I didn't say it. Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker did:
"Suffice it to say, the Republican Party is largely comprised of white, married Christians."
Click here for the rest of Parker's blasphemy. The woman is nothing more than a liberal in conservative (Neiman Marcus) clothing.
In her signature plainspoken style, Michigan native Shanna Flowers peels away the layers and gets to the heart of the issues. No pretense. Just straightforward perspective. Shanna writes about local people whose circumstances reflect decisions made as near as City Hall or as far away as the halls of Congress. Other times, she weighs in on a topic because it is incredibly ridiculous. Or heartening. Or fascinating. Read Shanna's column three days a week, Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays, at roanoke.com
Absolute, irrebuttable TRUTH AND FACT in that column! And it came from a columnist SOUTH of the the Mason-Dixon line too (although Shanna did reprint it from a Detroit newspaper, the columnist actually writes for a Florida paper). Maybe it shows a faint glimmer of hope that people with any common sense at all are waking up to the crepuscular train-wreck juggernaut the "religious" nuts with George Bush at the head of the charge put the country on. George Bush single-handedly elected B. Hussein Obama, just like the religious "magic show" nuts elected Bush. The whole thing might have been a big FIX, who knows?
"Conservatism" is a myth that was simply manufactured to fool poor whites into voting for the interests of the rich folks. That's another FACT.
Comment by Percy Kution — November 23, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Kathleen Parker; George Will; The Goldwater Family; William Buckley's(the father of conservatism) son; and the list of Republican intelligent thinkers goes on and on foretold the fate of the party long before November 4th, and many of them actually endorsed President-elect Obama. They made this decision not to spite their party but because they understand the Republicans are becoming more and more irrelevant.
As Ms. Parker notes, the party cannot represent the country, when it doesn't reflect the diversity of the country in its membership. When one looks at the map of the country, the GOP has been relegated to a regional party (The South). Maybe that's what Nixon meant by his "Southern Strategy".
True democracy cannot operate on a one party system, so there needs to be a breaking away of the moderate thinkers and conservative intelligentsia in the Republican party. They have been held captive long enough, and their voices need to be heard once again. It'll be good for the checks and balances needed for the Democrats, and it will be good for our Republic.
Comment by Henry Hale — November 23, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
I will wholeheartedly agree with the column. I grew up in Virginia bEach and supported the Republicans there because they were more moderate and not nearly as religiously-nutty as the party has become of late. My main reason for supporting the GOP had been for fiscal reasons, since I am very liberal on social issues. But when the GOP turned its back on fiscal responsibility under Bush, I found that I had no reason to vote Republican any more, and with the hard-right religious bent that party leadership has embarked on, my support for the party and most of its candidates ended. I started seeing that trend when I moved to Raleigh, NC and got to see firsthand the religious hardline of folks like Jesse Helms...and it was eye-openingly scary. Now my hope is that the Democrats can enact the common-sense legistlation that Obama ran on, and the GOP can either re-make itself into a party that actually represents more than the religious members it serves, or that a new party can emerge and replace them. I don't like everything the Democrats stand for, but they don't leave me with nearly as much cause for concern as the Republicans do.
Comment by Other John — November 24, 2008 @ 9:54 am
I agree that sometimes things can be taken to far to the right. But to hear that the only reason someone votes for a particular person is because of money is beyond me. I don't know of any religion (off hand) that tells its followers that they can give up on morals, or the values taught by that particular religion just so they can make sure they have more in their pocket. Maybe thinking like that is what is wrong with this country.
Comment by Shan — November 24, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Obama skips church for gym
Obama has yet to attend church services since winning the White House.
Stating he has plenty of time for that "Because they have a great deal of respect for places of worship, they do not want to draw unwelcome or inappropriate attention to a church not used to the attention their attendance would draw," said the aide.
President-elect George W. Bush In the weeks after the contested 2000 election, Bush regularly attended services at Tarrytown United Methodist Church in Austin, Texas....
Comment by Static Lines — November 24, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Its the same base ..Christians ,Rich,White that carried the Republican Party for years...The big culprit is George Bush..remember the Republican revolution where Gengrich declared the Democrat Party as dead..The tide has swung for democrats this time..one mistake by Obama...itll swing the other way so fast itll make your head spin!!
Comment by Larry — November 24, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
static lines- didn't know attending church was a requirement to be pres.
But while we're counting the number of times someone has gone to church let's count the time all the poeple putting obama down for not attending has gone in the past month...
Comment by HCS — November 24, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
Folks, the words "George Bush" and "Republican" shouldn't be used within TWO paragraphs of each other, much less in the same sentence. (uh oh!!! I just did that didn't I???). Well, this one time is for instructional purposes only. Just as the theories and dogma of Karl Marx were unrecognizable in the Soviet Union of Stalin, Bush was what has come to be referred to as a "RINO".....Republican In Name Only. The man is complete anathema and enigma to the Republican Party. While every facet of history will support the fact of stalwart GOP support for the banking and corporate interests, the GOP of the pre-Bush regime also supported smaller governmental intervention in states' and individual citizen's lives. One has to be somewhat wary labels, particularly in the political arena. One would not think of a President who proposed a guaranteed annual income of $12,000 for every US family as a "Conservative". However, Richard did exactly that, even having the legislation introduced in the Senate where it was promplty killed, and certainly no one would call Nixon a "Liberal." In addition, Earl Warren as Governor of California and GOP Presidential candidate exhibited every aspect of what is now considered "Conservative". But as Chief Justice, he was the most "Liberal" Chief Justice of all time. So when we think of George Bush and the Republican Party, I believe we should totally seperate the two, as George Bush has shown himself to be a complete aberration to the GOP. And in my own opinion, the human race as well. (and as a matter of information, I voted for neither McCain or Obama. I felt I had enough COMMON SENSE not to be fooled by either one).
Comment by Percy Kution — November 24, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
This is absurd. Who cares what Kathleen Parker says? Yes, Republicans have always stood for the traditional American way of LIFE. Conservatives believe that the family/marriage is the foundation of any society. We also believe that our country has been blessed by God. In that vein, we know that if our country turns its back on God, it will only receive that which it deserves.
And here we sit...
0bama hasn't gone to church since the election...so what? Why should he? The election is over. I do NOT believe that simply going to church makes a person better or more faithful than another. That said, 0bama is a charlatan and the "church" he went to for 20 years was the equivalent of a KKK rally.
His "CHANGE" has already brought us a redux of the Clinton administration. How many of his new positions have been filled with inside-the-beltway Clinton retreads? 40 or more so far. Is that "Change"?
So, is it important that he hasn't gone to church since being elected?
Sure, if you actually believed he was the type who would go in the first place.
I have a feeling there are going to be A LOT of contradictions with this one. (ex. NO Lobbyists...really? How about Tom Daschle?)
Comment by William — November 24, 2008 @ 7:23 pm
Liberals error in thinking that they posses superior intelligence compared to everyone else. They're smarter, deeper thinkers and more emotionally balanced than you.
Conservatives error in thinking that they are morally superior compared to everyone else. They're better servants of God, adhere to the right "values" and love America more than you do.
Comment by Enkidu — November 24, 2008 @ 10:29 pm
Simplest and easiest definitions of the two major parties I ever read were this: Democrats want to tell you how to spend your money and Republicans want to tell you how to live your life. I honestly believe that after only a short time inside the beltway party affiliations become meaningless anyway. They all become members of the "whatever I've got to do to remain here slurping up at the trough of public money" party. What began as "government of the people, by the people, for the people" has become "government in spite of the people".
Comment by Purvis Ledbetter — November 25, 2008 @ 9:57 am
Enkidu and Purvis: You two have it down PERFECT. Nothing to add to that.
Comment by Percy Kution — November 25, 2008 @ 12:53 pm
William, most people care what writers like Kathleen Parker say because she is one of the preeminent conservative writers in the country today. Her voice, along with those of George Will, Charles Krauthammer, John Kyl(fellow Republican senator of John McCain from Arizona), and several other members of the conservative intelligentsia, should have been listened to long before the election.
Now, it is imperative for the moderates and the group of conservative thinkers that have been shut out by the fringe group of far right wing people who have alienated Independents and others to start listening to those voices and recapture that party or start one of their own.
Enkidu, Purvis, and Percy, very good "put downs" of different groups of people. Too bad your posts don't stay focused on the subject matter of Ms. Parker's article. The fundamental flaw of the blogosphere is that there hasn't been an established posting etiquette that's been accepted by all-to keep each person's post specific to the subject matter.
Comment by Henry Hale — November 25, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
HCS
Obama said he has a ''personal relationship'' with Jesus Christ.
He often has said that religion has a place in public life and that faith and politics are not exclusively the domain of conservatives.
It's important to have religion in your life for a family that prays together stays together.
I guess shooting hoops supersedes his belief of practicing what you preach.
Comment by Static Lines — November 26, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
Ok, Henry...
I'd have to say that I would agree with the column by Kathleen Parker. I voted for Obama and it is the first time I have voted for a Democrat for President (first voted in 88 for Bush senior).
The Republican Party began to lose me with Newt/Pat Buchanan and the culture wars started in the 90's. They completely lost me as W. Bush spent money, ran up the deficit while cutting every tax they could find.
The irony is that I always looked at John McCain as my hope for the party. I was very disappointed when he lost in 2000 to Bush (I voted third party) and I wrote him in for President in 04 with Olympia Snow as the VP.
But McCain lost me with his changes during the 2008 election. He embraced many of the things he rejected back in 2000. The pick of Palin sealed the deal for me.
Many of my friends, like me, consider themselves to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I do not believe gay marriage will ruin our nation but I believe continuing to run up the deficit eventually might. I do not believe increasing the top tax bracket from 36%-39% is socialism but I do believe using the military as our main tool of foreign policy can be seen as imperial.
And to use a local moment to sum this diatribe up...in the week before the election I saw someone in Mill Mountain Coffee wearing a Sarah Palin T-Shirt. On the front it said "God, Guns, Glory" with a picture of the cross, M16 and American flag. I have found over the last dozen years or so that the far right confuse patriotism with nationalism. This is why they lost my vote in 08.
Comment by Enkidu — November 27, 2008 @ 7:21 am
Baghdad celebrates first public Christmas amid hope, memories and Iraqi children dress like Santa's elves for the Christmas party.
The event takes place in a public park in eastern Baghdad, ringed with security checkpoints. Interior Ministry forces deployed on surrounding rooftops peer down at the scene:
a Christmas tree decorated with ornaments and tinsel; a red-costumed Santa Claus waving to the crowd, an Iraqi flag draped over his shoulders; a red-and-black-uniformed military band playing stirring martial music, not Christmas carols.
Those first steps toward freedom of expression is always the hardest, yet whom will take credit for bold new steps in Iraq. Republicans, Democrats, The New Iraqi Government.
How about the combined effort of them all with the US Military commitment to preserve freedom through their sacrifices.
Merry Christmas, and God Bless
Comment by Static Lines — December 21, 2008 @ 3:04 pm