« Walking Backwards (A Theory of Finance) | Main | Ben Bernanke Has a Hard Job »

November 30, 2007



Are you willing to swallow a big-government conservative, Nathan?

Nathan Smith

Well, it's not great. But what if the options are (a) Hillary, (b) a nativist Republican or panderer to nativism, or (c) Huckabee?

At any rate we can hope Huckabee knocks out Romney in Iowa, and see what happens after that.


I, like you, am willing to sacrifice a considerable bit of fiscal and/or economic good sense in service of human/civil rights matters, if I have to choose one or the other. Of course, we diverge somewhat in what we consider critical human/civil rights, so our voting looks different.

Also, I have a hard time saying exactly what kind of president Romney would really be, since nothing I've seen has made me think that what he says now has any relationship with what he'll do later.


I don't like Huckabee because of his willingness to bring religion into politics. I don't like Romney because he seems to fashion his stances based on what the polls tell him they should be (does that make him a populist?). If I had to vote between the two, I would probably abstain.

Nathan Smith

How do you feel about Martin Luther King's habit of bringing religion into politics?

Merina Smith

I must protest the screed against the church, Nathanael. It really isn't fair. Val, where are you? Calling Val...


MLK brought religion into politics? For what public office did he run?


An LDS coworker was initially pretty excited about Romney's run (she's also related to him), but she feels he's mostly turned his back on what she sees as a very fine legacy in order to pander to the worst parts of the Republican base. "Hopefully," she says, "He'll switch back once he has the nomination."

I don't know how to feel about this.

Nathan Smith

Well, MLK wasn't running for political office, but he certainly was trying to alter the political landscape. It seems implausible to me to deny that he was "bringing religion into politics" in some sense. But if you want to say that religiously-based social justice movements are all right, as long as they are at the level of civil society, but that anyone running for public office should avoid making faith too explicitly a part of their platform, that seems tenable.


Countless people used religion to justify slavery and segregation. Today people use religion to justify being against stem-cell research and gay marriage, among other things. If there are pragmatic reasons for a position, then give those reasons to justify your position; don't give me quotes from the bible. I don't want people in government to get their marching orders from the likes of Jerry Falwell. Sorry.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Only use a payday cash advance as a last resort.


Blog powered by Typepad