There is only one argument that I can make when it comes to the Coeur d'Alene Press (http://www.cdapress.com) publishing Ron Vieselmeyer's letters; he represents the most radical of Republicans in the state of Idaho. And in his latest letter of 17 August 2007, he defends closed primaries in order to keep intrusive moderate (conservative) Republicans and old left Democrats out of the process. Equating both of the above with illegal aliens. And bringing the ACLU under attack as the sole group responsible for twisting and distorting a time honored institution called, the U.S. Constitution. OK, Vieselmeyer flogs plenty of dead horses and looks for straw men to set up in order to knock down. What he has yet to respect or recognize, the ACLU is hardly the sole group that claims to defend the Constitution then works to distort it. So also do the people that Vieselmeyer himself represents: Religious radicals such as Unus Vocate.
It is a matter of religious belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. It is also a matter of practical reality that people living up to that code of conduct actually and often, do not. Proposing a law, based against homosexuals having the right of legal marriage or civil unions continues to have far greater consequences against heterosexuals who are the prime cause of instability in marriage. It also suggests that government can ratify a religious involvement in government when it regulates personal behavior on a religious rationale. Just as it also suggests that religion is unwilling or simply too lazy to take care of addressing the right way of living to the proper set of sinners. Preferring the offices of big government instead. According to the first amendment, Congress shall make no law establishing religion... According to article 6, religious tests for office are not required. Well then, if Vieselmeyer were truly supportive of the U.S. Constitution's founding intent, he would throw open the primaries to the very Republicans most likely to support such an intent than work against the very nature of such an intent.
Conservative, cautious, moderate supports the status quo. As to the last, iffy at best since the "status quo" can change with the political winds.
Ideologue (radical): effectively, a narrow minded person who breaks down plenty of doors with an unwillingness to think things through before acting.
Ideologue (religious) the other argument in government sponsored social engineering, see Vocate's letter.
Ideologue (capitalist) the market place is geared solely toward business profits; (ref: James Pinkerton on "Libertarian Universalism" where big government guarantees for specific business interests being able to maximize profits.) Never mind a very recent CNN report (Lou Dobbs Tonight) that informs us that any more, people are increasingly unable to shop at Walmart because of increased prices in utilities, goods and services as well as education and health care. Make living unaffordable to an increasing number of citizens and the "market place" geared to the maximizing of business profits must come tumbling down. You can't do business with people who can't afford your wares. Neither will you have the maximizing of profits if you can't sell your wares to people who can't afford to pay for them.
The part of the letter from Vieselmeyer that I could agree with, but for reasons that even Vieselmeyer did not want to discuss given his need to find the right sort of whipping boys, businesses that want to outsource jobs and what remains of the jobs they don't outsource should instead go to the cheapest (and illegal) labor that they can find. And who is most likely to support such business interests? Well, Senator McCain of Arizona and Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. Both Senators hold a rather dim view of their fellow Americans actually having the capacity to do work. Would Vieselmeyer's idea of "conservatism" (ideologue of the religious or capitalist persuasion) be the people that he would prefer were voted for in closed primaries against politicians that recognized that these special interests (business and religion) weren't the only constituents they must represent in Congress or the state legislature? If so, the Vieselmeyer isn't very supportive of the founding document of this nation. And he ends up working for the kind of people hell-bent on undermining the future of this nation--not just Democrats, or the ACLU, but the GOP as well.
It is a matter of religious belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. It is also a matter of practical reality that people living up to that code of conduct actually and often, do not. Proposing a law, based against homosexuals having the right of legal marriage or civil unions continues to have far greater consequences against heterosexuals who are the prime cause of instability in marriage. It also suggests that government can ratify a religious involvement in government when it regulates personal behavior on a religious rationale. Just as it also suggests that religion is unwilling or simply too lazy to take care of addressing the right way of living to the proper set of sinners. Preferring the offices of big government instead. According to the first amendment, Congress shall make no law establishing religion... According to article 6, religious tests for office are not required. Well then, if Vieselmeyer were truly supportive of the U.S. Constitution's founding intent, he would throw open the primaries to the very Republicans most likely to support such an intent than work against the very nature of such an intent.
Conservative, cautious, moderate supports the status quo. As to the last, iffy at best since the "status quo" can change with the political winds.
Ideologue (radical): effectively, a narrow minded person who breaks down plenty of doors with an unwillingness to think things through before acting.
Ideologue (religious) the other argument in government sponsored social engineering, see Vocate's letter.
Ideologue (capitalist) the market place is geared solely toward business profits; (ref: James Pinkerton on "Libertarian Universalism" where big government guarantees for specific business interests being able to maximize profits.) Never mind a very recent CNN report (Lou Dobbs Tonight) that informs us that any more, people are increasingly unable to shop at Walmart because of increased prices in utilities, goods and services as well as education and health care. Make living unaffordable to an increasing number of citizens and the "market place" geared to the maximizing of business profits must come tumbling down. You can't do business with people who can't afford your wares. Neither will you have the maximizing of profits if you can't sell your wares to people who can't afford to pay for them.
The part of the letter from Vieselmeyer that I could agree with, but for reasons that even Vieselmeyer did not want to discuss given his need to find the right sort of whipping boys, businesses that want to outsource jobs and what remains of the jobs they don't outsource should instead go to the cheapest (and illegal) labor that they can find. And who is most likely to support such business interests? Well, Senator McCain of Arizona and Senator Larry Craig of Idaho. Both Senators hold a rather dim view of their fellow Americans actually having the capacity to do work. Would Vieselmeyer's idea of "conservatism" (ideologue of the religious or capitalist persuasion) be the people that he would prefer were voted for in closed primaries against politicians that recognized that these special interests (business and religion) weren't the only constituents they must represent in Congress or the state legislature? If so, the Vieselmeyer isn't very supportive of the founding document of this nation. And he ends up working for the kind of people hell-bent on undermining the future of this nation--not just Democrats, or the ACLU, but the GOP as well.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment