A liberal is a man who won't take his own side in a fight...
by David and Tim Bayly on August 3, 2010 - 10:18am
(Tim) Under "Try a little tenderness...," good reader Lew provided a link to a recent Joe Sobran article that ran last month in Chronicles. Here it is, along with this teaser:
The U.S. Constitution, as I often say, poses no serious threat to our form of government. It has roughly the same tenuous relation to our political institutions as the book of Revelation has to the Unitarian Church... (read more)
Clearnote Churches
Clearnote Fellowship
Christ the Word
Monthly archive
- May 2013 (21)
- April 2013 (33)
- March 2013 (43)
- February 2013 (28)
- January 2013 (41)
- December 2012 (31)
- November 2012 (37)
- October 2012 (38)
- September 2012 (21)
- August 2012 (28)
- July 2012 (46)
- June 2012 (50)
Popular Posts
Tags
Abortion euthanasia... (584)
Feminism (584)
Politics (366)
Reformed world (322)
PCA (302)
Evangelicalism (294)
Homosexuality (294)
Misc. (270)
Throw the radio in the bathtub (258)
Academia (256)
Reformed theology (234)
Culture (227)
Children are a blessing (218)
Emergent church (208)
R2K (Radical Two Kingdom) (196)
Recent Comments
- Emily Burlingham on Why move to Bloomington?
- Robert Woodyard on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Tim Bayly on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Christopher Lee on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Sandy Pryor on Why move to Bloomington?
Comments
Disappointing! Reckless inventive devoid of substance and with at least one frank falsehood, or at least a statement not remotely verifiable as fact. And I'm as conservative as the next guy. Since Elena Kagan has not outed herself and has not BEEN outed in any conclusive way, I think it's practically libelous for the author of this piece to call her a "fanatical lesbian."
Also, in the current political environment- an environment that has its roots in the new deal if not farther back- Barack Obama is hardly a uniquely liberal political animal. The author of this piece does not pose a coherent argument or statement. I have no idea what he was trying to say other than that the founding fathers would not have liked Obama very much. This is probably true of every president since Andrew Jackson. With a massive and cancerously growing federal bureaucracy, a state-mandated culture of tolerance that undercuts liberty, and an unsustainable brew of financial disaster and social breakdown looming, there's more than enough facts to marshal against the current order to have to resort to raving.
Wow... Do all us Libertarians sound this way? Please smack across the face if I do.
Oops... I left out a "me" in that last sentence.
Not that this substantially affects Roger's message, but... in his post, I think "inventive" should have been spelled "invective."
By refering to the Rosseauian belief in the innate goodness of man( Noble Savage )Sobran is not engaging in invective, he is accurately identifing the anthropological premise behind much of the bad policy that eminates from this administration-particularly with regards to foreign policy.
While the Keynesian approach to econimic policy has characterized evey administration since Harding's, one would have to go back nearly have a century to find it applied on such a grand scale; and it has never been applied with such open contempt for the people Obama intends to pilfer.
Finally, that antiquated document from the horse and bugy days posses no threat to our current form of government because it was declared null and void at Appomatox.
>>I think it's practically libelous for the author of this piece to call her a "fanatical lesbian."
Thirty years of reading Sobran lead me to believe he's on solid ground, here--that plus Andrew Sullivan's writing.
As for the content of Sobran's piece, it's an argument to those who share with him a commitment to Scripture, to Original Sin, to the Seventh Commandment, to the Tenth Amendment, etc. In other words, it's commentary based on commitments Sobran believes he shares with his fellow countrymen who are Christian and not completely asleep at the wheel, politically.
Sorry it irritated you, but it's food for my logic and reason in an age of anything but.
By the way, the statement "With a massive and cancerously growing federal bureaucracy, a state-mandated culture of tolerance that undercuts liberty, and an unsustainable brew of financial disaster and social breakdown looming, there's more than enough facts to marshal against the current order to have to resort to raving." is maybe not an argument, but raving. You know what I mean?
Love,
Ha! Hoisted by my own petard, I believe, is the phrase that comes to mind.
Add new comment