- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
Another Perspective
Offensive Conservatives
Scanning through the headlines, trying to find one that does not contain the phrase "president-elect" -- does anyone remember George W. Bush being called anything but "Governor" until his inauguration? -- I happened across a piece from the BBC humorously titled, "Uncertain times for US Religious Right." In it, the left muses on its favorite dream; that humbled by defeat in the last two elections, "Christian conservatives may find themselves working alongside Democrats" on certain social issues.
BBC's Matthew Wells hopefully focuses on the "tension between the narrow social agenda of Christian conservatives and the broader, more pragmatic 'low tax' wing of the party." Well, I hate to disappoint our British brethren, but the "religious right" has never been more certain that its cause is just; given that the "narrow social agenda" we defend originates far higher up the food chain than Washington, D.C. And the events of November 4 will only make true conservatives even more determined to fight for it.
We lost this election not because this agenda wasn't important to voters; it's that their pocketbooks were more so. One has only to look to statewide elections where bans on same-sex marriage passed, to know that even in California, the radical left agenda did not hold sway across the board. The thought that a big win by Democrats will make the conservative movement dry up and blow away is as laughable as the notion that 20 years of Reagan/Bush decimated the liberal agenda.
Of course our challenge is much greater than that of the left because of the stranglehold they still retain on the media, the public education system, and especially the courts. As we are seeing in California, even when the people exercise their right to self govern by amending their Constitution, liberals seek to circumvent this process through their willing allies on the bench.
But such efforts will only serve to further strengthen our movement and commitment, especially as our very identity as Americans comes under assault. We are called conservatives because we seek to preserve that which every American should hold dear: our founding document, the U.S. Constitution.
This is why many conservatives never fully supported John McCain; we remember his political free speech-busting Campaign Reform Bill. And although he naively signed it believing that the Supreme Court would strike it down, President Bush deserves credit for appointing our current Chief Justice who, in negating some of its most offending aspects last year, wrote:
"[W]hen it comes to defining what speech qualifies as the functional equivalent of express advocacy subject to such a ban -- the issue we do have to decide -- we give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship. The First Amendment's command that 'Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech' demands at least that."
Again, many think that because McCain and Obama never fully discussed other issues important to conservatives, these will somehow magically fall off the political table. Not a chance. Just as Chief Justice Roberts calls the First Amendment a "command," so do we believe that its protection of religious freedom is sacrosanct.
Barack Obama is notoriously supportive of abortion in all of its vile forms. He has promised that "The first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom Of Choice Act." As we all know, FOCA would erase all existing bans on abortion, and worse, force all those whose religious convictions now prevent the government from making them participants in this heinous practice, to toe the murderous line. The repercussions of this would be disastrous, even to Americans allowed to be born, as explained by Bill Donahue of the Catholic League:
"[R]eligious liberty is enshrined in the First Amendment and cannot be trespassed upon lightly, and certainly not by abortion zealots. Those who support FOCA must realize that if Catholic hospitals are ever required to perform abortions, the bishops will close every one of them; no one would be hurt more than the poor."
The left must realize that we will fight legislation like FOCA with all our strength. For the past eight years we have been on defense; especially on the War in Iraq and the economy. But conservatives are never more united and focused than when our Constitution and our values are under direct assault, as they will most certainly be in the next four years.
Let us take the offensive in the culture wars and leave the navel-gazing and hand-wringing to those paid to do it. Let us not worship the cult of personality as the Democrats do, but let our positions on the issues lead us instead. Let us, as Ronald Reagan said, be known for communicating great ideas.
In closing his article with a burst of wishful thinking, the Beeb writer opines that if Obama "steers clear of a social and cultural policy agenda, preferring to focus all efforts on the economy and foreign affairs, the Religious Right will have nothing much to react against." Those on the left assume that they will continue to have conservatives in a defensive position; let us prove them very wrong.
Comments
Leave a Comment
- Feeding the Beast
- The Right of Conscience in the Age of Obama
- Obama's Vision Through History
JC Allen| 11.19.08 @ 6:49AM
I'm a Log Cabin Republican, and I believe that our movement went to far demanding marriage and instead should've stuck with civil unions. While reading your article I was surprised to see an ad for same-sex wedding rings. How ironic...
J David| 11.19.08 @ 9:36AM
I am interested to know how one proposes to do away (or even cut back on) with pervasive commie-lib MSM, liberal education, and liberal ownership - outright - of all unions, including gov't workers at every level. Those who most need alternative information from mainstream propaganda are least likely to be exposed to it, and are at the same time not paying taxes and are generally recieving some entitlement from gov't.
Eugene Debbs| 11.19.08 @ 10:54AM
Re: "Pervasive commie-lib MSM"
If conservatives really wanted to win the "culture war," they would cultivate within their movement people who make sober, sharp, clear arguments.
Conservatives, especially including social conservatives, in my view, can be competitive in the "marketplace of ideas."
But calling names (communist, terrorist, etc.) makes you sound fearful, shallow, ignorant, and, worst of all, more interested turning opponents into enemies. It's divisive, foolish, and (thank God, in America) doomed to failure.
You should start by dumping Limbaugh and Hannity. They don't make arguments. Instead, they use sarcasm, anger, cynicism, and ad hominem attack. As leaders, they inspire conservatives (like J David) to present conservative ideas in this way. The result is that you all end up sounding like angry, resentful losers.
dave| 11.19.08 @ 11:12AM
If I sound like an "angry, resentful" loser, then it's because I am.
I'm angry and resentful because:
My children are growing up in a country where activists, in the street and on the bench, are cramming homosexual "marriage" down our throats;
My children are growing up in a country that is preoccupied with the approval of foreigners who very transparently do not have our national best interests at heart;
My children are growing up in a country that increasingly wants to wrap its collective lips on the government teat;
My children are growing up in a country that's more worried about the self-esteem of students than it is their ability to think critically and succeed; and,
My children are growing up in a country that just recently elected a socialist instead of an American war hero.
Angry and resentful? You betcha'.
Alan Brooks| 11.19.08 @ 11:18AM
I would like to make sober, sharp, clear arguments, but how can you discuss matters in a nation with no morality? Where Michael (so sorry to pick on a black pedophile) Jackson can molest not one but TWO boys.
We just cannot discuss these things, can we? Kiss old fashioned morality goodbye and say hello to a brave new world.
Speedbump| 11.19.08 @ 11:30AM
Hmmm...I see "advice" being given to conservatives to dump Limbaugh and Hannity...I think the worst thing conservatives could or should do would be to follow advice from Liberals...I'm unfamiliar with the Mr. Debbs who posts here, but his namesake is mercifully dead, and was one who represented the complete antithesis of what America was founded to be...
If we do something a liberal doesn't like, then we are most assuredly doing the right thing...no pun intended...
Becky| 11.19.08 @ 11:51AM
"Hmmm...I see "advice" being given to conservatives to dump Limbaugh and Hannity..."
On more than one thread and under more than one name. I sense a fake movement afoot. Perhaps the astroturfers didn't lose their jobs after the election.
Eugene Debbs | 11.19.08 @ 11:57AM
It's not "advice," folks. It's called civil political discourse. Believe it or not, it happens. Nost so much around here, where people with opposing views are dismissed as terrorists. But elsewhere. Liberals and conservatives exchange ideas and opinions.
Dave --
If you choose to be a "resentful loser" on behalf of your children, it's fine by me. As for "your children," whom you site in your post, if you raise them with solid values, none of these things you mention can hurt them. Your fear of "foreigners" and people who are different from you is depressing to read about.
Obama Rules| 11.19.08 @ 12:30PM
dave,
I've been angry and resentful for the past eight years as well, and here's why:
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where "freedom" and "liberty" were mere words for the Republican elite; gays, minorities, immigrants, liberals need not apply.
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where the government threatened to decide what a grown woman could or couldn't do with her body.
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where conservative Americans could give a hoot in hell about the rest of the world that they still pretended to "lead." I ask you, how can you lead if you really do not give a crap about our allies' opinions?
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where 800 billion dollars are wasted on a bogus war "against terrorism" and "for freedom," while millions of Americans live in poverty right here at home.
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where investing in America is considered socialist, but investing in Iraq is considered "patriotic."
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where the American people "elected" Dubya Bush, an elitist, coke-snortin' second-hand prez, who pretended to be "just one of us folks" but in reality has no connection to the average American.
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where questioning the government and the president is labeled anti-American and un-patriotic.
I was angry and resentful because my child was growing up in a country where a black person running for president was/is called "arab," "terrorist," "negro," "muslim," and "socialist."
Angry and resentful? You betcha. But, after eight long years of misery and pain, America has again realized its dream and become a place of hope and light for the rest of the world.
dave| 11.19.08 @ 12:38PM
Eugene,
My children are being raised with "solid values", and not by any village. I resent that they, unlike my parents and grandparents, will have to live in a country filled with ignorant voters who have not a clue as to what constitutes American exceptionalism. Your suggestion that I "fear" foreigners and those "different" from me is a regurgitated leftist shaming mechanism that is completely ineffective--at least as to me. What I fear is the intentional shaping of this country into a secular humanist state characteristically marked by oppression and tryanny.
And by the way, you should be depressed. As the author notes, the culture wars ain't going away. Not until we've finally won.
dave| 11.19.08 @ 12:46PM
As if on cue, a perfect example of what I term an ignorant voter with no appreciation of American exceptionalism appears in the form of "obama rules." What a load.
Stan redmond| 11.19.08 @ 12:54PM
Must Obama Rules use the tired old "oh yeah, well you guys did this..." It's week, pathetic, and shows lack of debate skills.
Anyway. McCain lost because he's McCain. It was like the Kerry vs. Bush 2004 election. Kerry only got votes because he wasn't GW bush. Not because people liked Kerry. McCain only got votes because he's not Obama. There was an incredible amount of nose holding to vote for a man who's policies are only slightly right of Obama. McCain sponsered MASSIVE limits on free speech and supported decriminalizing breaking FEDERAL LAW with his immigration amnesty bill. Palin prevented a huge landslide because she was the only fighter in this match. McCain was weak and pathetic trying to take the imaginary high road.
Big Elk| 11.19.08 @ 1:33PM
And, this nonsense from a Limey who worships a parasitic "royal" family, and whose crappy little island country is fast becoming an outpost of moon god allah worshiping mohammedans.
Marc Jeric| 11.19.08 @ 1:57PM
"Dump Limbaugh and Hannity" - no, Mr. Dobbs! Their voices are the voices of reason breaking through the cloudy mists of marxism emanating from our MSM!
Speedbump| 11.19.08 @ 3:08PM
I am angry and resentful that people claim to have been subjected to eight years of tyranny, yet if things were as tyrannical as they claim, then they themselves would have actually been consigned to a gulag somewhere, instead of being as free as they are...(Hasn't happened in this country - yet)
I am angry and resentful that someone is actually neurotic enuogh to believe that the government has decreed what they can do with their body (Hasn't happened in this country - yet)...
I am angry and resentful that there are people stupid enough to not understand the truth about who is and is not our ally...
I am angry and resentful that someone is so stupid as to not understand that government spending is not "investment", but rather is a short circuit on creation of wealth...
I am angry and resentful that people with severe cases of Bush-Derangement Syndrome are still allowed to walk around free without having to get professional help for their neuroses...
I am angry and resentful that someone in this country was allowed to grow up being so stupid as to not know the difference between 'questioning the government' and blathering insanity...
I am angry and resentful that someone is so stupid as to not know that the color of one's skin means nothing to Conservatives, but rather the fact that they have been surrounded and molded by marxists, terrorists, and raving lunatic theologins is indeed crucial, and not only do they then hide behind the 'race' thing, but cannot produce one example of Conservatives refering to race...
Angry, You bet!! Especially now that America will no longer be the free republic it once was, but will become at best a socialist democracy, and at worst a marxist state. What really angers me is that someone actually perpetrates that twisted mindset on their own child...Where is CYS when you need them???
The truth of the matter is, whatever the left is accusing you of is precisely what they are guilty of...
blotto| 11.19.08 @ 3:18PM
To Obama Rules: #1 Cite one example where an American's rights , freedoms and liberty were curtailed. I have no idea where you were going with the second part of this vapid claptrap.
2. If you believe that killing an innocent baby is means you are evolved or is a "right" then you have a poor view on human life. If a baby is nothing more than throw-away tissue then who or what is next? Anyway, where is the right of abortion found in the Constitution or Bill of Rights? Also, can you really defend killing a baby and feel good about yourself. Lastly, if Roe were overturned, it would become a state and a "people's" (your favorite constituency) decision.
3. We did form a coalition with our allies in the fight with terror. So what are you talking about. There were 35 nations at one time or another in Iraq. And again, as a lib, did not the rescue of millions of people from a homicidial maniac who murdered children, raped women and butchered anyone for fun, sound like the right thing to do?
4. Apples and oranges there guy. Do you believe there is no war on terror? If so then who bombed and murdered 3,000 Ameicans on 9/11? Not counting 20 million illegal immigrants the number in poverty is rather small more likily 10-15 million. Now they have all those wonderful Liberal safety programs Medicaid, SS, FDIC, Sect 8 housing, WIC, etc to live off of while we work so don't go there. Many of the poor stay poor because they get free everything. Moreover, and I will give you this, the money to fight the WAR on TERROR is deficit spending.. But we have not had another attack on our soil since we started.
5. OMG find a dictionary and figure out what socialism/socialist is before you use this argument. If you do not believe that "spreading the wealth" is not a socialist theme, then we have nothing more to debate.
6. Whooa buddy. You just killed your whole reason for being here: you just elected a coke snorting, drug taking, president elect.
7. Geez you really hate America. Dissent is fine but if you think what has been going on since GWB was elected has been dissent then you are drinking too much Soros' KoolAid. You folks have spent the last seven years tearing apart our nation, disparaging our military (Durbin, Murtha), leaking sensitive intelligence, and impugning our president and the administration and hiding behind the 1st Amendment like the cowards you are.
8. Here we go again. Cite an example of each.... Okay go to Kos, Huffington or MoveOn for help. And if he is not Muslim then go ask him to release his birth certificate... Why did he attend a Muslim school in Indonesia? Blah blah... If you align yourself with a terrorist like Ayers then you are a terrorist enabler or at least an apologist... Take you pick.
9. What misery you pain in the ass? What misery? Until the financial collapse caused by Raines, Dodd, and Franks, Reno, Coumo, Clinton and originally Carter, we had seven years of outstanding growth...
And to Eugene Debbs-go away. How you can use that name here is a sign of your patent foolishness. Go troll Huffington or Kos.
David| 11.19.08 @ 4:11PM
To Blotto and some others: Don't bother countering Eugene Debbs point for point. It is a waste of time because to him, like most liberals, facts don't matter. Take his comment on abortion: To claim that is what a women is doing to "her own body" is the height of ignorance.
I can say this for Republicans and the right, we all want Obama to do well for the sake of our country and children. Contrast the Republicans reaction after this election to what the left has said about Bush for 8 long years. The left didn't and doesn't care if we lose in Iraq, if the economy tanks, or what bad happens to us when a Republican is in the White House because that increases the chances of wins by Democrats.
Louis Jenkins| 11.19.08 @ 5:23PM
The argument that a right to privacy pales in comparison to a right to life. Google "fetus" and find out when the unborn heart begins to beat and send life giving blood to all parts of its unborn body. Find out when the unborn's nervous system begins to function, when the unborn begins to move, and yes, when it begins to suck its thumb. We're not writing about a parasite that needs to be removed from the human body. My opinion on when life begins is not above my pay grade. A job classification is not needed. The aborted unborn is more than discarded medical waste! Can any society call itself moral or upright when the defenseless are canned in the name of "privacy" and at the same time pay lip service about the rights of the homeless, the poor, and the starving?
Nommin| 11.19.08 @ 6:27PM
David wrote:
"The left didn't and doesn't care . . . what bad happens to us when a Republican is in the White House because that increases the chances of wins by Democrats."
On the Fox forums I've read posts by conservatives planning to evade taxes or establish a barter economy to undermine the government in hopes this will turn voters to Republicans. Pretty unlikely that will go very far or accomplish very much either. Probably 99.9999% of the population wants the country to prosper.
Alan Brooks| 11.19.08 @ 6:49PM
I am a social conservative who thinks Obama will, like Clinton, out-flank you all. To hell with being nice, I hate Commies and libertarians alike.
I curse Daphne Kenward, may Israel grind it in her face.
I do agree with American exceptionalism because America is the most bourgeois nation.
Obama will manipulate his opponents gloriously and be re-elected.
Eugene Debbs| 11.19.08 @ 6:52PM
David --
Your last post is a perfect example of the kind of simplistic rhetoric I complained about earlier.
Reexamine my posts, David: I've said nothing about abortion. I am, in fact, opposed to abortion (like many liberals).
I know that doesn't fit into the template you all learned listening to Sean Hannity, but I'm sorry if the world's more complicated than you expect.
As for the rest of you, some of whom managed to be more interesting and civil than others:
I don't think we're in a "culture war" at all. It is in the nation of western culture to be in conflict over the relative weight of individual rights versus the need of the community for order. There's nothing new or shocking in these coils, believe me.
What is new is this:
Conservatism used to be the home of civil discourse -- and actually of intellectual elitism in this country.
Too often now conservatism is just another name for false populism and shallow, unthinking patriotism.
I actually love Limbaugh's radio program. But many of you have forgotten that Rush is a satirist and an entertainer, not a philosopher or guru.
For philosophers I'd recommend some of you begin with Marcus Aurelius and remember that it is wise to be a thing to its proper use.
Part of the problem with the virulent strand of anti-intellectualism among conservatives is that it's seriously resulting in a brain drain. Why should an intellectually curious young conservative hang out with people who dismiss science, education, journalism, reading -- indeed, any intellectual activity whatsoever, as a communist conspiracy?
And I'm not just giving "advice." Like most people interested in the intellectual health of our public discourse, I see the robust participation of conservatives and liberals as essential.
I'm surprised there aren't more conservatives who are so confident of their argumentative purpose and philosophical strength. What I hear around here is fear, paranoia and insecurity more than anything else.
And don't mistake me for Obama Rules. I'm Debbs. Eugene Debbs. I'm speak for myself only.
Alan Brooks| 11.19.08 @ 6:57PM
Um, in case any simpletons don't know how a social conservative can like Obama, think deeply. Re-read last post.
And may Israel break Daphne Kenwards heart to pieces with its victory.
Michael L. Hauschild| 11.19.08 @ 7:01PM
Sorry Debbs, gonna keep Sean and Rush (and you) on my listening/reading queue. Will, however skip over J. David.
Where is John Gault?| 11.19.08 @ 10:52PM
Eugene:
I find you to be a thoughtful, well spoken poster to this website, and I would at any time be willing to speak with you on line or in person due to your respectful, yet inciteful challenges to persons who have not thoroughly thought through their position. Unfortunately, posting to a political site has become the equivalent of "wiping one's self" ,to use the course vernacular. Typically these posts are not well thought out, and persons tend to attack others who don't share their viewpoint. My wife refers to Fox News as the "Yelling Channel", and this type of MMA style discourse has become very popular, both on the Television and Internet.
However thoughtful citizens can disagree, and many valid points about how potentially harmful the incomming presidental administration may be to our collective way of life can not be ignored. Real change might have been picking persons NOT from the last Democratic Adminstration, persons who will bring "failed policies" to an already damaged system. Perhaps persons who were successful in private ventures, not those dependent on Political patronage might have been more thoughtful choices.
The economy is in free fall in SoCal right now, with many businesses seeing 20-60 drops in sales volume. The retail carnage may be in full swing by next February, sales forcasts are for the worst Christmas retail period since they started keeping records. Predators offering 20% APR "Bridge Loans" to Unsavy small business owners trying to make payroll will not improve the situation, just delay the pain.
The wholesale expansion of the Federal Government into the everyday lives of most American will probably not improve the lives of those Americans, as massive quantities of New Deal spending with nothing to show clearly illustrate.
I should be no wonder that if 10 persons are invited to dinner, all 10 eat "each according to their needs", but 1-3 pays, and a forth offers the tip, "each according to his ability", that after a while, the 4 may desire not to eat out, or look for different dining partners.
I hope that my future livelyhood, financial security and abilities are not to be spent supporting those who have no desire to earn their success, but loot mine. Government assistance should have always been at most a "hand up, not a hand out".
Perhaps when the government notices that the Producers have all disappeared, and the 7 revolt, as they have no more "free lunch", will the cold reality be evident.
Even in the following writings of this prevous poster to this website, in October of this year", which to some might appear as "non lucid ravings" may actually be an accurate 5 year macro view of how things could become.
“Obama will get elected by the majority of people that now sucks the government teat; that is, the politically-well-connected wealthy at the top, the protected class of unionized workers (at every level), and the forever dysfunctional poor at the bottom. The middle-class employees and small businessmen, who labor daily and are the economic engine of this country, will become (in fact, have already become) the cash cows that will be fleeced to support an ever-expanding government Leviathan. Therefore, the productive economic sectors, from which the extorted money is extracted, will contract dramatically. We will see intractable unemployment approaching double digits, where it will remain, as it has in Eurabia. Urban America will become like France, with uncontrollable banlieues of pathetic, disaffected minorities and illegal immigrants. Any large city in America will be like a third world hellhole. The general standard of living of every American will plummet.
Those who can, will flee the states that harbor large population centers, made virtually uninhabitable by the thieving and reprobate Democrats, and seek out the mostly unsettled western regions to escape the social, political, and economic pathologies that have now overwhelmed this country. This will be necessary, due to the fact that any Republican living in a blue state will be targeted and stripped of their financial resources to feed the beast of the ever larger number of welfare state recipients.”
“If there is any likelihood of the continuation of what was once considered the American ideal, it will be in the aftermath of such a migration.
It remains to be seen if the result of all this will be liberty's last stand on earth. In the best of circumstances, we will become a fragmented, Balkanized nation of isolated and disparate communities, fighting to protect (or destroy) whatever freedom remains. National unity will be a pipe-dream. It may be that hope for a positive American future will now become a distant memory”
Depressing, but possibly exactly true:
I conclude by quoting one Guideon Tucker, 18th Century New York State Judge:
"No Man's life, liberty, or Property is safe while the legislature is in session"
Remember, with 60 Senators, a house Majority, and a President from the same party, ANYTHING GOES.
Where is John Gault?
ArmyGirl| 11.19.08 @ 11:04PM
The bottom line is this: Liberals are more comfortable with the killings of 7 million innocent, defenseless babies a year than they are losing 4 thousand dedicated soldiers who died with honor. A lot of the comments on this blog are related to Iraq and how we should be taking care of our own right here. How about we start with not killing so many babies here in the USA. That's taking care of your own.
Eugene Debbs| 11.19.08 @ 11:29PM
ArmyGirl --
Whenever I hear someone say "The bottom line is..." I expect something simplistic and reductive to follow. That will still be true tomorrow.
Where is John Gault? --
Thanks for your kind words and appreciate your thoughtful post.
The essence of conservatism -- from my point of view -- is to question the involvement of government in our lives. I think this is right and healthy and as American as apple pie.
I do not share the view, however, that Democrats will be primarily motivated by the desire to rob hard earned dollars to give to people who don't want to work.
First, there is no real welfare system left in this country, and I do think this is in part a success of conservatism. Welfare was well intentioned by horribly thought out and ultimately destructive. What welfare still exists today is pretty limited and not a very large part of government spending.
Middle class entitlements and defense spending take up the largest portion of government spending.
The fact is that Bush and the Republicans bought votes by cutting taxes and increasing spending. No Democratic administration or Congress in my lifetime has been that irresponsible. It's breath taking. Why "conservatives" associate fiscal responsibility with Republicans and fiscal irresponsibility with Democrats is beyond me.
40% of the national debt was incurred under Ronald Reagan and the two Bushes. They talked a lot about the evils of government spending, but they didn't do much about it.
I think Obama does not share Clinton's philosophy on deficit spending (i.e., he's more inclined to engage in deficit spending during recession). So I'd expect more of the same. But at least Democrats say they're for government spending. Republicans do an incredibly good job convincing conservatives that they're the party of small government, but they don't ever really deliver. At least they haven't since I've been voting.
I share the view that Obama should appoint more Republicans to his cabinet and I'm concerned about the number of Clinton people in there. Clinton -- despite his selfishness, crassness, and irresponsibility -- was very smart and found talented people for his administration. Some of these may be smart people. But I do hope that Obama keeps his word and appoints more conservatives than it seems he will. The attorney general appointment was originally a Reagan man. That's something. Gates will probably stay. Who knows. Politicians are politicians.
Tim| 11.20.08 @ 10:04AM
Obama Rules,
I was angry and resentful that my young children had to be subjected to daily doses of Bill Clinton's BJ's from Monica in the Oval Office.
Perhaps, liberals need to take stock in just how bad of an experience that ordeal was for millions of decent Americans that were raising young kids during the 1990's.
The press doesn't cover this too much but the scars were left nevertheless.
Daphne Kenward| 11.20.08 @ 9:09PM
Paulson its time to wake up. The whole of America needs to wake up. Before what they have been fighting against, or what they thought they were fighting against to discover their worst fear they have become the biggest victims.
Google the secrets Rulers of the world 1-29, those of you who have not been totally brain washed may understand it.
Frances| 11.23.08 @ 1:27AM
Wow, all this over Lisa's article, or am I mistaken? I think she did a very good job and I stand firm with Conservatives that we will take back this country when Obama fails to deliver. Life offers more than the culture of death supported by Democrats i.e., Pelosi, Feinstein, Reid, Kerry, Boxer, Kennedy (so-called Catholics shame on them!) I pray that the children today will see past the smoke and mirrors, grow up, accept the truth about abortion, and "teach their parents well." Thanks for that inspiring article, Lisa!
Jeremiah| 11.23.08 @ 3:41PM
Frances --
Reid is pro-life.
Frances Meehan| 11.23.08 @ 9:04PM
Jeremiah,
According to Wikpedia, Senator Reid believes in a heavily restricted right to abortion. He stated in a 1998 National Political Awareness Test that he believed "Abortions should be legal only when the pregnancy resulted from incest, rape, or when the life of the woman is endangered."