Comments on: Three Legs of the Party Stool: Three Different Candidates http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/ Toward a Vision for Art, Politics, Culture, and Theology Mon, 25 May 2009 06:04:35 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Three Legs? at My McCain Blog http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-88 Three Legs? at My McCain Blog Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:21:56 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-88 [...] friend of mine facebooked me this link to MenLikeTreesWalking where the author draws the analogy of a three legged stool. Fiscal Conservative, Social [...] [...] friend of mine facebooked me this link to MenLikeTreesWalking where the author draws the analogy of a three legged stool. Fiscal Conservative, Social [...]

]]> By: Jean http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-86 Jean Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:21:39 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-86 Very good article. I agree. Once this primary is settled, we must unite. One imperfect, "one- leg- of- the- stool" candidate must defeat the hard core socialism of the current democratic party. If we unite, We the People, will hold up the rest of the stool. If we don't.... we're in trouble, folks. Heaven? yep. But once there, we will be judged for our actions here on earth. Very good article. I agree. Once this primary is settled, we must unite. One imperfect, “one- leg- of- the- stool” candidate must defeat the hard core socialism of the current democratic party. If we unite, We the People, will hold up the rest of the stool. If we don’t…. we’re in trouble, folks.
Heaven? yep. But once there, we will be judged for our actions here on earth.

]]> By: Truth Unites...and Divides http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-84 Truth Unites...and Divides Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:24:05 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-84 Caleb the Ron Paul Supporter who profoundly disagrees with me: Please read the following essay to gain greater understanding of what I'm referring to when I say that God is sovereign as to what, when, whether, and how social transformation takes place in the culture. http://www.desiringgod.org/media/pdf/fasting_for_the_little_ones.pdf Pax. Huckabee. Then any GOP Candidate. Christ first and always. Caleb the Ron Paul Supporter who profoundly disagrees with me:

Please read the following essay to gain greater understanding of what I’m referring to when I say that God is sovereign as to what, when, whether, and how social transformation takes place in the culture.

http://www.desiringgod.org/media/pdf/fasting_for_the_little_ones.pdf

Pax.

Huckabee. Then any GOP Candidate. Christ first and always.

]]> By: Caleb http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-81 Caleb Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:21:35 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-81 Dear, "Truth Unites...and Divides," "My thoughts are that social conservatism implies or entails a good measure of national security conservatism and fiscal conservatism. I.e., that’s priority number one. Clearly." I kind of agree. However, it's ironic that you support Huckabee because in his case his social conservatism has not entailed fiscal conservatism. He's a "pro-life, pro-gun liberal" when it comes to economics, and I have no confidence in his ability to tackle economic issues. I mean, has he ever even uttered the words "monetary policy," "inflation," or "fiat money"? "And if the GOP loses to the Dems in the presidential election and the Supreme Court turns left and there are tax hikes and other leftist policies being instituted, then so be it. What is that to me? After all, my citizenship is in heaven." Brother, I profoundly disagree with you. Yes, the results are to be accepted as the plan of God. He is sovereign. But the results aren't in yet from our perspective! And even if they turn out for the worse, "accepting" them from God doesn't mean condoning them or not striving to fight against them from a human perspective. "What's that to me?" Unless you move to another country, it means everything! If more than half of your paycheck goes to taxes (to pay for some godless universal health care plan), suddenly you don't have as much disposable income to support your family, church, and ministries of your choice. If the government never reverses Roe v. Wade, that means millions more babies will die. If suddenly praying in public becomes illegal, that is "something to you." Our country is sliding into oblivion, and though God will do what glorifies him most, from my limited human perspective I will fight for what I know is right! Ron Paul 2008 Dear, “Truth Unites…and Divides,”

“My thoughts are that social conservatism implies or entails a good measure of national security conservatism and fiscal conservatism. I.e., that’s priority number one. Clearly.”

I kind of agree. However, it’s ironic that you support Huckabee because in his case his social conservatism has not entailed fiscal conservatism. He’s a “pro-life, pro-gun liberal” when it comes to economics, and I have no confidence in his ability to tackle economic issues. I mean, has he ever even uttered the words “monetary policy,” “inflation,” or “fiat money”?

“And if the GOP loses to the Dems in the presidential election and the Supreme Court turns left and there are tax hikes and other leftist policies being instituted, then so be it. What is that to me? After all, my citizenship is in heaven.”

Brother, I profoundly disagree with you. Yes, the results are to be accepted as the plan of God. He is sovereign. But the results aren’t in yet from our perspective! And even if they turn out for the worse, “accepting” them from God doesn’t mean condoning them or not striving to fight against them from a human perspective.

“What’s that to me?” Unless you move to another country, it means everything! If more than half of your paycheck goes to taxes (to pay for some godless universal health care plan), suddenly you don’t have as much disposable income to support your family, church, and ministries of your choice.

If the government never reverses Roe v. Wade, that means millions more babies will die. If suddenly praying in public becomes illegal, that is “something to you.”

Our country is sliding into oblivion, and though God will do what glorifies him most, from my limited human perspective I will fight for what I know is right!

Ron Paul 2008

]]> By: Truth Unites...and Divides http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-80 Truth Unites...and Divides Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:28:49 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-80 <i>I think there’s a healthy balance one can keep by saying, “I will work to choose the best candidate and push for social change. However, at the end of the day, my citizenship is not of this earth.”</i> Actually, the substance of this is precisely what I was saying. Just not in the form that you would have liked. So we're in complete agreement. Other than stylistic concerns. I think there’s a healthy balance one can keep by saying, “I will work to choose the best candidate and push for social change. However, at the end of the day, my citizenship is not of this earth.”

Actually, the substance of this is precisely what I was saying. Just not in the form that you would have liked.

So we’re in complete agreement. Other than stylistic concerns.

]]> By: Stephen Welch http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-79 Stephen Welch Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:02:26 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-79 I have to agree with Brian. Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate. Many dismiss him because he is libertarian, but he does not embrace the radical views of some libertarian. He is consisently conservative on the moral issues and wants to bring the federal government back in line with our constitution. George Bush has made government so large, and Congress and Senate are voting for laws behind our back that will bring our nation to tyranny. To be a libertarian does not mean you are opposed to government but you are opposed to less government intrusion. I believe that if the GOP stays on the same course it will be no different than the democratic party. If you look at the history of classic liberalism it embraces many of the conservative elements of Republicanism. The democratic party is not liberal but socialist, and the frontrunners in the Republican race are not far from that ideology. Ron has raised more money than Hillary, but the GOP snubs him along with the so-called fair and balanced reporting of FOX NEWS. I believe the GOP is afraid of Paul because he would destroy their power base. Perhaps it is time to rid the Republican party of its power based approach to government. If more Christians would have looked closer at him and supported him he could have been farther ahead in the primaries. Unfortunetly many so-called evangelicals do not have a Chrisitian world view, so they vote for anyone who looks good. Perhaps if Hillary becomes President, we get what we deserve. I have to agree with Brian. Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate. Many dismiss him because he is libertarian, but he does not embrace the radical views of some libertarian. He is consisently conservative on the moral issues and wants to bring the federal government back in line with our constitution. George Bush has made government so large, and Congress and Senate are voting for laws behind our back that will bring our nation to tyranny. To be a libertarian does not mean you are opposed to government but you are opposed to less government intrusion. I believe that if the GOP stays on the same course it will be no different than the democratic party. If you look at the history of classic liberalism it embraces many of the conservative elements of Republicanism. The democratic party is not liberal but socialist, and the frontrunners in the Republican race are not far from that ideology. Ron has raised more money than Hillary, but the GOP snubs him along with the so-called fair and balanced reporting of FOX NEWS. I believe the GOP is afraid of Paul because he would destroy their power base. Perhaps it is time to rid the Republican party of its power based approach to government. If more Christians would have looked closer at him and supported him he could have been farther ahead in the primaries. Unfortunetly many so-called evangelicals do not have a Chrisitian world view, so they vote for anyone who looks good. Perhaps if Hillary becomes President, we get what we deserve.

]]> By: Shamgar http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-76 Shamgar Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:44:11 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-76 <i>I part ways with your assessment that the current administration is “anti-civil liberties".</i> Oh? How exactly do you explain the Patriot act? The veteran's disarmament act? The brief in support of the D.C. gun ban? The illegal wiretapping of american citizens? The declaring of american citizens as enemy combatants held indefinitely without trial or any other fourth amendment protections? The torture of prisoners? And yes, I for one do believe he can and will capture the nomination. And if you actually did mean to say the general election then absolutely - he's the ONLY republican candidate that can win in November. The rest will be utterly outflanked by Hillary, but she doesn't have a prayer against Ron. I part ways with your assessment that the current administration is “anti-civil liberties”.

Oh? How exactly do you explain the Patriot act? The veteran’s disarmament act? The brief in support of the D.C. gun ban? The illegal wiretapping of american citizens? The declaring of american citizens as enemy combatants held indefinitely without trial or any other fourth amendment protections? The torture of prisoners?

And yes, I for one do believe he can and will capture the nomination. And if you actually did mean to say the general election then absolutely – he’s the ONLY republican candidate that can win in November. The rest will be utterly outflanked by Hillary, but she doesn’t have a prayer against Ron.

]]> By: chonors686 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-75 chonors686 Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:28:20 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-75 Huckabee is not going to win anything. Rudy is probably - but not yet necessarily - done. So it would appear to be McCain or Romney. Personally I don't think McCain can hold up under Republican scrutiny. He wins when non-Republicans can vote for him but we have to see if he win in a Republican primary where only Republicans vote. If they somehow nominate him, he will lost a big part of his base. He will also win a significant number of Democratic and Independent votes so the issue could be close anyway. Maybe he can win, maybe not but he will not be a popular President with Republicans no matter. There are a lot of skeletons in McCain's closet. His biggest asset to me is the support of Joe Lieberthal. I like Joe even if he is a liberal. Romney is best qualifed to be president but not necessarily a presidential candidate. He needs some work on the campaign trail. But, he can win and very likely will, win. My feeling is he will win the nomination and the election. I can tell by how much the Democrats don't want him to be the nominee by the way the NY Times is attacking him. lol Hey, they just Love Hillary and Johnny. That should tell you something right there. Joey For articles of interest on many subjects: http://journals.aol.com/chonors686/JoeyPage1 Huckabee is not going to win anything. Rudy is probably – but not yet necessarily – done. So it would appear to be McCain or Romney.

Personally I don’t think McCain can hold up under Republican scrutiny. He wins when non-Republicans can vote for him but we have to see if he win in a Republican primary where only Republicans vote. If they somehow nominate him, he will lost a big part of his base. He will also win a significant number of Democratic and Independent votes so the issue could be close anyway. Maybe he can win, maybe not but he will not be a popular President with Republicans no matter. There are a lot of skeletons in McCain’s closet. His biggest asset to me is the support of Joe Lieberthal. I like Joe even if he is a liberal.

Romney is best qualifed to be president but not necessarily a presidential candidate. He needs some work on the campaign trail. But, he can win and very likely will, win. My feeling is he will win the nomination and the election.

I can tell by how much the Democrats don’t want him to be the nominee by the way the NY Times is attacking him. lol Hey, they just Love Hillary and Johnny.

That should tell you something right there.

Joey

For articles of interest on many subjects:

http://journals.aol.com/chonors686/JoeyPage1

]]> By: doccochran http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-72 doccochran Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:48:33 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-72 I think it is right to both understand our citizenship is in Heaven, in a city with foundations, all the while--in love--pointing others to the city with foundations. We do not have the luxury of getting out of the fight and letting it go wherever the broad path leads. What if Carey had the "What is that to me" attitude? India would still be burning widows with their husbands. And we will still kill babies... I think it is right to both understand our citizenship is in Heaven, in a city with foundations, all the while–in love–pointing others to the city with foundations. We do not have the luxury of getting out of the fight and letting it go wherever the broad path leads. What if Carey had the “What is that to me” attitude? India would still be burning widows with their husbands. And we will still kill babies…

]]> By: Jeremy J Taylor http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/three-stools-of-the-party-three-different-candidates/#comment-68 Jeremy J Taylor Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:30:07 +0000 http://menliketreeswalking.wordpress.com/?p=49#comment-68 Truth Unites...and Divides, My strongest pull is towards Mike Huckabee. I supported him and will continue to do so. I think it's a non-sequitur argument though to believe that social conservatism necessarily implies being strong on defense. Added into the complication is not a person's heart but also experience, judgment, and a clear foreign policy paradigm. I don't mean to imply that Huckabee lacks all of these but simply to say that being a social conservative doesn't mean that one's necessarily strong on defense. As to the second point, I agree that our ultimate citizenship is not of this earth; that doesn't mean though that we ought not to strive to teach all men what Christ has taught. I wonder if you don't fall into the ditch by denying our duty as citizens to transform our culture by shrugging the shoulders and asking, "What is that to me?" if the next Supreme Court justice reverses the progress made at chipping away on Roe v. Wade. I think there's a healthy balance one can keep by saying, "I will work to choose the best candidate and push for social change. However, at the end of the day, my citizenship is not of this earth." Truth Unites…and Divides,
My strongest pull is towards Mike Huckabee. I supported him and will continue to do so. I think it’s a non-sequitur argument though to believe that social conservatism necessarily implies being strong on defense. Added into the complication is not a person’s heart but also experience, judgment, and a clear foreign policy paradigm. I don’t mean to imply that Huckabee lacks all of these but simply to say that being a social conservative doesn’t mean that one’s necessarily strong on defense. As to the second point, I agree that our ultimate citizenship is not of this earth; that doesn’t mean though that we ought not to strive to teach all men what Christ has taught. I wonder if you don’t fall into the ditch by denying our duty as citizens to transform our culture by shrugging the shoulders and asking, “What is that to me?” if the next Supreme Court justice reverses the progress made at chipping away on Roe v. Wade.

I think there’s a healthy balance one can keep by saying, “I will work to choose the best candidate and push for social change. However, at the end of the day, my citizenship is not of this earth.”

]]>