|
|
|
|
Laura Ingraham listed some core basic conservative principles just now at 7:20 am May 4. Limited Government and individual freedom is the only non pecuniary (and that only in part) of the six or eight or so points of true core conservatism that the republican party should supposedly get back to. News Flash: Economics does not galvanize. Murdering one in four of America’s children legally will galvanize if you push it to its natural inflation. That is, murdering mom goes to hell, dad goes to hell, and, yes, their baby goes to hell, and, The blood guiltiness falls on economic conservatives and democrat politicians and judges. The repo.s have never been fiscally liberal, they have been racially and socially and especially morally liberal, yes yes they have been godless maybe not the Ann Coulter classic "Godless" democrat way where they hold to an alternate leftist religiosity but rather the old: “God is not to be brought into public life.” “We don’t discuss religion.” “A mormon or nonreligious or Jewish is just as able to address the moral issues that plague us as a pious catholic or protestant Republican is.” This is what got us into this mess. Blah blah blah: the constalk hosts lambast us because we won’t abandon God’s cause and get with their mammon worshipping “Core conservatism.” A rich raspberry to all that fluff. From that standpoint Newt is right on trying to get God back into the public square with his new effort Laura ignores. Her voice on behalf of the baby victims is laudable. But Laura can’t know Core econ values won’t do it. It’s the divinely ordained set of values: The love of God! Life! Purpose! Meaning! Eternity! And yes Charity! I sort of feel that Laura Ingraham has an agenda against evangelical Christianity in politics. Look what she and Hannity did to Huckabee's campaign. Now Newt is attacked: Go for God in the public square: I can't afford to buy Newt's book or tape; Special invitation, he calls it. But the title is enough, and, if you've read much of this site, you know I study and opine on this matter, in fact it is practically the point of the site. At a time like this tired, even if true, econ theories will lose. Rush Limbaugh came out with an expose' just after initial publ. of this
article right after afore mentioned La.Ingr.'s Constalk show. Apparently he was offered cash and support, not for himself,
but for cons. republican causes, if he could influence the Christians to drop their prolife demands on the repo party.
By this we know Rush is for real! He's Nathaniel: behold a politico in whom their is no guile. It was a
backwards offer. Recalling Rush it went someting like: "I'd support with money, but not while anti-abortion."
When ever did what was right in liberating and rescuing a downtrodden group receive largesse from the money empowered.
The whole world really does lie in the lap of the evil one. Apparently this is something Rush has been hearing all along.
When G.H.W. Bush lost his White House was just after Barb Bush said we should not emphasize prolife. Apparently G W won
with lipservice alone to antiabortion.
I wonder is this the position of Warren Buffet who seems oddly alinked
with Obortion Obama.
|
