Full text. God parts:
1. As Americans, we believe freedom is a gift from God, and government’s prime function is to defend it. We don’t see the role of government as a nanny state...
This is giving me flashbacks to
the Jesus-is-left-wing diatribe inflicted on me here in Madison the other day.
2. We will not sit back and accept our current misery... because a great country requires a better direction... because a renewed nation requires a new president. That’s why, with faith in God, the support of my family, and an unwavering belief in the goodness of America, I am a candidate for President of the United States....
3. The change we seek will never emanate out of Washington... it must come from the windswept prairies of Middle America... the farms and factories across this great land... the hearts and minds of God-fearing Americans who will not accept a future that is less than our past... who will not be consigned a fate of less freedom in exchange for more government.
Recall that — in Perry's view —
freedom (not a nanny state) emanates from God.
4. With God’s help, and your courage, we will take our country back....
5. Thank you, and God bless America.
पोस्ट्स
१०८ टिप्पण्या:
I admire Perry's religious convictions.
That said, he could cool it with the public displays.
Meh. Much ado about nothing. It'll drive the lefties crazy. That's a good thing.
Well, that certainly includes God fearing Mormons.
But of course he's there partly because his evangelical preacher buddies are pushing him to counter the Mormon.
The just haven't figured out how to say God fearing in a way that expressly excludes Mormons.
I'd be curious to hear from folks in Tx if that fits his past and present public persona as Governor.
I'm also recalling all the "to do" with GWB's evangelical convictions. And what do you know, his administration WAS NOT the American Taliban.
Agree with the previous comments, "much ado about nothing;" unless you are of a conviction that freedom of religion doesn't apply to public figures.
Sad to see T-Paw drop out, he and Perry seem the only GOP candidates with a proven track record.
Agree with Perry on this comment he made yesterday in NH: "Americans aren’t interested in a bunch of negative rock throwing and what have you. They’re interested in solutions.”
Perry has a demonstrated record of positive results in TX; that makes him the front-runner in my mind.
Rights emanate from God, and no government may abrogate them for that reason.
In this sense, freedom emanates from God as well.
God allows free will to be part of our life, and He does not even interfere with a person's rejection of Him. In the same way, the government may not interfere with exercise of our rights.
But you know all this.
It's Old School. Read the speeches of FDR, or Lincoln, or Washington, or Eisenhower, or many other Presidents. Many references to God, requests for God's blessings, speculations about God's will (Lincoln).
I practice no religion and am skeptical that a God who directs or monitors our lives exists. But if he believes differently, he should not hide it. It's a free country, isn't it?
One thing is certain: God really doesn't care who wins the nomination or the election.
Peter
But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America. Thomas Jefferson, 1775
Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; Thomas Jefferson
And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, Thomas Jefferson
the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, Thomas Jefferson
I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; Thomas Jefferson
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
Declaration of Independence
Seems religious hatred has become quite the trend lately.
I wish Perry had said what gerry says. Because it is the inalienableness of rights that has to be impressed on the citizenry.
Whether a person is religious or irreligious, David hits the right note.
I don't know much about Perry, but so far, he strikes me as another political opportunist who'd say just about anything needed to get elected. These prayer event things, they struck me as being a little weird for a politician. Why not hold a political event, since he is a politician, not a preacher? (I think). I do admire Texas' economic framework, and Perry had little to do with that.
That being said I'd vote for him over Obama, but man... Texas again??
Hell, DADvocate, why go back to old Thomas J? How about in the life of many of us still living FDR going on national radio on D-Day and offering a national prayer as well as asking that all the nation's church bells be rung? Can you imagine Obama (or ANY modern lefty President)doing the same on TV/radio in a similar circumstance today?
DADvocate said it already, but it probably bears repeating...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
You got a problem with the Declaration of Independence? Jeez, Madison is way more fucked up than I thought.
DADvocate --
"Seems religious hatred has become quite the trend lately."
Reading comments top to bottom, the atheists all state they don't care if he does it, even if they personally find it a bit overdone.
The only antagonism I find at all is the article itself being a setup for religious argument.
Such speech was common up until the last generation. Now white folks are embarrassed by it. Obama was permitted to indulge only as scraps thrown to blacks and bitterclinging whites.
Sensible adults know to keep this under wraps, like having model trains or reading romance novels.
What David and others have said, but I don't think he should cool it if that's the way he really feels.
A good part of the Lefties' strategy is based on shaming people into doing it their way, so Curious is right - let him drive the creeps nuts.
PS Considering Shout was all for white people not acting like pussies when attacked, I'd think he'd welcome Perry challenging the Left on this.
"Such speech was common up until the last generation."
Who, exactly, is "Nature's God"?
More Jefferson, less Perry.
Just because someone "pisses off the lefties" doesn't mean that they're good.
A point that's being neglected that shouldn't be is Althouse's implied equivalence between Perry's "God" talk and the loudmouth Madison protester who kept claiming Jesus was on his side.
If Perry had said that Jesus would be in favor of ending Social Security as we know it, I'd object strenuously. That sort of thing is polarizing bullshit, which is the stock-in-trade of Madison's idiot class.
But invoking God as a source of transcendent human rights addresses a fundamental philosophical question. Others of us may have different bases for our belief in individual liberty, but Perry's statements are not anything remotely close to rabble-rousing.
If I could I'd vote for 1, 2, and 3. It might be 4. Time will tell if it's 5.
This is giving me flashbacks to the Jesus-is-left-wing diatribe inflicted on me here in Madison the other day.
To me the phony preacher’s sick rant, which was replete with many references to “Jesus,” and this excerpt from Perry’s speech, which never mentions “Jesus,” are very different. Different in content and intent.
Also, from the Perry speech excerpt one could not determine the speaker’s particular religion. If one did not know Perry was a Christian the excerpt could be attributed to any number of religions – or no religion at all.
A belief in God does not automatically signify a religious belief; religions do not “own” the concept of God. Many irreligious folks may believe in the existence of a God. But I suppose to a liberal law professor it’s all one of a kind – ANY reference to a higher being is suspect, illegitimate and something to worry about.
Just because someone "pisses off the lefties" doesn't mean that they're good.
No, but it certainly moves the needle in the right direction.
Reading comments top to bottom, the atheists all state they don't care if he does it, even if they personally find it a bit overdone.
I'm not talking about the comments, or even the article, but a broader trend, lead by the left and the MSM, in our society. If not for their hatred of traditional American Protestant religion, this wouldn't be an issue.
Ann never would have made this post. Now, would Perry at the prayer rally been such a big deal. The left wants to disqualify anyone with these beliefs from serving in the presidency.
The left wants to qualify candidates according to religious beliefs. Mormons, conservative Christians, devout Catholics and the like don't meet their qualifications. Bigotry and hatred is at the heart of much liberalism.
True freedom, in a world with over 6 billion people, exists when individuals self-moderate their behavior. It is diminished when the acceptance of moral knowledge is replaced with totalitarian policies. The principal source of moral knowledge follows from respect for individual dignity, yours and others; and, individual dignity, as we are reminded by left-wing philosophers and sociologists, is a matter of faith. Whether that faith is derived from God is unknown. It may be intrinsic or it may be emergent.
The alternative is that we live in a dynamically unstable world, where order is maintained through fear of each other. Who knows, maybe that is the only reason we are hospitable to each other. Maybe the natural order rules as competing interests remove weaker adversaries, and the stronger interests keep each other in check.
If we accept the concepts of freewill and individual dignity, then the order which takes priority is our choice. If we reject those two fundamental or axiomatic concepts, then it is all for naught anyway.
The first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence:
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Better than President Downgrade's bowing & kissing the ring of the Guardian of the Two Holy Places.
This essay is consistent with Perry's speeches for the last 10 years as governor here in Texas. It certainly reflects his own faith and also shows his awareness that Perry himself is not the center of the universe or even his own world. But he has not used the governor's office to try and impose his religious views on the state. He is much less open about his own religious views than say, Huckabee. He's not an evangelical Christian like Bachmann either. I've lived in Texas my entire life and also went to A&M like Perry, and I didn't even know Perry was a Methodist until Taranto tweeted about it yesterday.
I see it as a red flag. Many Christians seem not to really believe a lot of the convictions that their religion would seem to require of them. They live with a certain amount of cognitive dissonance or maybe hypocrisy, whatever you want to call it. They're mostly good people, mostly sane, other than that. They make good moderates.
I don't mind true believers either personally, but the idea of a President committed to a Bible-based understanding of reality is worrisome to me.
Some of the reason, never discounting personal conviction, is that the founders did believe that our rights came from God, Stephen Langton said so and they were chartered (amongst other places)on the field of Runnymede. Where else could they come from? The King? That's one of the problems Europe is having these days, rights that the government gave you, the government can take from you.
@phx--So one thing we know about you for sure is that you're a religious bigot. Duly noted.
A lot of people are turned off by the thumpers. I know I am.
Care to explain what it is in these comments by Perry that constitutes Bible thumping? I must be missing something.
but the idea of a President committed to a Bible-based understanding of reality is worrisome to me.
Are you saying Perry has a Bible-based understanding of reality? What is "a Bible-based understanding of reality?" What proof do you have, other than Perry prays, that he is has a "a Bible-based understanding of reality?" Do you think every Christian takes a literal truth view of the Bible?
Is this your socially acceptable way of saying you're a religious bigot?
So one thing we know about you for sure is that you're a religious bigot. Duly noted.
Does it sound like I'm hostile to people who really believe in a Bible-based reality, or that I am intolerant of them? I think that would make me a bigot.
My concern is with someone who has a fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity being President, particularly at this time when people are already very divided.
I suspect you wouldn't however have a problem with someone who has the same commitment to the Quran being President, because you think that would make you a religious bigot. But correct me if I am wrong.
@DADvocate, I'd say that this is the evidence of bigotry:
They're mostly good people, mostly sane, other than that.
An elegant combination of condemnation and disdain, really. Sounds like a retired Bengal lancer reminiscing at his London club about the little brown Hindus.
Palladian said...
Just because someone "pisses off the lefties" doesn't mean that they're good.
This is true Palladian, but the usual suspects have sounded so alarmist over so many candidates that now it's almost a reflexive response to have a closer, sympathetic look.
Plus, their incumbent candidate of choice, Barack Obama, remains less than inspiring.
___________
wv = "anoid" a pissed-off, paranoid person with a hint of polarization.
I suspect you wouldn't however have a problem with someone who has the same commitment to the Quran being President, because you think that would make you a religious bigot. But correct me if I am wrong.
Another thing we now know about you is that you are quite ready to ascribe all sorts of beliefs to people you know nothing about.
What makes you a bigot is that you judge people on the basis of their religion rather than their policy proposals. If your ilk had ruled the day in the 1850s in this country, abolitionism would have been considered beyond the pale because of the religious basis for much of it.
If Perry is for fundamental reform of Social Security, I really don't care if that's because of his religious views or his economic analysis.
Similarly, I don't care a whit about Muslims and their beliefs. But I do care about people who want to commit mass murder.
Genocide isn't any better if it's carried out by atheists. Charity isn't worse if it's extended for religious reasons. Actions are what matter.
Pander, pander panderrrrrr. Perry thePanderer. The Religous Right might eat that up, but Texans who know Perry know better.
These prayer event things, they struck me as being a little weird for a politician. Why not hold a political event, since he is a politician, not a preacher? (I think).
Well, I guess the obvious answer would be that if there is a religious purpose, then attendance at a religious event is appropriate. If there is a political purpose, a political event would be pertinent. Conversely, one does not hold a political rally at an altar. It seems that to the commentor’s mind only preachers are allowed to participate in religious gatherings and a politician is evidently not allowed to have a religious life – unless perhaps the politician keeps the religious belief hush-hush.
I do admire Texas' economic framework, and Perry had little to do with that.
I disagree. Perry has had a LOT to do with the conservative ascendance and favorable business climate in Texas. And has been roundly vilified by the Left for it.
That being said I'd vote for him over Obama, but man... Texas again??
Here is an illustration of one of Perry’s handicaps. Perry is from Texas and many folks do not like Texans. Too fly-over, too unapologetically successful, too openly optimistic, maybe too conservative. A lot of Texans wear boots and speak with a Texas accent and that doesn’t wear well outside of the West and Southwest.
Does it sound like I'm hostile to people who really believe in a Bible-based reality, or that I am intolerant of them?
Yep, it sure does.
I didn't accuse Perry of anything. I said in response to the poll "I see it as a red flag."
I don't think I condescend fundamentalist Christians more than I do atheists, Muslims, well everybody.
I heard somewhere Mark Twain said "Jews are a part of the human race. Worse than that I cannot say."
That's pretty much how I feel about most of you libtards and Rethuglicans.
That might make me an asshole but I'm not a religious bigot.
That might make me an asshole but I'm not a religious bigot.
If you find this belief comforting, then by all means cling to it. Cling to it bitterly.
@Chip S.
I do not know much about Perry. In the last week, he had his prayer dinner and this statement. Maybe he is not a thumper. Maybe he is just a hippocrit and panderer. I am open to support him but his introduction has been weak.
Just tone it down a little bit. I think George W had it about right. He appeared to be a man of deep faith.
God a good older friend from Corpus Christi who used to work in Houston in the oil and gas business.
He said lots of execs would bring their bibles with them to meetings.
And he learned over time an almost fool-proof rule: the bigger the bible, the bigger the scoundrel.
And devout Catholic that my friend is, he swears by that rule in Texas to this day.
I also don't know much about Perry. I just gave him credit that when he spoke about God that he meant what he said.
I guess no one should be disappointed if he actually is just pandering.
Should read: "Got a good older friend....."
Sorry.
I suspect you wouldn't however have a problem with someone who has the same commitment to the Quran being President, because you think that would make you a religious bigot. But correct me if I am wrong.
You sound so much like the typical bigot throughout history. "Everybody does it." The favorite excuse of bigots and criminals.
"But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:6
It was the Pharisees who wore their religion openly. Jesus taught that by your fruits ye shall know them--point being that someone's faith is represented by their works, by what they do, not what they say and their ostentatious displays of righteousness.
Anyone that keeps reminding you they are Christian isn't.
Maybe he is not a thumper. Maybe he is just a hippocrit and panderer.
Lamar, you crack me up. In response to my simple request that you explain what you were referring to about Perry, you call on me to "tone it down." Then you play the "hypocrite" card. Nice.
What part of what I wrote in response to phx do you find unclear? Unlike you, I am not obsessed with assaying the depth of any candidate's religious fervor. I am only concerned with their views and the likelihood that they will do what they say they'll do.
Anyone that keeps reminding you they are Christian isn't.
So, now you're the arbiter of who's Christian and who isn't based on your interpretation of the Bible? What's that judge not lest you be judged only harsher passage?
I assume, in you book, anyone going to any of those thousands of "Christian" churches, isn't Christian because they're not praying in a closet. Talk about a literal interpretation.
Everybody says God's on his side. So sayeth Abraham Lincoln. And, then he added "one side loses."
Me?
If you think Jesus votes, God help you. I'm sure he doesn't. Just as I am sure God laughs.
Fuck this Christian Taliban. I know I'm voting for Maxine Waters if she throws her hat in the ring. I only want uber-progressives of the chocolate variety.
Fuck it - I want Jesse Jackson.
Just as I am sure God laughs.
A lot.
Ann, why don't you count up the shout outs to God in Abraham Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural Address, and then explain why he's such a bad President because he gives you the atheist heebie-jeebies.
We'll wait.
I know Americans know shit all about our own history, but cripes, you're a Professor of Law.
Isnt one of the lines in the declaration something to the effect that "...by the laws of nature, and nature's god?" Jefferson was by all acounts a diest, but had no problem inserting a reference to "God" in the Declaration.
I am a strong fiscal conservative and Repubs are STUPID if they vote in a social conservative like Perry. You lose the independent vote, you lose the election. Simple as that.
Damn you, AllenS--you beat me to it--should read the entire comment thread before letting my mouth overload my ass.
DADvocate, I think Jesus is made up. But if someone is going to claim to hold to the Bible, I'm going to judge them by that.
Regarding ostentatious displays of religion, the New Testament is pretty fucking clear.
The church in Texas has the political connections that Texas politicians seek.
That fact is why the Founders did believe in excluding a Church/Government axis as too much power in one place.
The Founders were not comfortable with the Episcopal Church which then had 80% of the wealthy and politically active men in its membership.
Today the Baptist church is thr power in Texas. And some of the Texas Baptists went into the Charismatic renewal, such as John Osteen'a Lakewood Church now run by his son Joel Osteen, and the Connerstone Church of John Hagee, both of whom are on TV regularly if you want to see them in action.
Hagee's church is Perry's asset and also Perry's problem because of the continual attacks Hagee's doctrines.
So Perry will need to learn how to de-emphasize religion, as Palin has already learned.
The USA is more than the Bible Belt.
So Perry will need to learn how to de-emphasize religion, as Palin has already learned.
Is this also a problem for Bachmann?
John F. Kennedy keeps saying "God". What's up with that?
You know 10-year-old Ann must have been freaking out. "God talk! The Pope! Help!"
As an atheist, I woud rank the excerpts in increasing order of objectionableness: 5, 2, 1, 4, 3. The first two are essentially personal statements of belief - very boilerplate for American politics, present and past. Number 1 projects those beliefs on all Americans, and numbers 4 and (especially) 3 designate a split in the populace between the god-fearing and otherwise. This is neither acceptable (to me) nor a winning formula.
The Tea Party approach of focussing exclusively on the secular issues of the size, scope, and fiscal reasonableness of the federal government, and the shit ton of trouble in which we are heading unless we get Leviathan under control is the only one that will inspire this non-religious libertarian, and I suspect that it will work with other independents as well. The conservative base will vote GOP in either case. This kind of talk is a sure way to lose the election.
Phx...Yes it is a problem for Bachmann if she uses religion in politics.
She seeks confrontation instead of peace with all men so far as it lies within her power. But in American politics making enemies into friends is part of the basic 50%+1 wins all rule
She needs to use wisdom more than she needs to use her great doctrinal steel spine.
St. Croix ... JFK was NOT invoking the Pope! He stayed so clear of God ... that you wouldn't recognize religion ... Instead, you'd just see a willingness to fly to the moon.
Islam hasn't accepted that trip at all!
And, the most recent Pope? Oh, yeah. Teddy got the whole 9-yards of funeral. But if that's the deal ... then everybody knows the Truth.
How did Teddy escape Chappaquiddick?
Oh, and exactly what marriage vows did JFK respect?
And, who ordered Marilyn Monroe killed? Beelzebub?
Barack Obama, 4 shout outs to God. And 1 to atheists, too. Yea! Inclusion! We are the world.
But Rick Perry said the "God" word one extra time. Ahhhhhh! The sky is falling! Christian Crusaders are marching and submitting to husbands and shooting coyotes. It's all so evil and predictable!
Jeebus who's going around doing the-
"God Tally?"
Doesn't the media have anything better to do?
**********
chickenlittle-
It actually has the opposite effect on me.
They've lost credibility. They've tried to make such big to-dos over everything that-
I ignore them.
It's probably not good because the one time they might really have something most of the public will be trained to ignore it.
It's the boy that cried wolf-syndrome.
The guy is literally going to have to set something on fire in some sacrifice ritual before I take them seriously-and it'll have to be on 7 different video tapes.
Bill Clinton,quoting from the New Testament. Oh the secular humanity!
What? The reason "inalienable" rights were "inalienable" under the classic conception is that they're given by God, and thus not "ours" to alienate. #1 is nothing more or less than a throwback to first principles. Lockean first principles.
As Americans, we believe that our rights are endowed by our Creator, God.
As Americans, we believe that our rights are endowed not by our government, but by a higher power that shall be capitolized when possible, according to the Dec. of Ind. and the big C.
Also, Former Luzerne County Judge Mark Ciavarella Jr. reminds me of Ann Althouse.
Does he you?
I mean, they always talk about Law. Law this, Law that, Law Law Law.
I think all this Law talk is kind of kooky myself, and they both do it, so I infer many things that connect the two people who don't know each other, have never met and never will, and talk about the same exact things as everyone else (God for example).
Like this Politico headline sums up: Barack Obama invokes Jesus more than George W. Bush
or this 2004 article comparing Rev. Bush to "the very Rev." Clinton points out:
Talking About God: Rev. Clinton vs. Rev. Bush
townhall.com ^ | 9/05/04 | Dr. Paul Kengor
Everyone talks about God. Some to ridicule those who believe, some for other reasons.
Rick Perry would be odd were he not to talk about God and mention Him numerous times in his most recent announcement.
Anyone who points out that he did it without understanding why is more wierd than Perry, which is of course one reason he is running for POTUS and we're not.
None of the above. I don't care if it's sincere or pandering, it's just tiresome.
I can't believe they gave a federal holiday to this guy. It's like he's preaching at me or something. It's like he's spitting on me with a vuvuzela.
What Joe said. And Carol, and Cindy.
W was a good man and a good Christian, from Texas. So good he lost us both houses of Congress and the Presidency. It's irrelevant, so lose the God talk, keep the independents.
It's the economy, stupid.
I respect deeply held, private religious views, the grandstanding is annoying.
wv: cactiste - Perry stay out of the cactiste.
I like Rick Perry, but seriously, is America ready to elect an Aggie as President?
Bush had a dog.
This is the problem that has plagued the left and modern liberalism from the beginning. Neither is capable of giving a coherent explanation for the origin of human rights.
If God (or any other metaphysical reality)are ruled out of order as the source of human rights, then human rights as well as human dignity become matters of mere convention. What they are and who has them will always vary from society to society and their content will always be historically based. Rational criticism over how liberty was understood at one time in history is impossible because there is no universal standard for comparison.
When Clinton's dog Buddy died, run off and hit by a car, they issued the same statement of regret that Vince Foster got years before.
This is much ado about very little. I can imagine some irritation with quote 3, but this sort of civil religion is so ingrained in American politics that if it bothers you enough to discount him as a candidate, you'd be discounting every candidate from both parties. They all invoke religion. I say that these invocations of God are less offensive than some of Obama's more ideological versions.
That said, candidate religion matters about as much as marital status, sexual orientation, or hair color. That is, not at all. I expect candidates to color their hair and play up their religion, just as they show off their families, sublimate marital conflict, and hide the excesses of their children. It's human nature. I actually prefer that candidates be up-front about these things.
Why doesn't Although link to more Republican like Thaddeus McCotter who are just Republicans.
"This is the problem that has plagued the left and modern liberalism from the beginning. Neither is capable of giving a coherent explanation for the origin of human rights."
This is an argument religious people bring up about human rights all the time, but all it does is show that they haven't fully engaged with the secular writings on human rights. Secular conservatives and libertarians have little trouble offering a foundation for human rights without invoking God. The only issue is choosing among the half dozen or so serious offerings secular thinkers have suggested over the last century or so.
Human rights as a priori are an invention of the West.
They started as concern for the rights of the other guy, not of one's own.
It's been made theoretical in the meantime, making it appear that it's all about one's own rights.
That makes it a contest of hostile wills again, which is what the West had escaped.
The reason it has to be of the other guy is that that's when you're first called on as irreplaceable and nonsubstitutable.
Which is how you came to be who you are, and how morality is connected to rights.
Levinas The Rights of Man and the Rights of the Other
I think Jesus is made up.
I don't think there's much question that Jesus existed, but if you want to join the Elvis lives crowd, go ahead.
I don't care much for ostentatious displays of religion either, but I don't see mentioning God in public as necessarily ostentatious. Although some churches definitely go over the top.
But, holding people to the Bible is shaky territory because the varied interpretations. In me experience, people such as you tend to find the interpretation that will show "Christians" in the worst possible light.
Who are the 30 nitwits that think Perry is a dangerous religious ideologue?
I am a strong fiscal conservative and Repubs are STUPID if they vote in a social conservative like Perry.
I believe Perry is foremost a pro-free market fiscal conservative who doesn’t preclude social conservatives from the GOP. Reagan was the same – there were plenty of social conservatives during the Reagan era and Reagan went down the Big Tent road and welcomed their support while at the same time not allowing them to dictate the terms of the debate. The more time passes the more wise Reagan appears to me.
So Perry will need to learn how to de-emphasize religion, as Palin has already learned.
Yeah, I guess. But I’m puzzled just when Perry has emphasized religion. Something must first be emphasized before it can be de-emphasized. One prayer gathering does not a religious zealot make. I’ll give him a chance to campaign for awhile before I condemn him for too much religion.
The Declaration has four references
to God, direct or otherwise, one fewer than Gov. Perry's essay:
"nature's God"
"their Creator"
"the Supreme Judge of the world"
"the protection of Divine Providence"
Scary Christianists, a scourge on the Republic since its founding.
Rick Perry believes in God. Barack Obama believes in the state.
Rick Perry believes in the flying spaghetti monster.
wv: bible(apropos)
Look I don't want to offend you godbelievers, but you really are a bunch of fucking children.
This is giving me flashbacks to the Jesus-is-left-wing diatribe inflicted on me here in Madison the other day.
Probably residue from you hippie LSD days. The only "flashbacks" Perry's references to God gave me were to the Declaration of Independence, which mentions:
- Nature's God
- the Creator
- the Supreme Judge of the world
- Divine Providence.
Only four mentions. Perry racked up five, so maybe that makes him a religious nutbag. Or maybe your even raising the question makes you a blonde airhead. I know which answer gets my vote.
Alex...So what do you have against the faith of a little child?
You can be the adult and bravely live your 80 years on earth without God and without hope.
And as Dostoevski observed, without God everything is permitted.
tradguy - I am living the posh lifestyle of the rich & famous. I don't need your God or so-called "hope". I am living the life that you people will never achieve in a million years of trying.
Now toodles, I'm off to pinch a loaf.
Not a good sign for Rick Perry if he can't crack 100 posts. And he's got a religious debate running up his score!
"Sarah Palin likes to jog" gets 200 posts, easy.
Maybe Sarah is too controversial?
Inspires posts = issues?
Maybe you want to be in the middle of the road, post-wise.
T-Paw, not enough posts. He's out of the race and nobody noticed. What a loss to the milquetoast community.
At least he doesn't reference himself like the One. Who seems to think he is a god.
Alex said...
tradguy - I am living the posh lifestyle of the rich & famous. I don't need your God or so-called "hope". I am living the life that you people will never achieve in a million years of trying.
Now toodles, I'm off to pinch a loaf."
Dude. You used the wrong google account that time. Get your characters straight.
This is like the time you had Americas Politico talk about his rare clumbers.
Sharpen up!
also shows his awareness that Perry himself is not the center of the universe or even his own world
I love ^this^.
I'm an atheist and have no problem with the # of "God"s Perry used.
Just because *I* don't believe in God doesn't mean the whole damn country wasn't founded on the religious idea that rights are God-given. If I am going to live here and chow down on the fruits of the Founders' labors, then I figure it would be hypocritical to bite my thumb at politicians who believe in God.
I mean, what's the alternative? A country that believes rights are granted (and therefore can be revoked) by the state? By the crown? No thank you!
"Oh my gracious! It's one of those practicing Christians!"
I have seen people complaining about this kind of thing enough that one would think evangelical Christians were not common and rather some rare oddity to be studies and wondered about.
BFD.
It would be funny if Perry responded with that.
I don't see Perry asserting that God takes his side on politics, so I don't think there's any equivalence.
I mean, what's the alternative? A country that believes rights are granted (and therefore can be revoked) by the state? By the crown? No thank you!
Point! And match.
You're all naive if you think your "rights" are granted via God or the state. What determines your "rights" in any given community are the people around you and the police. You are at their mercy. Don't kid yourself.
Perry says God God God.
Obama says Me Me Me.
Both think they are talking about God.
Once again my answer is not among the choices.
He can't say "Jesus" because that is too specific, but he's definitely reaching toward the Evangelical vote, with subtle reminder that his chief rival, Romney, is LDS and therefore not a real Christian. Huckabee laid this groundwork last time, and now along with Obama's ploy of calling Romney "weird" is just another dog whistle signal calling for a religious test.
Perry reminds me of a tent preacher, Billy Graham or Jimmy Swaggart. But as Huckabee found out, that has a limited appeal. He is Prince Charming to the fans of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, but that's only because he's been teasing them with this announcement. This letter is a suggestion that he is God's candidate.
"I am having flashbacks," you say. This is partly the problem of mixing cultures. You don't see the very different psychology of these 2 people and so you would attack somebody who doesn't intend to threaten you and be "friendly," your word, in your attitude to the guy at the demonstration, who is. One of the problems of Christianity is that it's literature can facilitate the development of a grandiose self, well shown by the demonstrator you recorded. It's adherents are more likely however to stabilize a sense of self regard, I think what Perry is asking for, in conformity with self/God reliance which is a realized empathy and an acceptance of morality.
i already have a pastor. i'm looking for a president.
I like the cruel neutrality reflected in Ann's poll.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा