tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post1186017374213276521..comments2024-01-04T07:33:10.137-05:00Comments on Seldom Wrong, Never in Doubt: Free Consult for GOPJon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNIDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04595651777890086293noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-37988517819812244352009-07-01T08:32:01.491-04:002009-07-01T08:32:01.491-04:00The only part of the platform that needs to be dis...The only part of the platform that needs to be discarded is the support for the liberal policy of blanket amnesty. There is nothing wrong with expecting those who wish to enter this country to follow the rules to do so.<br /><br />Thnakfully, not all state govts are as out of touch as the one DC.<br /><br />http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090701/ap_on_re_us/us_xgr_immigration_enforcementKevinKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-66890525764527368512009-06-29T08:22:59.434-04:002009-06-29T08:22:59.434-04:00So "for all" isn't a starting point ...So "for all" isn't a starting point as a point to be settled before moving on. It seems to us that such a discussion is obviously necessary but is the very thing that a political party engages in if it asserts what we have suggested in contrast to an opposing political party. What we suggest isn't a framework for settling all political differences but talking point for one side to re-engage the public and recapture its place in the dialogue.Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNIDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04595651777890086293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-37658016420159306242009-06-27T17:33:43.930-04:002009-06-27T17:33:43.930-04:00I still disagree. It seems to me that we need to h...I still disagree. It seems to me that we need to have a firm grasp of the common good before we can even begin to understand what virtue is. Historically, this is the view associated with Aristotle (who identified the common good with a properly functioning community of human beings) and reasserted by Burke (who identified it with one's cultural tradition). It is opposed by classical liberals (i.e., libertarians, such as Locke, Smith, and Hayek) and liberal individualists (such as Kant, Rawls, and Dworkin), both groups of which believe that justice ("the public virtue") is in some sense prior to the good. <br /><br />The problem with this view is that we cannot really determine what a person would have to be like in order to be just until we first figure out what a society would have to be like in order to be good. For example, is it ever good for some people to receive proportionately less than others, or must there always be an equal distribution of resources, regardless of the circumstances? This is a question concerning the common good, and until we answer it, our concept of justice has no clear meaning. Of course, we can answer it either explicitly, by articulating a notion of the common good, or implicitly, by presupposing--perhaps unconsciously--a notion of the common good, but to ignore it completely is to risk constructing an incoherent concept of justice.JB in CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-91102106518420806492009-06-27T09:34:35.666-04:002009-06-27T09:34:35.666-04:00N.B. that in political discourse this "virtue...N.B. that in political discourse this "virtue" is approximate and may therefore be lightly extrinsically incentivized with rewards and punishments. We're talking politics here, not evangelism. Nevertheless, our proposed rhetoric is most clearly a moralistic call to individual responsibility.<br /><br />We don't want "Washington" <i>deciding</i> what the virtues are. But we think there's a broad enough consensus in the history of Western Civilization to which one can effectively appeal.<br /><br />We don't like staring with "for all" as it leaves open what it is that all ought to have. It does define "common" but not "good." Free ice cream? Cash for clunkers? Health insurance? Pork? Miranda rights?<br /><br />Nevertheless, <i>in whatever order</i>, we are glad that our esteemed gentle readers find some value in these themes. We would hope that if they are employed, the larger emphasis should remain where we have tried to put it: that the GOP must recapture its ability to challenge individuals to strive for character and citizenship, not simply to blame sinister forces for ruining the otherwise ideal natural state of the Republic, and that all narrowly nativist, ethnocentric sentiments must be ruthlessly excluded from party discourse.Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNIDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04595651777890086293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-49413289646360712392009-06-26T19:40:37.258-04:002009-06-26T19:40:37.258-04:00That virtue begets more liberty does not mean that...That virtue begets more liberty does not mean that liberty isn't in fact necessary for virtue to happen. Even the fact that virtue is a subversive force and tool of liberty is not the point. The laws of a land may reflect virtuous principles, but this does not make those who keep them virtuous but, rather, well controlled (in fact, disenfranchised from what they might perhaps rather do).<br /><br />The kind of liberty that I refer to, that which enables ethical action, is of course divinely endowed, not a protectorate of any government. I oppose moralizing legislation, however, for this very reason; it gives the opposite impression, an illusion in fact. Virtue can only result from free choice, not compulsion. I would hate for the law or government to imply otherwise. Shameless Pauline reference: law produces lawbreaking, only grace (which is liberty) can produce virtue (and no I don't think that is terribly eisegetical either, it fits in my book, but I'm not willing to go to the mats over it either).<br /><br />I'd also hate to see Washington deciding that which is virtuous. A virtuous and noble senate is the hallmark of the republic. That such a thing is so rarely to be found is a necessarily damning critique of the system. <br /><br />Washington reckoned that democracy was only fit for a virtuous people. I wonder which one he has in mind, surely not the ones he lead to rebellion and slaughter of their brethren.Bryan Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06571780870560590747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-78254988977676841612009-06-26T18:35:43.040-04:002009-06-26T18:35:43.040-04:00Agreed, virtue precedes liberty. But the common go...Agreed, virtue precedes liberty. But the common good precedes virtue. How else could we even know what virtue is unless we first understood its purpose? Hence, "for all" should lead the list.JB in CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-32786061227857381202009-06-26T09:31:11.683-04:002009-06-26T09:31:11.683-04:00Bryan D, the order is deliberate and necessary: yo...Bryan D, the order is deliberate and necessary: you've got the relationship between virtue and liberty precisely backwards, as Adams, Burke, <i>et al.</i> argued and various oppressed peoples have demonstrated. Think Solidarity.<br /><br />The contrary demonstration happens every time a free people squander their liberty in the absence of virtue. Like maybe now, for instance.<br /><br />Anon #1, big pharm has saved a lot more lives than most other entities, big or small, including especially big government. Folks need to realize as much. 2012 needs first to be an educational exercise, then a political one. Things are too serious for politics right now.<br /><br />Anon #2, "ex-" is a beautiful prefix for conservatives. And as a lifelong adherent to the adult-baptism wing of Presbyterianism, we are ready to reach across the ecclesial aisle.Jon A. Alfred E. Michael J. Wile E. SWNIDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04595651777890086293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-50704117959656218522009-06-26T07:28:44.683-04:002009-06-26T07:28:44.683-04:00Wow a Presbyterian ex-pot smoker - now he's go...Wow a Presbyterian ex-pot smoker - now he's got nothing on Sarah. Reality is - who knows what will happen in the future - just work on reducing your carbon footprint and life will be good.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-25504513309952377182009-06-26T07:23:41.181-04:002009-06-26T07:23:41.181-04:00A big pharm guy? Are you kidding me? He'd ge...A big pharm guy? Are you kidding me? He'd get eaten alive - think Bill Frist as an investment banker.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-23762269329821362152009-06-25T21:49:14.428-04:002009-06-25T21:49:14.428-04:00This platform would make me once again feel confid...This platform would make me once again feel confident about calling myself a Republican. Thank you especially for the "for all" portion of your comments. Republicans (and Christians of all political stripes) should be ashamed to be on the wrong side of racial issues.Robnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15405788.post-26740428157394995402009-06-25T19:27:54.455-04:002009-06-25T19:27:54.455-04:00Firstly, I think the order might need slight amend...Firstly, I think the order might need slight amendment (this is why i'm a crazy libertarian and you a toryish GOP guy). Only where liberty is available is virtue possible. If liberty doesn't maintain priority, the R's are the same as D's just with different ideas of virtue. <br /><br />Secondly I think the cries for virtue here are something that's taking hold among the conservative laity (this bit from Glenn Beck of all people came across my fb news feed yesterday: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/21018/).<br /><br />It is this move away from billboard issue polemics that have dominated discussion around the morality of the polis that is the true way forward for the people with a message. Any perspective which can be sloganized and graffitied on bathroom walls is insufficient. But we best not expect the change to happen in Washington, if it happens at all it will be when churches more frequently make real differences in their communities and change people's perspective on living.Bryan Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06571780870560590747noreply@blogger.com