LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY gloucester)
In a previous post I commented that I was attempting to develop a PR plan to punish James Dobson for recanting on his promise to form a third party, when/if he did in fact recant. I did develop such a plan, but then a friend called me on my hypocrisy--he reminded me that I am solidly against fear and anger in politics, and that, while it could work and "couldn't happen to a nicer guy," this plan amounted to concerted character assassination. As a result, I sought another approach, and what I have come up with is that I have to find a way to build support for the third party idea. All that's coming to mind in that regard is a PR campaign to support that course of action. I have lots more research to do.
So let me just feel some things out in this community. I get the sense that we are generally in favor of the pullout to a third party by Dr. Dobson and his peers, but that we don't think he'll do it. I'm not sure if I think he will or not, and I am coming to think that the GOP will give in before he will/won't. Are we generally in support of the pullout? What needs to be true before we can be assured Dr. Dobson will follow through? Is there anything we can do to help that happen? If so, what? I think it can be generally agreed that I do not have enough information to do anything yet, so what am I missing that I haven't thought to ask?
James Dobson and the Third Party
Quote of the Day
LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY hummingwolf) I am a democrat because I believe that no man or group of men is good enough to be trusted with uncontrolled power over others. And the higher the pretensions of such power, the more dangerous I think it both to the rulers and to the subjects. Hence Theocracy is the worst of all governments. If we must have a tyrant a robber baron is far better than an inquisitor. The baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent. But the inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations. And since Theocracy is the worst, the nearer any government approaches to Theocracy the worse it will be. A metaphysic, held by the rulers with the force of a religion, is a bad sign. It forbids them, like the inquisitor, to admit any grain of truth or good in their opponents, it abrogates the ordinary rules of morality, and it gives a seemingly high, super-personal sanction to all the very ordinary human passions by which, like other men, the rulers will frequently be actuated. In a word, it forbids wholesome doubt. A political programme can never in reality be more than probably right. We never know all the facts about the present and we can only guess the future. To attach to a party programme--whose highest real claim is to reasonable prudence--the sort of assent which we should reserve for demonstrable theorems, is a kind of intoxication. --C.S. Lewis, from the essay "A Reply to Professor Haldane," as printed in On Stories And Other Essays on Literature Dominionist attacks on libraries?
LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY redstar826) If you drink beer...
LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY amethyst_hunter) |