Comments on: Iowa: Santorum’s day to shine

By: foxmarks

foxmarks — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 00:08:09 +0000

Don:

If it isn’t mandated by the Constitution, by what authority does the Federal Government undertake it? Did the Founders conceive a gov’t ruling by whim?

And don’t be so fast…I might be able to dig up a Progressive justification that says the FedGov must do all it can to help people. The General Welfare clause is a primary font of abuse.

I’m not in the ABO camp. Obama is just a symptom.

By: Don Carlos

Don Carlos — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 02:40:39 +0000

Fox:
With all respect, I meant to (OK, snippilly!) indicate some of your comments were too oblique. I would prefer you to flesh out your case with quotes and citations rather than referring me to Google to hunt and peck for whatever you’ve already scratched up to stoke your ire.

No one, no one asserts the Constitution mandates compassionate conservatism (a Bushism, IIRC), nor Medicare Part D. Those are straw arguments which you seem to lay at Santorum’s feet. The Constitution also does not grant sexual rights, nor the other “rights” invented by some of SCOTUS. That includes the “right” granted by the Griswold ruling. And the “right” (though she did not use the word) that Juatice O’Conner granted to Blacks for the rest of us to suffer the bias of Affirmative Action for…um…maybe another 25 years.

Let’s get back to the over-riding: ABO!!

By: foxmarks

foxmarks — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:53:18 +0000

Don:

I guess I have to be more explicit. The Constitution does not empower Congress to focus on compassionate conservatism. There’s no clause which says the FedGov should subsidize prescription drugs for old folks. There’s no clause which puts sexual behavior under Federal control. Do some googling on Santorum’s vision for the role of gov’t as expressed in his book.

His very concept of “focused government” is a farce. He wants to focus on every aspect of daily life. The Founders did not empower the FedGov to be an agent of culture. We have churches for that. Replacing faith with law turns family into hive.

You can’t roll back five decades of Gramscian decay by Executive Order.

I ask you to stop insulting me and think a little to try seeing my perspective. You can disagree. Heck, you might even persuade me. Give it a try.

By: Don Carlos

Don Carlos — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:41:22 +0000

Cattle prods? A focused government is expansionist? Your screws may need a little tightening, foxmarks. Do take your own advice and act adult.

By: foxmarks

foxmarks — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:10:56 +0000

Don:

Santorum is quoted in his Wiki entry:

Santorum advocates “compassionate conservatism” which he says “relies on healthy families, freedom of faith, a vibrant civil society, a proper understanding of the individual and a focused government to achieve noble purposes through definable objectives which offers hope to all.”

A focused government to achieve noble purposes is an expansionist view of the role of government. The Marriage Amendment is a concrete example.

Don’t run away with a strawman. Our Constitution is not the Word of G-d. My personal morality is founded in the Commandments and instructions from G-d. But if man is not allowed to choose, he is no longer a moral agent.

Coercion takes the matter outside morality. The Abrahamic God explicitly allows men to choose and metes out punishment and reward according to His rules. We lost the Innocence of children when cast out of the Garden. Now we have to act like adults. Santorum can’t herd us back to the Garden with cattle prods.

By: Commenter formerly known as roc scssrs

Commenter formerly known as roc scssrs — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 19:11:01 +0000

I love Rick Santorum, I respect Rick Santorum. I also don’t think he can be elected President. He excites the same animus that Sarah Palin does. The media will be gunning for him and he will be an easy target. A lot of voters will absolutely hate him. His problem is something like Gingrich’s: he thinks too much and speaks too plainly; not as broadly as Gingrich, but again to his disadvantage, very focused and with bulldog tenacity. He thinks like an old school Catholic– he traces everything back to root causes and moral failings. He’s very much in the tradition of Aquinas and Aristotle, but they never got many votes outside Iowa either.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 17:57:48 +0000

No one wants Western sharia (an apt label). The social conservatism is enforced not through law but through the myriad number of interactions and relationships. If it isn’t there through the free acceptance of the people, that’s it. You can’t force people but the force of consequences will surely provide a message. Our national debt is a moral problem and the left’s solution, make the rich and prosperous pay, is an immoral solution. The solution is not to implement Western sharia but to suffer and, hopefully, repent.

By: Don Carlos

Don Carlos — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 17:36:11 +0000

FOX:
Do us all a favor and cite some specifics as to Santorum’s “form(s) of government interventionism”.
As to morality not being commanded, pray how and whence came yours? They’re not called The Ten Commandments for nothing.

By: foxmarks

foxmarks — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 17:06:03 +0000

Yet, the Constitution does not give Congress authority to make laws on many socially conservative issues. Morality cannot be commanded.

That’s the philosophical failing of Santorum’s form of government interventionism. It aims to treat us all as children, unable to control our own urges. We trade the nanny state for the nunnery state. The Founders preferred no tyrants, even the virtuous ones.

Or, if you want it in flashier rhetoric, Santorum wants impose Western Sharia.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:39:23 +0000

Social conservatism is indeed the context which made possible the birth and success of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. A people afraid of and hateful of social conservatism can no more use those documents than a one arm man a hoe. (And there’s got to be a better metaphor since the one arm man has no choice in having only one arm.)