[Peace-discuss] The Kennedys' fake liberalism... [reformatted]

[Robert Dunn]

Ann Coulter pointed out that on many issues, Hillary is to the right of McCain. 
The grassroots right is upset. Many are willing to punish the GOP elite with a Hillary victory. 
She said she would endorse Hillary if McCain wins the nomination.
As an evangelical, I can not support McCain!


Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 22:52:20 -0800From: jencart13 at yahoo.comSubject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Kennedys' fake liberalism... [reformatted]To: galliher at uiuc.eduCC: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
Ah, at last something on which we can agree absolutely!! Well put... and you've also answered yr own question: evangelicals will be voting for McCain, rather than voting for Hillary or not voting at all.
 --Jenifer"C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
Far from being king-makers, evangelicals are regarded by Republicans as blacks/radicals/etc. are regarded by Democrats: they've got no place else to go... --CGEJenifer Cartwright wrote:> The Evangelicals will NEVER vote for pro-choice Hillary over pro-life > McCain!! Even tho' McCain was not their first choice, he's got enuff of > their platform that he'll get their vote... and he'll also go a-courting > in their camp between now and November.> --Jenifer> > */"C. G. Estabrook" /* wrote:> > The emergence of Mad John McCain as the putative Republican nominee> looks like being a difficulty for those who think our problems are> caused by people who don't believe in evolution. "Evangelical 'values> voters' of the Midwest and South" would not seem to be too happy with> McCain, whose favorite argument appears to be, "Fuck you!" (In that at> least, he's a worthy successor to Cheney.) See> .> > If evangelicals turn out not to be directing presidential politics (and> never have), what are they going to do in a Clinton-McCain election?> Vote for Hillary? --CGE> > > David Green wrote:> > From Wiener's review (thanks Carl):> > //> > /Michael Kazin recently warned against viewing Hofstadter as "an> elegant> > ruin from a benighted age." Brown agrees, arguing that we need> > Hofstadter to understand the tormented politics of our time. In this> > view, Hofstadter may have been wrong about yesterday's Populists,> but he> > was right about today's Republicans. *The rise of George Bush is> said to> > mark the return of status politics, because Republican majorities> depend> > on the Evangelical Protestant "values voters" of the Midwest and> > South--former Populist areas!* Facing economic decline, they> blame their> > problems on the "liberal elite" and vote for prayer in schools> and guns> > everywhere else....(Wiener's view:) That seems like a thin lesson to> > draw from a thick body of work./> > //> > Indeed, it seems like no lesson at all to draw from Hofstadter's> work,> > both because Hofstadter himself appears to have had serious> doubts about> > it, and because it's wrong. Because the Democrats repress class and> > economic issues, "red state" voters either vote for Bush or stay> home.> > They're absolutely right in their mistrust of a liberal elite,> and right> > to associate that elite with the horrible Clintons and his erstwhile> > Democrat successors, including of course his wife. Talk of "status> > anxiety" and "status politics" among the middle and working> classes is> > intellectual sloganeering and reactionary sociology from both> liberals> > and conservatives who are threatened by "extremes" who want to> rethink> > the notion of "progress" in an egalitarian manner that debunks the> > measure of Gross Domestic Product.> >> > DG


Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
_________________________________________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your "fix".
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080202/20b11a5d/attachment.htm