[Rhodes22-list] Politics - Brad's Left Wing Source

[brad haslett]

Ed,

You would be shocked, perhaps disgusted, at some of
the stuff I read.  Two of my favorite magazines, The
New Yorker and The Atlantic, threw out all pretenses
of being objective this election cycle.  Both came up
for renewal and I told Fan, "don't bother".  Reality
is though. I'll buy a copy the first time through an
airport terminal so I'll probably renew under my
wife's name and get the first time subscriber
discount.  It's always good to know what the other
side is thinking, or not!

Brad


--- ed kroposki <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:

> Brad:
> 	Are you really quoting the "New Republic" and an
> article by a
> "Brookings Fellow"?  These organizations have been
> as far left as you can
> get.  How come the liberal issue supporters on this
> list are not endorsing
> your articles?
> 	The truth is probably they do not read what you
> site.  They think
> that their belief is the one true belief and they do
> not need to think any
> further.
> 	When I came to South Carolina, I was amazed at a
> group of local
> citizens.  I observed that this group was ignorant
> and what amazed me, was
> that they were proud to be ignorant.  They were
> completely intransient in
> their opinions.
> 	It was interesting because you always knew this
> group.  Your nose
> told you.  You could smell them.  They did not
> practice modern hygiene.
> They did not take baths.
> 
> Ed K
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
> [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On
> Behalf Of brad haslett
> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 8:36 PM
> To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list] Politics - Moral
> Clarity
> 
> Ed,
> 
> Here is a very good article on the role of "moral
> issues" and the recent election:
> 
>
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=c3t%2FZx7FXm7Px4waAFUYsx%3D%3D
> 
> Being religious doesn't make one moral nor does
> being
> a moral person require one to be religious.  There
> has
> been too much made of this issue.  But, if you need
> a
> scapegoat, moral issues is as good as any.
> 
> Brad
> 
>  
> --- ed kroposki <ekroposki at charter.net wrote:
> 
>  Folks:
>  
>  Moral Clarity is a political term.  Moral Clarity
> is
>  "the real black and
>  white line that divides free societies from fear
>  societies, the real line
>  that divides good from evil."  Sharansky, Natan and
>  Dermer, Ron (2004) The
>  Case For Democracy, The Power of Freedom to
> Overcome
>  Tyranny and Terror. New
>  York: Public Affairs.
>  
>  There is no deity in this definition
> notwithstanding
>  the author is
>  associated with a particular religion. 
>  
>  This book is available in print only and not on
>  audio.
>  
>  Ed K
>  
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
>  [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On
>  Behalf Of Robert Skinner
>  Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 6:14 PM
>  To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
>  Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Jesusland.
>  
>  Rummy -
>  
>  Couldn't agree more about the problems that come 
>  up when we combine religion with politics.
>  
>  Part of the background of our current "family
>  values"
>  vs. secular considerations may come from our
> failure
>  to distinguish between moral issues and ethical
>  ones.
>  
>  Morals are a product of a person's dialogue with
> his
>  deity of choice - and there is more than one such
>  acknowledged in this country.
>  
>  Ethics are shared in a society without regard to
>  religion - or the society falls apart.  When the 
>  society decides to enforce morals, it becomes a
>  theocracy, and people's rights are submerged in the
>  regulations laid down by the priest class,
> specially
>  when it is indistinguishable from the ruling class.
>  
>  I believe that the "family values" issues raised in
>  the last election are totally irrelevant to our
>  government, and were used in the most unscrupulous 
>  way to obscure the real issues confronting our
>  government.
>  
>  /Robert Skinner
>  -----------------------------------------------
>  R22RumRunner at aol.com wrote:
>   
>   In a message dated 11/21/2004 2:06:47 PM Eastern
>  Standard Time,
>   flybrad at yahoo.com writes:
>   
> 
>
http://realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/2004_County_Results_Final.html
>   I get it now, those people that didn't vote for
>  Bush, according to the red
>   and blue map, are less religious than those that
>  did.
>   This country is in a sad state of affairs. What
>  happens to the people that
>   are either in the red or blue, voted for their
>  candidate, but aren't
>  religious?
>    Where do we fit in? Personally, I don't think
>  religion has any place in
>   politics. Something about the separation of church
>  and state. Our founding
>   father's were very smart in writing this into our
>  constitution. Putting
>  the two
>   together only muddies the waters even more than
>  they already are. Religion
>  or
>   actions taken in the name of religion have done
>  more harm to the planet
>  than
>   any  other "just" cause. Let the priests, rabbi's,
>  mullah's(sp) and
>  ministers
>   tend their flocks, but leave the rest of us alone.
>   
>   Rummy
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! 
http://my.yahoo.com