Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Another Lost "Conservative?"
All non-conservatives seemed to love Roger Abramson's post where he spent more time defending his credentials than endorsing Bob Corker.
My reaction? Well, it is best summarized by the great philosopher...
Batman.
"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me."
Roger gives a laundry list of why he is a conservative in his defensive effort (in the part of the epic post before he states that he trusts Bob Corker to be a candidate that can manage a budget without interference from outside interests - yes, that Bob Corker that is beholden to more moneyhandlers and influence purchasers than any other candidate in the race). Roger may have acted like a conservative at one time, but those days are in the rearview mirror.
Roger, this is not your first questionable act against conservatism. Even your own FAQ on your site admits your moderate status (see question #8). You state that your heart is with the conservatives, but that your head is elsewhere. Your actions - which define you - can attest to the latter statement, but you - and Bob Corker, as well - want us to take you at your word as to who you are underneath.
I'm not prepared to do that anymore. Doing that is why the Republican Party has let us conservatives down. It's time we remained principled, not pragmatic, in both our ideology and actions.
Yes, it's sad, but not entirely unpredictable nor revolutionary.
My reaction? Well, it is best summarized by the great philosopher...
Batman.
"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me."
Roger gives a laundry list of why he is a conservative in his defensive effort (in the part of the epic post before he states that he trusts Bob Corker to be a candidate that can manage a budget without interference from outside interests - yes, that Bob Corker that is beholden to more moneyhandlers and influence purchasers than any other candidate in the race). Roger may have acted like a conservative at one time, but those days are in the rearview mirror.
Roger, this is not your first questionable act against conservatism. Even your own FAQ on your site admits your moderate status (see question #8). You state that your heart is with the conservatives, but that your head is elsewhere. Your actions - which define you - can attest to the latter statement, but you - and Bob Corker, as well - want us to take you at your word as to who you are underneath.
I'm not prepared to do that anymore. Doing that is why the Republican Party has let us conservatives down. It's time we remained principled, not pragmatic, in both our ideology and actions.
Yes, it's sad, but not entirely unpredictable nor revolutionary.
Permalink posted by Rob Huddleston @ 3:59 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Just illustrates that there are several definitions of "conservative," some of them directly contrary. So to me, the word means nothing now. It's a empty word.
Bob Corker is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination, and endorsing him is not a conservative act. Abramson, it seems, has gone the way of Goldwater before him-out to a very sad pasture.
Rob,
Very few people agree ON EVERYTHING. I, however, tend to see this as a plus as it helps us reach for the most realistic solutions. Many things (for example, experiences) shape what people think, so therefore, they have a different viewpoint than you. All should be respected.
For example, many conservatives are against stem cell research (reasons ranging from the funding of it to the morality of it). I am in favor of it, as many people in my family (including my mother) have had to deal with cancer. I would support just about anything that would make cancer preventable or less painful.
I wasn't taking a pot shot with my previous comment, I was just pointing out how some can be very close-minded. Thanks for making my point.
Post a Comment
Very few people agree ON EVERYTHING. I, however, tend to see this as a plus as it helps us reach for the most realistic solutions. Many things (for example, experiences) shape what people think, so therefore, they have a different viewpoint than you. All should be respected.
For example, many conservatives are against stem cell research (reasons ranging from the funding of it to the morality of it). I am in favor of it, as many people in my family (including my mother) have had to deal with cancer. I would support just about anything that would make cancer preventable or less painful.
I wasn't taking a pot shot with my previous comment, I was just pointing out how some can be very close-minded. Thanks for making my point.
<< Home
