Hypocrisy without Principles

[Adam's Apple]

Hypocrisy without Principles Is the Worst Kind of All
By Jonah Goldberg
March 29, 2005

Let's do something crazy. Let's assume that everyone involved in the Terri Schiavo controversy has operated in good faith. In other words, let's imagine that Michael Schiavo isn't a homicidal money-grubber; that the Republicans aren't political opportunists performing a Kabuki dance for the right-to-lifers; that the so-called evangelicals really do care deeply about Terri Schiavo and are not fighting a cynical proxy war against abortion; and that the Democrats siding with the Florida courts' decision to starve Terri to death are not doing so out of a reflexive petulance toward anti-abortion and conservative forces.

For most of us, this is probably harder than we're willing to admit. But assuming the best motives on everybody's part isn't merely an exercise in niceness. Doing so helps us take arguments seriously. Private motives always play a role in public arguments. Michael Jackson's lawyer may be more motivated by his desire to buy a new boat than his belief in his client's innocence, but that doesn't mean his courtroom arguments should be ignored.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah032905.asp

 

[dilloduck]

Hypocrisy without Principles Is the Worst Kind of All
By Jonah Goldberg
March 29, 2005

Let's do something crazy. Let's assume that everyone involved in the Terri Schiavo controversy has operated in good faith. In other words, let's imagine that Michael Schiavo isn't a homicidal money-grubber; that the Republicans aren't political opportunists performing a Kabuki dance for the right-to-lifers; that the so-called evangelicals really do care deeply about Terri Schiavo and are not fighting a cynical proxy war against abortion; and that the Democrats siding with the Florida courts' decision to starve Terri to death are not doing so out of a reflexive petulance toward anti-abortion and conservative forces.

For most of us, this is probably harder than we're willing to admit. But assuming the best motives on everybody's part isn't merely an exercise in niceness. Doing so helps us take arguments seriously. Private motives always play a role in public arguments. Michael Jackson's lawyer may be more motivated by his desire to buy a new boat than his belief in his client's innocence, but that doesn't mean his courtroom arguments should be ignored.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah032905.asp

nice---I like it but I'm repped out ! common sense always gets my attention

 

[Nienna]

Hypocrisy without Principles Is the Worst Kind of All
By Jonah Goldberg
March 29, 2005

Let's do something crazy. Let's assume that everyone involved in the Terri Schiavo controversy has operated in good faith. In other words, let's imagine that Michael Schiavo isn't a homicidal money-grubber; that the Republicans aren't political opportunists performing a Kabuki dance for the right-to-lifers; that the so-called evangelicals really do care deeply about Terri Schiavo and are not fighting a cynical proxy war against abortion; and that the Democrats siding with the Florida courts' decision to starve Terri to death are not doing so out of a reflexive petulance toward anti-abortion and conservative forces.

For most of us, this is probably harder than we're willing to admit. But assuming the best motives on everybody's part isn't merely an exercise in niceness. Doing so helps us take arguments seriously. Private motives always play a role in public arguments. Michael Jackson's lawyer may be more motivated by his desire to buy a new boat than his belief in his client's innocence, but that doesn't mean his courtroom arguments should be ignored.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah032905.asp

I tried to "rep" you too, but I , likewise, have to spread the rep around. It's only one point, anyway.

 

[musicman]

Hypocrisy without Principles Is the Worst Kind of All
By Jonah Goldberg
March 29, 2005

Let's do something crazy. Let's assume that everyone involved in the Terri Schiavo controversy has operated in good faith. In other words, let's imagine that... the Democrats siding with the Florida courts' decision to starve Terri to death are not doing so out of a reflexive petulance toward anti-abortion and conservative forces.

Fine! We can assume, then, that Democrats' miraculous, instantaneous rebirth as states-rights advocates - certainly not being the result of political expediency - will become increasingly evident in their actions. So, when can we expect to hear Barney Frank telling federal courts to stay out of the gay marriage issue? When Barbara Boxer begins her push to repeal Roe vs. Wade, is she going to call a press conference, or what? Will Charles Schumer actually, physically restore Ten Commandments displays to their former places of public display, or will he just emcee the proceedings?

 

[dilloduck]

Fine! We can assume, then, that Democrats' miraculous, instantaneous rebirth as states-rights advocates - certainly not being the result of political expediency - will become increasingly evident in their actions. So, when can we expect to hear Barney Frank telling federal courts to stay out of the gay marriage issue? When Barbara Boxer begins her push to repeal Roe vs. Wade, is she going to call a press conference, or what? Will Charles Schumer actually, physically restore Ten Commandments displays to their former places of public display, or will he just emcee the proceedings?

:rotflmao:

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Fine! We can assume, then, that Democrats' miraculous, instantaneous rebirth as states-rights advocates - certainly not being the result of political expediency - will become increasingly evident in their actions. So, when can we expect to hear Barney Frank telling federal courts to stay out of the gay marriage issue? When Barbara Boxer begins her push to repeal Roe vs. Wade, is she going to call a press conference, or what? Will Charles Schumer actually, physically restore Ten Commandments displays to their former places of public display, or will he just emcee the proceedings?

Right, that'll be the day. They claim states rights only because it is temporarily useful in the pursuit of a greater goal.

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee. We have those who are actually pushing for a society with those in power that will be able to choose death for a citizen if it helps their greater agenda - which we know is some form of socialist communistic world order. Anybody happen to see the gal on Hannity & Colmes last night who was a Michael Schiavo supporter and who was proudly wearing a pro-Communist T-shirt? They're not even hiding it anymore...

First they came for the unborn and I did nothing, then they came for the disabled and I did nothing, then they came for the Christians and I did nothing, then they came for the orthodox Jews and I did nothing, then they came for me. -Savage

 

[Annie]

Fine! We can assume, then, that Democrats' miraculous, instantaneous rebirth as states-rights advocates - certainly not being the result of political expediency - will become increasingly evident in their actions. So, when can we expect to hear Barney Frank telling federal courts to stay out of the gay marriage issue? When Barbara Boxer begins her push to repeal Roe vs. Wade, is she going to call a press conference, or what? Will Charles Schumer actually, physically restore Ten Commandments displays to their former places of public display, or will he just emcee the proceedings?

Oh I agree that the dems are never going to be state's rights advocates. Problem comes with trying to argue for, when you have been caught in the trap of your own making.

 

[Adam's Apple]

First they came for the unborn and I did nothing, then they came for the disabled and I did nothing, then they came for the Christians and I did nothing, then they came for the orthodox Jews and I did nothing, then they came for me. -Savage

I think it was Edmund Burke who said something along the lines that all that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. The Christian majority had better get busy and start shaking things up--become activists like the libs--or they are going to find themselves in the minority in every way that matters.

 

[musicman]

Oh I agree that the dems are never going to be state's rights advocates. Problem comes with trying to argue for, when you have been caught in the trap of your own making.

Absolutely. And I think that - down the road - if anybody's going to be bitten in the ass by their stance on the Schiavo case, it'll be the libs who are crying the loudest now. How can they block the appointment of a judge who is a strict constitutionalist when they've made such a grand display of their new-found federalism? I can think of few sights more gratifying than a liberal with his head in a noose of his own making.

 

[Annie]

Absolutely. And I think that - down the road - if anybody's going to be bitten in the ass by their stance on the Schiavo case, it'll be the libs who are crying the loudest now. How can they block the appointment of a judge who is a strict constitutionalist when they've made such a grand display of their new-found federalism? I can think of few sights more gratifying than a liberal with his head in a noose of his own making.

Well MM, I do hope you are right. I have a feeling we will be finding out, sooner than later.