Comments for Post Right

Comment on Bizarro History Repeating by Jon Ponder

Jon Ponder — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 20:49:24 +0000

I, for one, did not wince at the use of the term “traditionalists,” but the oxymoron “conservative intelligentsia” made me giggle.

Comment on Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? by Francis

Francis — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 17:00:46 +0000

At least the above commenter is quite willing to showcase his racism; if only Planned Parenthood had such candor.

Murray Rothbard only demonstrates libertarianism’s woeful detachment from moral/human reality when he describes pregnancy in that peculiar manner.

Comment on Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? by Attack the System » Blog Archive » Is Federalism Good for Fetuses?

Attack the System » Blog Archive » Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:09:53 +0000

[...] Pro-lifer James Banks explains why the pro-choice camp has mostly won the abortion debate. [...]

Comment on Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? by Chad Rushing

Chad Rushing — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:12:30 +0000

I would like to thank the author for mentioning the issue of no-fault divorce. The fact that people today can walk away from their supposedly lifelong marriages and familial obligations on a whim has taken a tremendous toll on American families, although it is rarely acknowledged in the media. People would probably give much more thought to entering into a marriage if they believed that civil governments would enforce their marital vows.

Comment on Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? by Chad Rushing

Chad Rushing — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:02:06 +0000

Regarding Mr. Hardesty’s comment, Murray Rothbard was certainly a brilliant historian and economist. I highly recommend his book What Has Government Done to Our Money?

However, on the abortion issue, he is dead wrong: the mother’s rights do not trump that of the unborn baby’s. To claim that an unborn baby, who was the logical consequence of a mother’s deliberate actions in the past (far more often than not), is somehow “trespassing” in the mother’s womb and, therefore, disposable is both absurd and inhuman. Are we to believe that an unborn baby is a “parasite” of some kind similar to a tick or tapeworm?

The line of reasoning that goes, “This baby whose existence resulted from my actions must die so that I can continue to live the kind of life that I want to live,” was enough to morally discredit the Rothbardian variant of libertarianism in my mind forever. From the Rothbardian point of view, should abortion clinics where babies are systematically dismembered and killed be renamed “liberty wards” in contrast to maternity wards where babies are delivered and lovingly cared for? If so, what a horribly twisted system of ethics that is.

Comment on Bizarro History Repeating by paul gottfried

paul gottfried — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:50:56 +0000

I agree with the two venerable gentlemen who weigh in above about who ousted whom. The traditional Right was not on display at CPAC, except among the marginalized observers. The neocons purged the traditional Right decades ago from the visible conservative movement, and the debate to which John Payne refers took place between Republican-neocons and what could be described as left libertarians. Talking about the traditionalists going down to defeat at last week’s CPAC meeting is a bit like characterizing the Obamaites as Jeffersonian Democrats or Hamiltonian Federalists. The descriptive terms are TOTALLY anachronistic.

Comment on Bizarro History Repeating by Keith Blankenship

Keith Blankenship — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 14:41:51 +0000

The culture war was lost long ago. Pro-sodomy and pro-death ideas are the prevailing ethos, but this does not mean they will always be.
Many people on the Rad-Trad and Paleocon Right are just as opposed to abortion and sodomy as they are to war-mongering and statism.

I support Ron Paul, but I also support Western culture. There really is no contradiction. While I am not sure what a Bible-thumper is, it would be wrong to lump all Christians in with the neo-cons. Many have been misled by their pastors or bedazzled by the Palins of the world.

With the rise of home-schooling, a generation of youth is coming who are neither misled by Baby-Boomer ‘pastors’ of the dispensationalist ilk, nor afraid of secularisers. Don’t count out Tradition just yet. These kids are fierce and totally un-PC. Look out Log Cabin! Look out CPAC!

Comment on Bizarro History Repeating by Simon

Simon — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 19:02:52 +0000

Yes, this “traditionalist” vs “libertarian” distinction isn’t really accurate. If Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity are traditionalists, then words have no meaning. And what about those of us whose social conservatism INCLUDES opposition to global democracy proselytism, endless and wasteful wars, and multi-trillion dollar deficits? I voted for Paul in 08, and he’d have gotten my CPAC vote. But that doesn’t mean I support GOProud or any other group that makes private sexual behavior the core of its identity. All such people are of the Left.

Comment on Is Federalism Good for Fetuses? by James Banks

James Banks — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:07:00 +0000

Phillips: Thanks for the comment. While I don’t respond to it directly, I do address some of the topics you bring up here: http://gulliverdispatch.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/the-politics-of-federalism-and-economics-of-reproduction/

Comment on Bizarro History Repeating by Ed Marimba

Ed Marimba — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:13:11 +0000

I too winced at the use of the term “traditionalists”, since one of the true conservative’s (“paleoconservatives”) core beliefs is the preservation of tradition. Absent that distinction, there wouldn’t be much to conserve.

In fairness, Mr. Payne did use quotation marks, and then later served to assign the proper conservative perspective by his “…traditionalists have been losing all along…” point.

Mr. Origer’s remark is well taken about the absence of the paleoconservative view at CPAC. I was frustrated and disappointed at the same dichotomy at last year’s SRLC event. The two main presences were the Bible thumping, war-mongering, democracy exporters on one hand, and the youthful, Paulian, anarcho-libertarian types on the other. In a choice between the two, I’m much more at home with the latter.