The Nutcase Across The Street just had its first review and it is already accruing labels. It seems that I have written a “conservative” book. Well, I’m glad someone knows how to classify it, because – as I explain in the book – words like “liberal,” “conservative,” “moderate,” and “libertarian” have no agreed upon meaning. Labels often are more trouble than they’re worth.
Read the review here.
The following are three open letters that I think are very important to get out. One is to Occupy Wall Street, one is to the Tea Parties, and the last is to the Coffee Parties. Please repost until it spreads through the internet. Repost individually, or with all three together, with or without commentary, with or without your website added at the end, or however you see fit. We are more alike than you think. Together we stand, divided we fall.
Civility and tolerance are common themes in this blog and this post is no different. While I speak out against the harsh rhetoric of pundits of all political stripes, I recognize that actions speak louder than words and so today I wish to write on a recent action by the Obama administration to force hiring institutions to cover the health care costs of their employees, including controversial procedures that many deem unhealthy or even immoral.
One thing I have long had a hard time understanding is how two people of differing political persuasion can look at the same article and find it supporting their own point of view. Sometimes pundits that seem to clearly lean one way are accused of leaning the other way by others. When it comes to comedy, where the message is less explicit, and nothing is to be taken literally, this phenomenon is even more pronounced.
Does Mr. T promote incivility? An event several months ago got me thinking about what truly drives incivility. It’s not simply calling people names or shouting at them. It’s certainly not pointing out the flaws of your opponent in the context of a political campaign; this is expected. The problem has to do with thinking the worst of people.
“’Live Free or Die’ isn’t just the official motto for a great state. As the 62nd Republican National Committee Chairman, I think it’s a mantra our party should live by.” So begins Kel Mehlman’s call for the GOP not to “strip citizens of their right to marry,” speaking of HB 437, which would repeal the recent extension of marriage to homosexual unions in New Hampshire. It is a noble sentiment to wish greater freedom for all citizens, and I whole-heartedly back that sentiment – but at the same time, to frame the debate over gay marriage as freedom versus non-freedom is to grossly misunderstand what the debate is even about, and to miss exactly why it is that so many people are against gay marriage.
Hi, I'm Dan. I like chocolate, hiking, and politics.