12.6.06 @ 12:01AM
Re: John Tabin’s Cold Fusion:
Tabin nailed it. I sure can’t speak for other Libertarian types (I’m of the “small-L” variety), but opposing the hard-nose (religious) right finds me totally and absolutely divorced from the GOP — and No Way I’d ever cozy-up to the demented Democrats. Never! A few I knew and strongly backed some years ago in Alaska, when the Democrats were the fiscally conservative (Bill Sheffield, Hugh Malone, Oral Freeman and Steve Cowper among ‘em) and Republicans the big spenders — a juxtaposition of today’s realities maybe? Like Ted Stevens rivals Robert Byrd in pork, and I’m appalled at the massive change in Don Young. He once was a conservative, believe it or don’t.
No, the Morality Police scare the hell out of me about as much as the Pat Leahy-Teddy Kennedy-Nancy Pelosis, et al. They make my skin crawl with their sanctimonious and pious platitudes and condescension. Thus, exactly where the twain will meet, if at all — that’s a mighty big question!
Damned if I see any resolve, and I’m sure not going to again settle for the “Lesser-of-Evils” either. No way!
One additional point concerning our cojonesless president. My guess is that if he’d not weakened into a Politically Correct “containment” or no-win wrap-up of the mess in Iraq, we’d’ve been out of there already. How he could condone those so-called “insurgents” taking pot shots at our Marines from a mosque and doing Nothing is totally beyond my comprehension. Anyone with even the most marginal recollection of history would agree that the only thing the folks in the Middle East understand is strength. STRENGTH, got it? Dubya and his mickey-mouse McClellens in the Pentagon make me ashamed, and it appears that Dr. Rice has been sufficiently brainwashed by the State Department to have evolved into a terminal blah.
Again, if we’d’ve done this right, perhaps all I’d have to bitch about is Dubya’s exerting his hallow’d First Veto on stem-cells when it should’ve gone to the humongous spending/pork and growth of government, so much under the auspices of the Republicans.
Yeah, we of the semi-libertarian persuasion have “had it” with the wimpy and inept GOP as we have with the goofy, opportunistic Democrats.
Trent Lott or Chris Dodd? Pardon the vernacular, but they and their good buddies make me want to puke.
Color me thoroughly pissed-off as I continue searching for the
next Barry Goldwater.
— Geoff Brandt
(yes, a veteran who voted for Dr. Ron Paul last month)
John Tabin writes “If foreign policy remains the primary fault line in American politics, dovish libertarians may be bound to the left for the foreseeable future”.
The fault in Mr. Tabin’s fault line analysis is that anything fundamentally human is rational. It isn’t. People of all political persuasions, sexes, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, ages, religions, socio-economic status, are overwhelmingly emotional, making virtually all of their decisions emotionally, but then retain the most infinitesimal remainder of conscience to hastily reverse engineer “objective” reasons for their out and out emotional decisions.
Once it is accepted that American political reality is emotional, not rational, the question them becomes what issue generates the most emotional reaction, and given the answer to that question, one can accurately predict individual conclusions and trends. I suggest the most emotional reaction in America today is triggered by any issue of sexual license, be it that of a woman to have sex with a man she does not want to have children with (thus the need for abortion), or that of a man to have sexual relations with another man (thus the need for laws postulating the equivalence of such associations with heterosexual ones), or of any man to do what his bloodstream testosterone suggests might be “fun.”
The real world consequences of non-sexual license, e.g., narcotics legalization, another one of the commandments on the libertarian stone tablets, are only hinted at by Mr. Tabin, see “If there’s one surefire way to make sure America never reforms its drug laws, it’s telling the public that step one in ‘drug reform’ would be to have taxpayers foot the bill for morphine clinics, needles, and the local addict’s relapses.” Thanks to the liberals that Mr. Tabin considers might be allies of libertarians, the tobacco industry pays for advertisements that advocate not using their product, because tobacco might actually result in clipping the three or four final and most Medicare expensive years off the tobacco user’s life. But libertarians insist that there is a real world where your local ShopRite will have shelves stocked with products previously supplied the year before by the Mob, which if used “as intended” will result in your immediate death, rather than some sad emphysema in your early 70s.
Honestly, Mr. Tabin is correct, libertarians and liberals have
more common ground than libertarians and conservatives. But the
reason is because conservatives understand that there is such a
thing as sin, even if many, most and probably all conservatives are
sinners. Libertarians and liberals, on the other hand, insist with
a straight face that there is no such thing as sin, no such thing
as societally determined (or divinely determined) right and wrong,
and thus whatever emotionally pleases, is the way to go.
— Frank Natoli
Newton, New Jersey
The most vocal strain of modern Libertarianism has become more
concerned with lifestyle liberty then traditional economic and
political liberty. This strain of lifestyle Libertarianism is as
much a product of the 1960s counterculture then an outgrowth of von
Hayek and Friedman. You could say it is the fusion of Ayn Rand and
Timothy Leary. Lifestyle Libertarians seem to be quite willing to
sacrifice political and economic liberty so they can enjoy the
triumvirate of drugs, sex and rock n’ roll. Ultimately, this
disregard for fundamental liberty for the sake of living the
libertine lifestyle is corrosive to true liberty. I would rather
live in the “repressed” 1950s social climate and have meaningful
freedom then sacrifice my economic and political liberty for the
sake of a few passing carnal pleasures.
— Jerrold Goldblatt
It would have been interesting to hear John Tabin take on immigration. Liberals [the progressives] favor open borders. And so do many of the libertarians that I come across, but for different reasons.
Leftists are self-hating. They feel guilty about America’s prosperity and power and have a irrational fear of the envy of other. Liberals would not mind submerging the nation with Third Worlders; it would be a way of assuaging their troubled souls. This is the same mental disorder that is afflicting the elite of Europe where many of their elite are actually cheering the prospect of the continent becoming Eurabia. Go figure.
The libertarians, on the other hand, idolized the individual and place individual rights over country — and often over family and God, too. No society can be built on libertarian principles. God created man as a social being, and that’s something the Cato Institute can’t change.
Liberals and libertarians what a match. I say let them have each
— Peter Skurkiss
Re: Joel Himelfarb’s Talking to Syria and Iran:
Congratulations on this fine tale of 30 years of serial woe by
the U.S. I have a friend, a psychologist who specializes in the
treatment of alcoholics and drug addicts and she told me once that
a definition of insanity is to repeat behaviors that have failed
while expecting a different result this time around. By this
definition, America’s efforts to deal peacefully with Syria and
Iran are completely, howling naked at the moon insane. Calling the
likes of James Baker “realists” for promoting diplomacy with the
most untrustworthy, ruthless and worthless people on the planet is
the most bizarre and nonsensical act of ridiculous rubbish I have
seen in many a year. Instead of these “realists” I would much
prefer to hear from the dreamers who think in terms of a laser
guided bomb from a stealth bomber falling unheralded through the
ceiling of the master bedroom of the presidential palace in
Damascus. Now that is my idea of a wakeup call. If America wants to
send a message to Syria then that is the most direct and
unambiguous available — all the diplomats can take a holiday and
take their kids to the beach, they won’t be needed any more. The
day I hear that this has happened will be the day that America’s
problems in the Middle East melt away faster than a snowball in the
middle of July.
— Christopher Holland
Re: William Tucker’s Democracy in a Tribal World:
“If we can put them under the glare of world opinion, they may
learn to get along better” — that’s a big “if,” followed by an
unrealistic “may.” The world doesn’t expect much of that corner of
the world, and most would rather they just keep fighting —
especially the “realists.” Why get along when killing each other
produces such excellent results, like the U.S. leaving? Until oil
becomes a much less valuable commodity, the possibilities are
endless. People seem to forget that our problem is mainly with
dictators. I respect Mr. Tucker’s cynicism more than his high
— M. Scott Horn
Mr. Tucker’s essay is an interesting, thought-provoking piece. It reads well and one finds no serious disagreement until one comes to the language suggesting that letting the Muslim world know that America casts a “nuclear umbrella” over Israel so as to save that nation. That thesis fails for two reasons. America’s left has demonstrated to the world countless times that submission rather than conflict is the preferred solution. They caused a genocide in Southeast Asia and are about to unleash a similar holocaust in Iraq by a precipitous surrender there. The majority Muslims will kill the minority and they both will kill Kurds who in turn, etc., etc.
So a nuclear umbrella is good only as long as rightists are in power and we know the cowards that comprise the present day American population will vote them out and the leftists in at the first sign of any difficulty. The nuclear threat is immediately removed and we begin negotiations of what part of Israel must be surrendered to the Arabs. Democrats see Jews as donors and nothing else. So the “nuclear umbrella” is an oxymoron under any circumstances. Then to be complete, let us look at the Muslim side of the coin. These people truly believe they will get 72 virgins (always assuming there are that many left somewhere in the world) if they die murdering innocents in the name of Allah. So why wouldn’t the fanatic, ignorant men that lead these countries see an nuclear exchange as a consummation devoutly to be wished?
If we follow Mr. Tucker’s plan, the people of Israel might want
to begin leaving that poor beleaguered nation in droves first thing
— Jay W. Molyneaux
Re: Jay D. Homnick’s Pastor Primavera:
You are being way too kind to Rick Warren. As his co-religionist
I can assure you that he is simply an egomaniacal hack who will say
anything or do anything in order to obtain face time with the
Almighty (Larry King) and flack his abominable books.
— Steve Gingerich
Battle Ground, Washington
A big “amen!” to Mr. Homnick’s fine article. Regrettably, as an evangelical it seems that I hear more “sermons” from the pulpit regarding the topics of the environment, poverty, racism, and AIDS than I do regarding scripture itself. If such malpractice occurred in other professions licenses would be revoked.
What is especially irksome to me is that in such sermons often the debate is so framed that there is no debate to be had. For example, I’ve heard from the pulpit that global warning is a scientific fact and that our response to it should be thus and such. Excuse me, a scientific fact? What gave the preacher the right to claim that? Insofar as I know he has no scientific training beyond the typical college graduation requirement of an introductory course in kiddy chem., baby bio, or football physics. And he hasn’t studied climatology beyond listening to the evening weatherman tell us things we don’t understand or care about. Nevertheless, there he was proclaiming from the pulpit — yes, the pulpit — that a hypothesis was no longer open for debate.
Legal work should be performed by lawyers, doctors should
practice medicine, pilots should fly planes, barbers should barber,
candlestick makers should make candlesticks, and preachers should
preach from the scriptures.
— R. Trotter
Thank you, Mr. Homnick, for your most excellent column. As the Pastor of a Southern Baptist Church, I understand how difficult it is to walk the line between espousing legitimate moral opinion and overt personal advocacy from the pulpit. I have long admired Rick Warren and his success at Saddleback in bringing people to the Lord. I do not, however, agree with his recent posturing on the issue of global climate change, primarily because I believe that much, if not most, of what masquerades as environmental activism has less to do with the environment than with controlling the behavior of others for social purposes.
The purpose of the church of Jesus Christ is to proclaim the Gospel. When people accept the salvation of Jesus Christ then their actions are to be changed in accordance with their new nature. I remember environmental activist Jeremy Rifkin, who is not to my knowledge a follower of Jesus Christ, suggesting a few years ago that if the world is to survive, it will be because people have begun to adopt the standards of self-denial and concern for others such as those manifest in the church of first century Christianity.
On the issue of whether Rick Warren should give a forum to Senator Obama, I will suggest that if God is not in it, it will soon become apparent. I remember when the Clintons visited with Pope John Paul II a decade or so ago, after the meeting they were queried about their conversation with the Pope on the issue of abortion. President Clinton made a comment the gist of which was that their discussion had helped bring about a better understanding of each other’s views which had helped to bring them closer together. A few short moments later a spokesman for the Pope interrupted the press conference to issue a statement to the effect that if the Clinton’s and the Pope had come closer together on the issue of abortion it was not because the Pope’s pro-life, anti-abortion position had changed one little bit.
The people in Rick Warren’s church always have the option of voting with their feet if they do not like what they hear from Senator Obama, or believe that he has acted inappropriately.
The bedrock foundation of our Constitutional Republic is that
there is a level playing field for all points of view to be heard
but that government does not take and active role in the promotion
of one religion over the other. Having said that I also believe
strongly that a government such as ours was founded on Christian
principles and cannot survive without our recognizing that the
phrase “One Nation Under God” establishes an irrefutable and
irreplaceable moral foundation for all that we do. We will have a
Christian nation in truth, when those who profess to know Jesus as
Lord and Savior of their lives begin to live that truth, and demand
adherence to that standard both at the ballot box and in the Halls
— Reverend Joseph Phillips
Red River, New Mexico
I agree with Mr. Homnick completely. However, I think the issue goes even deeper. Mr. Obama’s main solution to curtail new AIDS cases is to distribute more condemns!! To allow this brilliant and revolutionary (heavy sarcasm here) idea to be put forth from his pulpit, this is also an endorsement for “safe sex.” I have yet to find in the Bible a passage or verse that allows for safe sex! God makes it so simple: if you are not married, don’t have sex. And if you are married, only have sex with your spouse. The guarantee for stopping the spread of AIDS!
In other regions that have put abstinence into practice, the
drop in new AIDS cases has been dramatic. God knew what He was
talking about. Imagine that!
Thanks to Jay Homnick for a discouraging word — finally — about the pasta driven pastor, Rick Warren. Given his avoirdupois, Warren could hardly have chosen Starvation as his gig — so it was AIDS.
God does move in mysterious ways. A couple of months back,
“Pastor Rick” went to some little African country to spread the
Word. As he left, secure in the knowledge of doing the work of the
Lord, his helicopter blew the roof off their only school. The
article did not say who replaced it — or if it was replaced.
— Diane Smith
South San Francisco, California
Sorry, Rick Warren’s church is not in Florida. You’ll probably receive hundreds of these.
Enjoyed your article and concur with your comments.
Re: Quin Hillyer’s Please Torture Me:
Current interrogation techniques are less tough than the methods the U.S. military uses to train its own personnel. No interrogator wants a long stay in Fort Leavenworth and an interview by Larry King. If I had to chose, I would take the former.
BTW, I have been unimpressed by Sen. Lindsey Graham ever since
the Clinton impeachment hearings in 1998, when then Representative
Graham played it just a bit too cool.
— Name Withheld
Former U.S. Army interrogator in Iraq
Mr. Hillyer, you have been waist deep in politics at various levels long enough to know how people like Sen. Graham get their minds changed. I am perfectly prepared to take you word for the “real” issue that is stuck in the Senator’s craw. I certainly do not know.
I would suggest, however, that the solution to the problem of getting Sen. Graham to at least quit fighting the Haynes nomination has been available for more than enough time to have accomplished the task. Unfortunately, we currently have a president that refuses to use common political practices accepted on both sides of the aisle to confront his opponents. Lindsey Graham has had numerous things that he has wanted the White House to accommodate him on. I would ask you, Quin, how many of those things has he lost White House co-operation on due to his intransigence?
It has long been obvious that Sen. Graham is little more than an obedient puppy dog to Sen. McCain. Is it really McCain that is behind the denial of a judgeship for Mr. Haynes? If not, then why hasn’t the President used the many pressures available to him to cause McCain to rein in Graham?
I find it simply incredible that the President of the United
States cannot perform a successful “come to Jesus” intervention on
an ambitious Senator of his own party. I could list for you a whole
plethora of political leaders in both parties, starting with FDR
and coming forward, that would have long since dispensed with this
problem. I am sincerely hoping that the good people of South
Carolina will solve this problem for our country at the very next
— Ken Shreve
Miss Lindsey Graham, handmaiden to Senator McCain, has set her
sights on the position of Attorney General in a McCain
Administration. Poor ol’ Lindsey has fallen far since her days on
the House Impeachment Committee. She used to be a good
Conservative. That went by the way when she became a Prancing,
Preening Senator with a very large ego. I mourn our loss.
— Judy Beumler
No. The sun will rise in the west 10 years before RINO Lindsey
Graham will even think about doing the right thing.
— John Gridley
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
DRECK THE HALLS
Re: James Bowman’s review of Deck the Halls:
James, Jimmy, the Jimster, Jimbolaya…lighten up! I think the problem with “you critics” (I’m lumping you all together), is you lose sight of some of the simple pleasures in life. Any Average Joe, watching a commercial for Deck the Halls, can surmise that they are not going to see an epic motion picture, should they decide to view Deck the Halls. They are going to see a Christmas-time-of-year, slapstick comedy. Once the Average Joe sees the commercial, he is either content with that notion and will consider going to see said movie…or, he will not, perhaps looking for more substance, as you obviously were.
Deck the Halls is a goofy, run of the mill comedy, and
they make that pretty obvious in their commercials. I can picture
you copiously taking notes in a dark theater and noting things like
“number of Xmas lights unrealistic,” “power source not sufficient
for number of lights,” “sleigh scene would never happen in real
life,” “Danny Devito’s wife way too hot for Danny Devito, unless
she married for money…and he appears to have no money,” “valuable
vase would Never be sitting in the open such as it is,”
“note to self: check to see if any real trees were harmed in the making of this motion picture,” etc.
I don’t believe Deck the Halls camouflages itself to be something that it is not. However, “you critics” (there I go again) have a way of constantly dishing out this “if ONLY I had made this movie, I WOULD HAVE,” type attitude. If you had made it, it I’m sure it would have been a much deeper and much more boring affair. I imagine you “don’t get” the Three Stooges, either. Perhaps you should stick to critiquing European art house flicks…
I saw Deck the Halls with my son and it was fun —not
rocket science, just fun.
Hollywood, running short of sizzling ideas for Christmas movies?
May I submit a few royalty-free suggestions:
Start Trek: Ebeneezer Spoc
— David Govett
Re: Sandra Todd’s letter (under “Avoiding Failure”) in Reader Mail’s Losing Iraq:
Sandra Todd thinks that claiming that any Democrat wanted to redeploy the troops in Iraq to Okinawa is a “hateful and sinister thing to say.” Yet on the June 18, 2006 Meet the Press, John Murtha did just that. In fact here is just what he said;
“We can go to Okinawa. We, we don’t have — we can redeploy there almost instantly.”
Hateful and sinister indeed.
No wonder she wants us to “just shut up shut up shut up” as that would prevent us from pointing out the obvious fallacy of her position.
If having the simple truth pointed out to Ms. Todd irritates her
this much already, then she is in for a long two years.
— Scotty Uhrich
Dear Sandra: Your wonderfully incoherent rant sent chills down my
back as I contemplate the reality that fools like you now control
Congress. You are factually incorrect (or as you might put it:
“REALLY REALLY REALLY SERIOUSLY WRONG!!!!!!”) on a number of
issues, specifically this one: senior Democrat and all around
corrupt thug John Murtha specifically advocated redeploying the
forces in Iraq to Okinawa in an interview with Tim Russert. So tell
me, do you seriously believe that Okinawa is anywhere near any
Iraqi border that you claim noted plagiarist (and Hair Club for Men
Spokesperson) Joe Biden has been “SCREAMING” about? Oh, you do? I’m
not surprised; your Senator, Ron Wyden (ahemâ€¦
Democrat), couldn’t find Bosnia on a map either. God help this
— Steve Gingerich
Battle Ground, Washington
Oh my gosh, where has this lady been. Murtha is the one wanting to
redeploy to Okinawa. I guess you only watch the MSM so you don’t
hear what the Democrats REALLY say, only what they want you to
hear. We have not won a war since WWII and if we try to finish this
one being PC we won’t win it either, I don’t care who is running
— Elaine Kyle
Foreign Policy, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Religion, Abortion, Environment, Books, Hollywood, Movies, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, Israel, NATO, Africa, Libertarianism, Immigration, Alaska, Oil, Medicare
Sign up for our weekly newsletter:
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
By John Corry
By Mark Steyn
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
By Mark Steyn
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
By Brit Hume
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.