I think that perhaps this newsletter and or site should stick to things computer and not delve into the muddied waters of politics. I’d really rather not pollute my mind thinking of crooked politicians, desperate to stay in office, and what they are willing to sell to stay where they are instead of getting a real job. Say, like one in IT.

This post represents a classically simplistic, yet all too typical, analysis of “conservatism.”

First, I find the methodology of the survey flawed due to potential hidden bias, particularly with regard to the phrasing of the questions asked. (E.g., instead of asking if they are in favor of more gun regulations, ask if they are in favor of a total ban on gun ownership.) Still, overall, you and the survey are correct: most Americans’ views feature a healthy mix of liberal and libertarian on social issues.

Second, and most important, you (or, rather, the study you cite and agree with) have cherry-picked issues which all relate to one type of conservative — the “social conservative.” As I have stipulated, you are correct, the country does tend to lean left on many of these issues. Though their views are much more nuanced than you imply. (E.g., yes, most Americans don’t want Roe overturned, but also aren’t comfortable with late term abortions and are OK with parental notification laws, while the “liberal” take on these restrictions is that they signify a return to the days of back-alley abortions.)

Anyway, I consider myself quite conservative, yet am indeed liberal/libertarianish on social issues. The reason I still consider myself conservative is that I am on the right or lean right on many other broad categories of political issues, such as:

*economic (free trade, supply-side economics, fiscal repsonsibility, etc.),
*national defense (large budget for military expenditures, support — in general, if not in this Administration’s implementation of — the War on Terror, strong and well-regulated borders, etc.),
*judiciary (though I lean libertarian on social issues, I also feel that federal judges too often usurp the legitimate role of the legislative process. And yes, the line between “conservative judicial activism” [e.g., courts issuing rulings to cede too much authority to the executive branch in prosecuting war] and what conservatives call “judicial restraint” [e.g. on abortion, the Court could’ve let the country come to a consensus through Congress and state legislatures, instead of short-circuiting the debate. Or it could’ve at least based its Roe and Casey opinions on a “liberty interest,” right there in the text of Constitution’s Due Process Clause, to substantiate a woman’s right to choose instead of making up out of whole cloth a new definition of the “right to privacy.” ] is certainly fuzzy and gray, in many instances. Still, the line does exist.

In future, I would commend that you not use such a narrow subset of individuals to make such broad and stereotyped generalizations of a vast swath of your fellow citizens, especially when characterizing how they do or don’t fit in with the rest of the multi-layered and complex quilt that is America.

As someone who grew up in an ‘evangelical’ church, these things are very distressing to me.

I am left leaning, believe in the COMPLETE divide between church and state, and yet think that CRIMINAL control is what we need, not gun control. You might think I own guns. There is not a single gun in my house, outside of my son’s Daisy bb gun. I just have no place to shoot, and don’t wish to take long trips to do so. I do believe that if I wanted to stock 5 of every known gun in my I house, I should be able to, as I am of sane mind, and have no criminal record.

The David Koresh incident was the single large failure of the Clinton administration, not Monica Lewinsky. Until the first wrong shot was fired, Koresh should have been able to keep all the guns he could possibly store. I don’t think he was all he was cracked up to be, but he certainly wasn’t on a killing spree the likes of which we hear about weekly in our big cities.

I also think that with respect to abortion, women should be able to choose. God gave man free will, and that means some wrong choices were anticipated. If we are given choice by the omnipotent being [that the right, conservative types, say they believe in] how can we do any less?

I also think that the ‘mouthy’ Christians have been consistently shown to be people who spend so much time putting people down, how can they expect anyone to listen to the message of God. When was the last time these people shared any good news?

These same ‘Christians’ are also for the death penalty. How INANE is that? Is is wrong to ‘kill’ before birth, but ok afterward. These people seem to use ‘eye for an eye’ really well, but seem to pick and choose what they will accept as the word of God. If they truly read the Bible they would have come across ‘Vengeance is Mine and right after that, I will repay. To anyone who reads the complete verses, the context pretty explicitly says it is not our job to take vengeance on people, which is, after all, what the death penalty is all about.

I am not sure why we are being told that being liberal is a bad thing. I know that as far as expenditures, George Bush seems to be very liberal. Perhaps that is what the people are talking about. I wish we were more conservative with the government spending, like that done on wars.

I do know, from the study of history, when a people get so disillusioned by what is happening in their government, strange things happen…like Germany circa 1938.

I do know that I believe that the [dare I say it] real Christians should stand up and quietly but very forcefully show that those blowhards on television who claim to be speaking for them, as Republican, Chrisitan, and conservative, aren’t.

Sorry for the rant, I’ll try to be more brief next time.

Wonderful words, it is wonderful to see others putting it on the line like that. Thank you both. The fact is that the conservatives are usually the one’s with money, and as the economy fails, their corporate empires fall. Of course they want us to stay on the band wagon of good and evil, but I think they framed the wrong devil. During the 1200’s Satanism actually came about as a rebellion against the Catholic Church, The people had become so oppressed under this regime, that they came to believe the enemy of their government’s Catholic God must be their salvation. It was a very strange political movement, taking the form of the supposed opposition. If they could have only seen then that opposing it was still believing in it…it didn’t matter what side they took. Republicans and democrats, Churches and wild parties, evil vs. good….what the hell are we doing taking sides? I don’t even remember being happy with the choices. .There is a middle ground everyone can meet upon, these bozo’s want us to think it doesn’t exist. Your either for me or against me. Yeah, right. As far as I am concerned, I think we just unplug the machine, and stop living on their life support. They want us to think that we even need their governmental system…as if it works! What kind of joke is this? We slave for you to live?These people are living off our hard earned money, thinking they deserve massively larger pay than we do. These are the republicans, voices of the corporations. The majority of corporate campaign donations go to republican candidates. Religion and morals? These people are more about godly finances; they believe they are GOD. The whole system has already begun to majorly decay. They want us all to panic, and undermine ourselves, but I just think we can be a lot more intelligent about it. Education is the only way to go. Americans may be a lot of things, but they can be really tenacious if they believe it’ll make their lives easier.. If they truly realize things could be better, I am sure a lot of people would be willing to let go of these *end of the world* doom propagandas, and start making change now. They want us to believe we’ll get ours after death, but it’s just a way of cheating us of what we could have now. This is not a new problem, it has gone on for several thousands of years now, and taken on many forms. Right now though we have gained advantages we have never had before. These very tools that have been created to sedate us, are giving us the power to reclaim ourselves. Places like this where we can blog, and speak of what we see…such an empowering thing. Gracious blessings to people like Chris for helping to make this possible!

Let a new story line begin….

I had considered making an involved reply, but then I thought, “This is a story about an article by a reporter on a study based on filtered facts by a liberal organization.” Hearsay at best and hardly an unbiased or reliable source in any case.

I’m a skeptic, not liberal or conservative. I prefer to see more data, know how it was collected and draw my own conclusions.

It is always amazing to me how liberals try to confuse the issue of federal funding of stem cell research and stem cell research.

I used to consider myself strictly “left”, but now I think of myself as a common-sense and pragmatic person. I guess that’s a move to the right, but really, more to the center. I believe many people think in those terms.

Here’s an example: Abortion - I used to think that those who wanted controls on abortion were primarily white evangelical men who simply wanted to dictate what a woman does with her own body. In that sense, it was more of a gender and dominance issue than a human rights issue (human rights as in the rights of the unborn).

But times and technology have changed. We’ve seen dramatic in utero photos of fetuses that are distinctly human in form at a very early stage in the term. No one can deny this now; it must be confronted.

My position on abortion has hence evolved. My thoughts are that unless there is an absolute (not vague or undefined) threat to the mother’s health, abortions should be limited to a very early point in a pregnancy. No “partial birth” abortions unless a woman’s health is in imminent danger. Partial birth very late term abortion for any other reason is simply murder. No one can deny that with a straight face.

There are far too many ways to prevent pregnancies now, and abortion should never be considered birth control.

Where I differ from the right on this is I think it’s ridiculous to try and prohibit the so-called “day after” pills to prevent a pregnancy. I’m not trying to force religion or religous values on anyone. It’s patently ridiculous to try and prohibit any kind of pre-pregnancy birth control.

To me, my views make sense –common and human sense– given what we now know about fetal development. I don’t see that as liberal or conservative. My thoughts are that many Americans are not ideologues as such. They just want common sense.

It would seem to this conservative that you’ve got the situation wholly backwards. It is the lliberal agenda that is being forced down the throats of conservatives via the liberal media.

Hi Jackie,

I hope you’re doing well.

As I mentioned in a reply to one of your earlier posts I think labels like “conservative” and “liberal,” “Republican” and “Democrat” tend to be counterproductive in their inception. Granted that without the labels (i.e., words) we’re using here to point to their respective referents (i.e., the concepts to which the words apply) there’d be no communication between us, and I will agree that labels like “Jackie” and “Steve” are as useful (and benign) as “here” and “there” in their value to distinguish, but when labels take on derisive connotations their more innocent meanings are lost behind a wall of divisiveness; i.e., these are “fightin’ words” to many people who won’t consider the philosophical forest for the trees once they’re uttered–all they’ll see is “red”…or “blue”.

If humans were telepathic–with the ability to share raw consciousness directly (or like in the movie “Brainstorm”)–we wouldn’t have the problems associated with written and spoken language comprised of more or less highly charged, evocative words.

The Minutemen of early American history were considered “patriots” and “freedom fighters” to those who thought of themselves as Americans rather than British subjects, although their “asymmetric” fighting tactics would have made them as much “terrorists” to their British occupiers as the “insurgents” are considered to be to the American troops occupying Iraq today–who are by all rights as much “terrorists” to the locals as the “insurgents” are to them.

It all depends on whose ox is getting gored.

Fascist and imbecilic though George W. Bush may be, the failures and decadence of his administration aren’t uniquely right-wing or Republican: they’re systemic. We’ve entered an era of corporatocracy where the stated politics of both parties pale in comparison to the forces of industry, commerce and banking. (See John Perkins’ book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” for a concise explanation of how.) While individual citizens waste time, energy, and their collective power as a unified force calling each other names, recently evolved, arcane forces are controlling their destinies in ways they don’t yet fathom.

Arguing over who’s Republican and who’s Democrat is like arguing over which wrestler should win the WWF Championship: it don’t matter to the sponsor as long as the receipts keep rolling in at the gate. Likewise, no matter how many people (on either “side”) are killed in Iraq, or how long the war rages on, the decimation of the Iraqi infrastructure is money in the bank to Bush administration cronies at Blackwater, USA–and Bechtel and Halliburton, who have lucrative contracts to rebuild it; and due to the highly effective nature of lobbying this situation is unlikely to change simply because the administration soon will, even in the event of an even more significant shift in the political composition of the next administration than the one that found sacrificial lamb Donald Rumsfeld falling on his sword after the last election.

Then there’s the divisiveness perpetuated by those who cleave to religious labels like “Christian,” “Jew,” or “Muslim.” As I mentioned in that other post, the core values of all such religions are essentially the same: peace, brotherhood, and spiritual awareness. Those who’ve accepted the Pat Robertson/Fox News, pre-digested version of the Islamic faith because they’re “just too tired after a hard day’s work” to learn about it for themselves are doing us ALL a disservice. Given a large enough population of devotees there will inevitably be radical factions in any group, whether they be Christian fundamentalists, Zionist Jews, or Islamic jihadists; but the truth of the matter is that Islamic jihadists are no more representative of the Muslim religion than skinheads, neo-Nazis or members of White Aryan Resistance are representative of Christianity or radical Zionists are of Judaism.

The current administration has been brazen (and largely successful) in its efforts to control the media and quash the civil liberties of people here and abroad while ensuring financial windfalls for its corporate partners and a greater scope of authority for itself; but future administrations (of either stripe) are as unlikely to reverse these trends as Congress would be to repeal personal income tax or reinstate usury laws restricting the amount of interest lending agencies can charge. In my opinion it’s gonna take a helluva a grass roots effort to move this country back toward the kind of democracy and freedom we once enjoyed…not so very long ago.

Please STOP STOP STOP the politics and stick to GEEK.

I am getting ready to shut down this link…

Peter

wow.

First, the Bush administration does not control the media. See for yourself:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485

MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.

Second, when you talk about being in favor of stem cell research, you must define what TYPE of stem cell research.

ADULT stem cells research, which has almost 100 cures and treatments, and doesn’t require the killing of the unborn.

or,

EMBRYONIC stem cell research, which has produced NO cures or treatments, and requires the destroying of a human life.

BIG difference.

As for Row Vs. Wade, and the “Pro Choice” folks, they neglect to realize that the life taken is NOT given their choice. you are chosing the mother’s choice for convenience over the child’s choice to live. HARDLY pro-choice.

Oh, and the Gorelick Wall was the single large failure of the Clinton administration.

PS: For anyone astute enough to have recognized that I myself engaged in derisive labeling in my last post by calling Bush a fascist and an imbecile, I’d like to make a distinction…

My concerns about labeling regard self-imposed categorization based on an ostensibly finite number of alternatives offered by the community at large, such as the examples I offered in my last post. While voter eligibility required me to choose a political affiliation I am by no means a card-carrying member of any party, and while I consider myself to be a highly spiritual person I don’t follow the strictures of any particular religion. If others wish to pigeonhole me as a member of the political party with which I’m registered, or as a heretic (or worse) for having no specific religious affiliation, that’s their prerogative; but to label a person “liberal” simply because he opposes an immoral war, or for a self-proclaimed “Republican” to feel compelled to support one simply because his party does is naïvely divisive.

On the other hand, I have no qualms about calling a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein a tyrant, calling Donald Rumsfeld a liar for denying having had prior knowledge of the abuses at Abu Ghraib before the release of the damning pictures to the media (when incontrovertible proof now exists that he did), or calling Bush a fascist (i.e., “somebody who supports or advocates a system of government characterized by dictatorship, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism”) and an imbecile (examples abound, like the quotes: “The reason we start a war is to fight a war, win a war, thereby causing no more war!”; “The legislature’s job is to write law. It’s the executive branch’s job to interpret law.”; and Bush becoming completely lost during his now-infamous “There’s an old saying in Tennessee…” faux pas.)

I have no problem calling a spade a spade, but to blindly commit oneself lock, stock and barrel to the tenets of a fixed and unyielding philosophy or group is to deny (at some point) the freedom of will God has granted us all, and the responsibility which accompanies it. In the wake of the My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq, even military Courts Martial have held that in requiring enlistees to obey any LAWFUL order, the Uniform Code of Military Justice thereby requires them to DISOBEY any UNLAWFUL ones (as exemplified in the movie, “A Few Good Men”).

So “enlistee,” “devotee,” “fan,” “member,” “adherent,” “follower,” or “partisan” though one might consider oneself: he or she should never presume to discard his or her own value system or moral code in favor of some idealized group or label.

I saw the title and was all ready to flame you in to next week. I’m glad that initial reaction was wrong. If I could voteon a post you’d get all 5 stars.

This is a great article and a great follow on discussion. I’m just surprised that I don’t see a bunch of posts from right-wingers threatening to cancel their Lockgnome subscriptions because of this. That seems to be their typical response to the publication of anything they don’t agree with.

Rick

Dear Steve

Thank you for all your comments on my articles. Thank you for inquiring about me. I am doing much better since my surgery and hope to be able to keep up my responses and posts from now on.

I really appreciate your educated opinions and hope that other readers will take the time to see what you have to say. They don’t have to agree but it is good for all of us to realize how fortunate we are to live in a land where we are free to voice our differences in opinion.

Have a wonderful day. Jackie

Dear Gene

I would personally choose adult stem cell research. I myself do not favor abortion but I am no one else’s judge so what they choose to do is between themselves and God. I sincerely hope that medicine, however, is able to solve some of the medical tragedies that individuals are faced with from terrible burns to Lou Gehrig’s disease. If you have never been faced with friends or family who have suffered from a terrible disease or injury God has indeed been good to you.

I sincerely believe that God gives man the intelligence to learn in order to use scientific discoveries for the good of all mankind. Science in no way undermines the greatness of God but rather shows the magnitude of his greatness.

Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Dan

Thank you for voicing your opinion. I know that if I believed as you do I would probably react in a similar manner. However, I don’t view myself as a liberal but neither am I a conservative. I feel that conservatives often attempt to control the masses with their ideas of right and wrong and while I tend to have strong moral ideals for myself and my family, I strongly believe that I have no right to tell others what to do.

Have a wonderful day. Jackie

Dear Rick B.

Thank you for your intelligent comments, especially on abortion. I think that government would only be enhanced if politicians would be more middle of the road. I also feel that partial birth abortion is wrong and have a friend who is a nurse who refuses to work with obstetricians because of the live births that she has seen.

However, I like you feel that denying women availability to the day after pill is ridiculous since life doesn’t begin until the sperm and egg unite which can take as long as 72 hours.

Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Rick Hogan

Thank you for adding your thoughts to the discussion on this topic. I hope you will continue to feel free to contribute to any discussion that my posts might incite.

Have a good day. Jackie

Dear Winston

I am convinced that you must think that I am a liberal. That is not accurate. I am middle of the road with some conservative ideas and some liberal ones. I respond to life and life’s issues on an individual basis and apply them to my life in the same manner.

However, I do not think that conservatives have the right to tell others what they must believe or do.

Please feel free to comment on any of my posts and have a wonderful day. Jackie

Dear Jesse

I am glad that you visited my site. I do try to research much of what I write and will try to bring in more sources and info in the future. However, I like you are neither conservative or liberal and will continue to post articles that will stir discussion among my intellectual readers.

Have a wonderful day. Jackie

Dear MJS

Thank you for your educated comments. I totally agree with your comment regarding federal judges who make rulings for the general population without knowledge of what the masses want. However, since I firmly believe that the states should be much more empowered and the federal government much more limited I am probably still stepping on your toes. I hope that you will continue to feel free to comment on any all posts that I circulate. Have a good day. Jackie

Hi Marc

How are you doing? It was good to hear from you again. I loved your comments regarding conservatist options and the controlling influence of evangelicals.

One can’t help but remember the holy wars that were fought, not for protection against paganism, but rather for power and control. Sadly, the fight continues today between liberals and conservatives who desire to control what people think and can do with their lives.

God’s could have made us all a lot of little robots but that wasn’t what He wanted. He wanted people to be able to make educated choices.

If, therefore, one isn’t happy with the choices of others they are free to try and change their minds. Short of that, however, we are not in the position to judge them since even Jesus told those that are without sin to throw the first stone.

It is also of interest to me that many out there still try to differentiate sin by degrees. As far as I can tell the Good book doesn’t distinguish a lie from murder or coveting from stealing. If that is truly the case then I believe that only God is in the position to judge us and our fellow human beings.

Have a good day Marc and take care. Jackie

Dear ShadowMyth

Once again thank you for your input. I was just in Salem Massachusettes a month ago and I learned a lot about what occurred there during the Salem witch trials.

It was indeed fear that led the Christian majority to persecute and kill innocent people. That is until the governor’s wife was accused and the madness stopped. Unfortunately, it seems like no one has learned much since that time.

Even witches started out as good people. They had nothing to do with Satan worship. Quite the contrary, they were the early medicine people who delivered babies and grew herbs to cure illness much like the Indian shamen.

It just goes back to people are people and most of us feel too intimidated by the people with money to fight back. Too bad that it seems that these rich cats are also the ones that are raising children who are so bored that they kill for fun and even think that drugs don’t give them enough enjoyment. Look at Bush’s daughters who have been arrested for drunkeness but of course released because of who their father was. Even President Bush has, according to some reports, had a serious alcohol problem. Scary that he is such a good example of the Evangelical Christian. Or is it that he is just using them to maintain his power?

Have a good day ShadowMyth and please keep coming back. Jackie

Jessie…

I do think you right on the spot with this post, i could use a lot a struff for my new study thank you very much.
Greets …