Political Lines... I think along these line: I think pretty much all Americans are fed up with their governments being hi-jacked by lobbiest and special interests. They are fed up with politicians who lack honesty, leadership, courage and integrity. They are fed up with financial instability and an uncertain future. The Republican base is divided into three distinct groups. 1) Those who want fiscal responsibility, an end to deficit budgets and strong leadership. 2) Libertarians who want far less, if any, government, the elimination of programs and regulations and the restoration of individual freedoms. 3) Evangelists who want leadership directed by God's word and one nation under God. Democrats are divided into: 1) Those who want a thoughtful approach to deficit and debt reduction while continuing to care for those less fortunate who are truly in need. 2) Those that want the clear separation of church and state, and in particular a woman's right to choose, freedom for science to investigate stem cell research and gay rights, etc.. 3) Those that see government programs as entitlements and opportunities to avoid actually having to earn a living. Close?
As a non American too that pretty much hits the nail on the head as I see it as an outsider. It's the No 3's in both camps that would be my concern.
This is exactly what is NOT needed in the political life of the country: injecting religion into it, no matter what religion, is divisive and puts a personal system of belief and practice ahead of all other considerations. The understanding that there should be a separation of church and state is there primarily to protect the citizens' freedom to practice one's adopted religions beliefs: no system of belief can be promoted by the government, nor by the president, without doing harm to this freedom. Those who do not accept this simply don't care whether others' sensibilities are trampled. It appears that Santorum falls in this camp: this alone disqualifies him from the high office of president, in my opinion.
I agree with your assessment of religion in politics 100%. Whenever I hear someone say that we need more religion in politics, I always ask them, Who's God? Is it their defiinition of God or that of the Ayatollahs or the rabbi or the Jehovah's Witness or whom? However, that being said, what are our choices going to be? It seems that the Republicans have sided heavily with number 3 on Brewster's list but the Democrats have sided right square on top of number 3 on their list. So the way it shakes out right now our choice is going to be a religious fanatic who has no idea of what reality is or a spendthrift incompetent who also has no concept of reality. Could it be time for a third party? And V, I would want to see that third party put up someone who has had real life experiences. Someone who has actually lived in the real world rather than lived in a life of riches or one spent as a "community organizer." By my definition that would put them more as an average American because we haven't done too well with the non-average American.
IMO Santorum belongs on a pulpit and not in the Oval office. I'll grant that the man has strong morals, but that by itself is no qualification for president. While I share his moral convictions in many ways, I simply can't support legislation based solely on the premise of what is "right or wrong". That sets a dangerous precedent. Instead, I would rather see someone in the office who defaults to the protection of liberty and freedom, and doesn't seek to legislate morality. One's moral convictions should be personal and based upon their own decisions. I really don't like the thought of someone else deciding what my character should be.
I didnt think it would be possible....but if they nominate Santorum it would be even worse than McCain/Palin.....another stupid choice and it's just gonna give us 4 more years of the current idiot.
The Republican candidates scare the hell out of me, well, at least the ones in the main spotlight tonight: A warmongerer and a rabid homophobe that believes womens rights should be what they were hundreds of years ago, ie: pretty much non existing... "Do you dislike gays? Yep! Cool, you passed the first test..." I need to check the calendar to see if its really 2012 or if its 1212... You with way more insight than me: Could you tell me about Ron Paul? Him and Romney get at least decent press back home in Sweden, compared to space aliens such as Santorum and Newt...
Ron Paul would be best be described as a libertarian. His bottom line seems to be that all government interference is evil. Not many people take him seriously. I guess the best assessment of Ron Paul is that he has been in the House of Representatives for something like 14 years and has never, ever had a bill even get out of committee. Although I should add that Anthony Weiner was also in Congress for about the same length of time and he never even bothered to propose any legislation. I guess he was too busy with his camera and his mirror.
