1 - 10 Next
In response to:

The Decline of the West (Cont'd)

WRH Bill Wrote: 9 hours ago (12:38 PM)
There was a poll a while back from a major polling organization (Pew Research, I think it was) indicating that 58% of Americans want our nation to be less involved, not more involved, in the situation between Russia and Ukraine-- and only 8% wanted us to take any kind of military action. The group wanting us to avoid further involvement included not only large majorities of Democrats and independents, but 50% of Republicans. Now Paul Greenberg may just consider that the rot of the "decline of the West" hsa sprad beyond the Obama White House to the American people in general. But he should consider a couple of questions. One: We hear a whole lot from intrventionists about "democracy," how it is our duty to spread it to Iraq and Afghanistan and other places which have never known or even conceived of it on their own, how we must defend democracy in Ukraine, etc. But what about democracy in the United States of America? If a majority of Americans do not want us to be global meddlers and "policemen" or to engage in saber-ratlling with still-nuclear-armed Russia, shouldn't advocates of democracy take heed of the majority will? And as a more practical political matter, will it benefit the Republican Party in the next couple of elections to be known as the Party of Unpopular Wars? Perhaps you feel that it is the duty of Republicans to stand up for American "leadership", but the cost of your principles may be handing elections to Democrats and ensuring that you have no power to influence either the global situation or the political situation at home. By the way, may I point out that not even during the depths of the Cold War was any U.S. President, including Reagan, crazy enough to imagine that we could *force* the Soviet Union to disgorge Ukraine or other Eastrn European territories.
I knew Bloomberg had a lot of gall, but it takes either utter chutzpah or utter cluelessness (or both) to call his new organization a "national grass-roots effort" when it is very clearly what leftists like to call "astroturf"-- an effort initiated and propped up by a wealthy donor rather than by a wishes and efforts of ordinary people.
In response to:

Uninstall Firefox

WRH Bill Wrote: Apr 08, 2014 9:53 AM
As of right now I would say that the Left is more prone than the Right to try to suppress free thought and speech. However, I agree that right-wingers as well as left-wingers have historically been guilty in this respect, and that we should not place blind trust in right-wing politicians or governments to protect freedom.
In response to:

Uninstall Firefox

WRH Bill Wrote: Apr 08, 2014 9:47 AM
I have to say that for someone who generally tries to project a cool and rational image, Dennis Prage is prone to occasional bouts of wild hysteria, especially where the image of same-sex marriage is concerned. Though I support same-sex marriage, at least as a political issue to be decided by voters and elected representatatives (I'm not so sure about the idea that it's a "constitutional right" which ought to be imposed by judges regardless of voters' wishes), I can understand why a reasonable person might think same-sex civil marriage is a bad idea. But when Prager hyperventilates that it is "the most important domestic issue facing our country," and that "traditional marriage" and society itself will crumble to dust if a few same-sex couples are able to obtain legal papers stating they are married, that is not a reasonable position as far as I am concerned. (Actually I think BOTH sides are prone to hysteria on the gay marriage issue. Opponents like Prager are wrong to claim that gay marriage will destroy society, and proponents are wrong to claim that NOT having gay marriage is some sort of horrible, unendurable cruelty.) And now I agree with Prager that the forced resignation of Eich for having opposed gay marriage was wrong and is part of a disturbing trend toward suppression of free speech and thought by the Left. Nonetheless, I think Prager is getting into hysterical territory when he claims, as he did on the radio, that liberty in America is doomed if Mozilla is not driven out of business.
Joe, with the exception of Andrew Sullivan (who I think still calls himself a "conservative" of some sort), were there any gay-activist groups or spokesmen who *objected* to Eich's forced resignation?
Thomas Friedman's complaint that global warming skeptics ("deniers" to him) resemble "Trotsky Marxists" is a bit ironic, considering Friedman's comment from a few years ago that he wished the U.S, could at least temporarily have the "benefit" of a system similar to Chinese Communism, so that "reasonably enlightened leaders" could impose their global warming "solutions" on everybody without nuisances such as constitutional government, free elections and political opposition. Granted, the Chinese Communism of today doesn't bear such a close resemblance to that of Marx or even Mao-- in some ways, it's more like "Chinese Fascism". But still, I wonder if Friedman is in the position of those "fellow travelers" of time past who supported Stalinism rather than the heretical "Trotsky Marxism".
I am not a Christian and not especially sympathetic to the "religious right," but in fairness I would have to say that, as of the present day, the proportion of Christians who have committed violence in the name of their faith (as with attacks on abortionists) is much, much smaller than the proportion of Muslims who have done so.
I have to say that, considering that gays are only 2-3% of the population (one post here said 1%, which sounds low to me) then if 97% of them don't want to get married, somehow I have trouble believing the idea that 3% of 2% of the population getting legal papers saying they are married, is going to cause "traditional marriage", or society in general, to crumble.
I certainly would not try to run your car off the road, or do anything else to you, for having a Rick Santorum bumper sticker. On the other hand, I also will not vote Republican if Santorum is their next Presidential nominee.
I don't agree with what happened to Eich, but you're mistaken about "violating his 1st Amendment rights". The First Amendment (and most of the rest of the Constitution) places limits on government, not on private citizens and companies.
1 - 10 Next