conservatives have been among the strongest backers of intervening in Sudan and increasing AIDS spending in poor countries. If the Bush administration wanted to, it could find plenty of religious support for increased welfare programmes, tougher environmental standards and more foreign aid. The differences between the religious groups are equally striking. The Protestant traditionalists favour less government spending. But all the Catholics?traditionalist, mainline and modernist alike?favour more. Traditionalist evangelicals are usually the odd men out. Fully 81% of them say that religion is important to their political thinking?far more than any other group. They are the only ones to rate cultural issues as more important than economic or foreign-policy ones. They are the most opposed to abortion (though 52% say it should be legal in some circumstances) and the most opposed to gay marriage (though 36% say they support gay rights). They also hold highly distinctive foreign-policy views seven in ten say America has a special role in the world and two-thirds think America should support Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians. He need not be trapped Will the new importance of the traditionalist evangelical vote succeed in driving the president in the direction that many of these voters want? Not necessarily. The variety of conservative religious opinion means that Mr Bush need not be trapped by one important wing of his religious base, even if he will certainly not want to neglect it. For example, the evangelicals' Zionist views are offset by the more even-handed positions of Catholics and mainline Protestants, implying that the president could try to restart the Middle East peace process without risking the wrath of his whole religious constituency. And because the evangelical churches are decentralised, and somewhat leaderless at the national level, it will be hard for any populist to mobilise them against a president they like and respect. Attempts to ram conservative social policies into law look inevitable. They include the federal amendment banning gay marriage, though this is an uphill struggle that failed by 19 votes in the Senate last time round. Moreover, on the eve of the election, Mr Bush came out in favour of civil unions, which more than half the population, including many religious conservatives, favour. They also include extending a ban on ?partial-birth abortion? to cover all third-trimester abortions, and, most important, appointing conservative judges to any Supreme Court vacancies. This week there was a sign of what may be to come when Republicans threatened to strip Senator Arlen Specter of the chairmanship of the committee that oversees Supreme Court nominations after he said that staunch opponents of abortion were unlikely to be confirmed. For opponents of Mr Bush, and also for many socially liberal Republicans, the election results and the trumpeted evangelical ambitions point to a big reversal the victory of aggressive social conservatism over the small-government tradition in which morality is not legislated. It could, indeed, turn out to be something like this, but it need not. The wide variety of different opinions held by Mr Bush's religious supporters give the president, and his new administration, a lot of leeway, if they choose to look for it.
-
All right last one -- then back to Macca Bush's victory heralds ascendancy of religious right By David Domke Special to The Times David Domke E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles George W. Bush has won re-election as president exactly as his campaign planned ? on the strength of his appeal among religious conservatives. The surprise twist in this outcome, though, is that Bush's success drew upon a diverse coalition of religious voters. Four voting trends provide particular insight into the election outcome, and also are suggestive of where the administration and U.S. politics are headed. First, "moral values" ? which is code language for voter opposition to gay marriage and abortion ? was the top concern among presidential voters (named by 22 percent, higher even than terrorism or the economy), according to national exit-polling data. This is a remarkable finding, given that moral values barely registered as a campaign concern in national polls over the past several months. Clearly, religious conservatives turned out to vote in large numbers. Second, anti-gay-marriage initiatives on ballots in 11 states all passed with sizable majorities (Oregon's 57-43 margin was the closest). This undoubtedly worked to the advantage of Bush ? most importantly in Ohio, where support for an initiative banning gay marriage came in at roughly 62 percent overall and at 86 percent among white voters self-identifying as evangelical or "born-again." Third, Bush's support among African Americans was much higher in several key states Tuesday than in 2000. Exit polls indicate that Bush received 16 percent of votes by Ohio blacks (up from 9 percent four years ago) and 13 percent of votes by Florida blacks (up from 7 percent four years ago). Polls consistently show African Americans to be more religiously inclined than the rest of the population, and CBS's Ed Bradley speculated Tuesday night that Bush's opposition to abortion and gay marriage resonated among blacks. Indeed, 61 percent of African Americans in Ohio supported an initiative banning same-sex marriages. Lastly, exit polls also indicate that Bush's support rose from 2000 to 2004 among Catholics (up 5 percentage points to 52 percent) and Jewish Americans (up 6 percentage points to 25 percent). Put simply, people of religious faith gravitated toward Bush, or at least away from his Democratic Party opponent, in greater numbers than in 2000. The merger of politics and conservative faith present in this administration culminates more than three decades of political engagement by U.S. religious conservatives. Ronald Reagan was the first president to be embraced by the religious right, but Bush's resonance with these voters ? and the Republican Party's corresponding alignment with them ? is unprecedented. Indeed, under Bush, the Republican Party has picked up seats in the Senate and House of Representatives in 2002 and Tuesday night, strengthening conservatives' power. The religious right is now the ascendant political force in this nation. In this context, several legislative and judicial developments become plausible. The likelihood of new appointments by Bush to the Supreme Court will provide an opportunity for Roe v. Wade to be revisited. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, with its clear electoral power, almost certainly becomes a central pillar in the Republican agenda. Stem-cell research will remain in limbo, allowed but not encouraged. In foreign policy, the president already consistently evinces a certainty that God's will corresponds with administration policies. Consider this claim by Bush in the third presidential debate "I believe that God wants everybody to be free. That's what I believe. And that's one part of my foreign policy." Such rhetoric is attractive to the religious voters who support Bush and the Republican Party. These individuals have the potential to be a new political coalition in the United States. If this is so, then at least we might hope that Bush and others who seek to fuse faith and policy would recall the words of St. Augustine of Hippo to a student "I wouldn't have you prepare for yourself any way of grasping and holding the truth other than the one prepared by him who, as God, saw how faltering were our steps. That way is, first, humility; second, humility; third, humility; and as often as you ask, I'll tell you, humility." David Domke is an associate professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Washington. He is the author of "God Willing? Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the 'War on Terror,' and the Echoing Press" (Pluto Press, 2004). Copyright
-
One of those evangelicals, my very own sister, called me after the election and said "nah, nah, nah, now we are going to get everything we want and you liberals will get nothing." I told her that wasn't very tolderant and I thought the Bible taught about tolerance. I also asked what she is going to do when her son gets drafted (although he won't go) and she didn't have an answer. Yes, back to Macca and Sam. Hope you are all having a great weekend.
-
Hey Mike and Sam C Whilst it's always a pleasure to have posts from you both, I think I'd rather read about Y*** than Bush. Or watch paint dry !! Religious nutters got Bush back in....and nothing else !! Cheers Sam.
-
Hello Sam hope your doing good!! have a fab weekend!! We had snow flurries last night we might get an inch of snow tonight! it's been very cold here!! brrr!! Hello to everyone! Hope you all have a good weekend!! I'm off till Monday yay! 4 days!! Nice little break!
Greg where are you? Lol!!
-
Hi again Sam C How you can even mention Bush in the same sentence as Blair or our Queen beats me. Bush is semi -literate and must be a total embarrassment to any intelligent American. And I know there are at least 49 Million of those. They're the ones who voted against Bush, heh, heh. Cheers mate. Sam.