- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 10,320
- Reaction score
- 2,115
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
I am going to read through this book, which is a collection of liberal essays. This is really a study of what some liberal writers are saying, and an examination of my own beliefs. I do this periodically as a way of challenging what I belive in. I have decided this time to engage in debate with others through the process as well, so my notes as I go through this will be posted here as well as on my blog. www.xanga.com/ludahai
I invite comments and discussion, both here and on my blog, all through this reading. Let's make this civil and educational. Let's keep the argument and near flaming to other threads please.
Here is my first installment:
Taking Back America
A Conservative Running Commentary of a series of Liberal essays
September 13, 2005
Just a couple of days after I made my final decision to break ranks with the Republican Party and refer to myself as a “Conservative Independent”, I have decided to take a look at a collection of essays from a groups of leading Liberal writers. Why? Well, for one, it is always a good idea to stay informed about what those you don’t agree with are saying. It is always good to question your own convictions. This is especially timely for me now that I have made my break with the party. I haven’t changed my ideology, but for me, the Republican Party’s morphing from “The Big Tent” to “The Revival Tent” has driven me away. I still support many Republican ideas, but I am hopeful that the Constitution Party, a party that I have considerable agreement with, can become a more important party in American political discourse.
Before beginning to read the book, I read the back cover. There are several red meat phrases present, such as “radical, reactionary policies of the Bush Administration,” “radical court-packing,” “assault on the rights of women and minorities,” among others. What do they consider radical, and the “radical right”, a phrase that is present in the title of the book? Is it meant to include all of those on the right, or just the fringe? Daniel J. Flynn, in his work “Why the Left Hates America,” is very careful to draw the distinction between mainstream liberalism and the Left. Is that kind of distinction drawn in this book, or are all conservatives lumped into this “radical right.”
What do they mean by “radical court-packing?” Do they mean to suggest that Bush is trying to pack the courts a la Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who actually attempted to add to the number of members of the Supreme Court to forward an agenda that was deemed to be unconstitutional? It was a Democrat responsible for that radical act. By putting conservatives on the courts, is President Bush doing anything different than when Democrats put liberals on the courts? That remains to be seen.
It is also going to be interesting to see what is meant by “assault on the rights of women and minorities.” Do they mean efforts to curtail the “right” to murder unborn babies? Is that the right they are keen to protect, or is it something else. Do they actually have evidence of this? It is hard to accuse someone of racism who has elevated two distinguished Black citizens to two of the most important foreign policy positions, making them two of the most globally visible American citizens in the world in Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice. It would seem strange that, on the one hand, he is elevating Black Americans to their loftiest positions ever held in the government of the United States of America, while at the same time trying to curtail their rights.
This reading and commentary will take some time. I fully intend to give every essay the proper reflection that it is due. If it takes a year, fine. It is good to challenge your own beliefs every so often. Doing so makes one a better person, and more informed not only about oneself, but also those who disagree with oneself.
I invite comments and discussion, both here and on my blog, all through this reading. Let's make this civil and educational. Let's keep the argument and near flaming to other threads please.
Here is my first installment:
Taking Back America
A Conservative Running Commentary of a series of Liberal essays
September 13, 2005
Just a couple of days after I made my final decision to break ranks with the Republican Party and refer to myself as a “Conservative Independent”, I have decided to take a look at a collection of essays from a groups of leading Liberal writers. Why? Well, for one, it is always a good idea to stay informed about what those you don’t agree with are saying. It is always good to question your own convictions. This is especially timely for me now that I have made my break with the party. I haven’t changed my ideology, but for me, the Republican Party’s morphing from “The Big Tent” to “The Revival Tent” has driven me away. I still support many Republican ideas, but I am hopeful that the Constitution Party, a party that I have considerable agreement with, can become a more important party in American political discourse.
Before beginning to read the book, I read the back cover. There are several red meat phrases present, such as “radical, reactionary policies of the Bush Administration,” “radical court-packing,” “assault on the rights of women and minorities,” among others. What do they consider radical, and the “radical right”, a phrase that is present in the title of the book? Is it meant to include all of those on the right, or just the fringe? Daniel J. Flynn, in his work “Why the Left Hates America,” is very careful to draw the distinction between mainstream liberalism and the Left. Is that kind of distinction drawn in this book, or are all conservatives lumped into this “radical right.”
What do they mean by “radical court-packing?” Do they mean to suggest that Bush is trying to pack the courts a la Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who actually attempted to add to the number of members of the Supreme Court to forward an agenda that was deemed to be unconstitutional? It was a Democrat responsible for that radical act. By putting conservatives on the courts, is President Bush doing anything different than when Democrats put liberals on the courts? That remains to be seen.
It is also going to be interesting to see what is meant by “assault on the rights of women and minorities.” Do they mean efforts to curtail the “right” to murder unborn babies? Is that the right they are keen to protect, or is it something else. Do they actually have evidence of this? It is hard to accuse someone of racism who has elevated two distinguished Black citizens to two of the most important foreign policy positions, making them two of the most globally visible American citizens in the world in Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice. It would seem strange that, on the one hand, he is elevating Black Americans to their loftiest positions ever held in the government of the United States of America, while at the same time trying to curtail their rights.
This reading and commentary will take some time. I fully intend to give every essay the proper reflection that it is due. If it takes a year, fine. It is good to challenge your own beliefs every so often. Doing so makes one a better person, and more informed not only about oneself, but also those who disagree with oneself.