Comments on: The Collapse of the Christian Consensus?

By: Fr. Johannes Jacobse

Fr. Johannes Jacobse — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:45:10 +0000

In reply to Greg. Maybe so, but probably not. Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, now Syria, bombing of Serbia, and so forth. I won't argue the point because either way "aggressive interventionist" is common to both.

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 03:17:09 +0000

Fact check: the neocons are the most aggressive interventionist and irresponsible/immoral faction in US foreign policy circles: they are most certainly not “more circumspect” than liberal Democrats – in fact they are even now on the vanguard of an Iran attack. That fact alone warranted Romneys defeat.

By: Bill Congdon

Bill Congdon — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:21:45 +0000

George Wiegel pointed out on The World Over that there is no “Catholic” or “Evangelical” (nor, I suppose, “Orthodox”) vote per se, but that these denominations all split between churchgoers and non-churchgoers. It seems that orthodoxy (in the general sense) is becoming the chief predicator of how Christians vote. A clearer proclamation of the Gospel does seem to be indicated.

By: macedonianreader

macedonianreader — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:22:16 +0000

In reply to Dino Ramzi.

Dino it seems that Obama hasn’t gotten us in any wars because he has taken it one step further, instead of breaking the Constitution by overstepping the Congress like his predecessors, he does this, and then doesn’t even mention his “crusades” to the press. In fact, we usually find out after the fact that we just demolished a terrorist along with the hundred bystanders in a 100 mile radius. Drone warfare is entirely Obama’s and it is 100% more insidious than our past endeavors. Who knew we were bombing Yemen? Well we surely found out the day after Obama was re-elected. He decided to do it via executive order after the results came rolling in.

But I agree, the narrative is faulty. However, not because it’s a liberal conservative one, but because it’s a neo-conservative one (held by both parties) vs our Constitution and those that would actually protect and follow it.

By: Fr. Johannes Jacobse

Fr. Johannes Jacobse — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:25:58 +0000

In reply to Dino Ramzi. Dino, you are all over the map here but just to take one example: you can't blame Egypt, Libya, and Syria on Bush. That's Obama's doing. Remember though that there is little difference between liberal and neo-con foreign policy except that neo-con tends to be a bit more circumspect.

By: Dino Ramzi

Dino Ramzi — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 14:47:45 +0000

It seems we should be concerned about a so-called conservative narrative in the US, amplified by the consumption of self confirming media via the Internet, leading to the puzzlement you describe. I say “so-called” conservative, because the “conservative” movement in the US does not really support the status quo, which is the true essence of conservatism, and the conservatism that I espouse. No Orthodox Christian would deny that we live in a fallen world, where our political choices will be fallible and must be undertaken with prayerfulness and discernment. How in the world one would characterize Obama’s actual actions as “socialist and his policies portend[ing] serious structural problems (perhaps even economic collapse)” is mind-blowing, repudiated by a simple Wiki search of the definition of socialist. I sometimes think that, to “conservatives” a socialist is someone who disagrees with them.

I am unhappy with several of Obama’s social approaches to policy, but he is an intelligent and thoughtful leader who did not get us not any expensive wars without an exit strategy. Most of our current deficit is due to two wars fought under Bush combined with his administration’s regulatory incompetence, a consequent economic collapse and a necessary reflation that was done urgently and somewhat sloppily by the Obama administration. Remember, giving money to corporations is not a hallmark of socialism. About 1/3 of our current deficit represents corporate welfare. I still don’t understand how we can trust to govern those who do not trust the process of governing. Is it not foolish to assume hat action NE consequence re coincident? Why are we blaming Obama for the consequences of actions taken more than four years ago?

I read voraciously and listen to both sides of he issues. It seems to me that “conservative” arguments don’t hold much water, and the sad part is there is a genuine conservative argument to be made. We need an intelligent and thoughtful counterpoint to Obama, not a strident, irrational subculture that is growing progressively more disconnected from the world of ideas and from reality. The current economic arguments appear to be nothing more than duelling opinions in the absence of empirical data. OTOH, the battle between Keynesians and classicists is playing out right before our eyes and it is crucial that we observe DATA with equanimity and some attempt at objectivity uncolored by per-existing prejudice. Data always trumps opinion, if one is at peace and not succumbing to the delusions of one’s own narratives. Remember that God’s will HAS been done and our choices are all individual, not collective and so is our salvation, in the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.

By: cynthia curran

cynthia curran — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 05:04:55 +0000

This is true Mr Smith Slim Pickins was a view of Orange County and San Diego in the 1960’s, the conservative bircher people. In 1964 Orange County gave Barry Goldwater 55 percent of the vote and San Diego 50 percent. Fast fowarded today Orange County gave Romeny 53.6 percent of the vote and San Diego Obama won with 49 percent. The old red counties like Orange or San Diego in calif go low for Republicans since whites are more liberal than 20 years ago and hispanics trend toward the Dems because of lower incomes and Asians tend to be attractive to the Democratic Party.

By: macedonianreader

macedonianreader — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 03:02:03 +0000

Listening to a radio show this afternoon on my way to work, the host was interviewing a “Freedom Works” guest and he was talking to the fact that Republican Leaders have had a problem or even a complete lack of will in explaining their plans or platforms for economic reform. The host said he offered Mitt Romney a ten minute, free-time piece to explain his plain to create 12 million new jobs, unedited with questions sent to him so he had time to answer. Romney refused. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe he ever explained that during his campaign.

The guest went on to say that Republicans usually do well when they explain their plans; Americans actually buy it. He went on to cite examples of Paul, Rubio, among others as successful orators of their plans.

This is a complete breakdown of the GOP. They completely missed the ball in incorporating the Ron Paul movement that could have put the election over the top for Romney. Not only is GOP completely missing the Classical Liberal aspect of their party and adherence to the Constitution, but had they adopted the rhetoric of Ron Paul they would have garnered a good chunk of that anarcho-socialist-chomsky vote that calls itself the “Libertarian Party” today, which hung on to Ron Paul merely because of his strict adherence to the 10th Amendment. Today’s Libertarians like to believe that the GOP has to drop the social portion of their platform, but folks like the Paul’s Amash’s and DeMint’s will tell you that all the GOP has to do pick up the Constitution and be consistent with it, domestically and internationally.

This is entirely on the GOP and I am pulling for a Rand Paul/Justin Amash ticket in 2016. If they go the route of Gingrich, Santorum, or even Rubio in 2016 – they will lose again.

By: Wesley J. Smith

Wesley J. Smith — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:58:15 +0000

A few points:

1. I think O convinced the young that R would take away the sexual revolution. I made fun of the ad in which the star of Girls equated voting for Obama with giving up virginity. But it was brilliant. It really caught the zeitgeist of our moment and brought the young out to vote.

2. After the loss, I was chided about demographics on Twitter by a liberal friend. All I could think was that they will ride the decline like Slim Pickins rode the atom bomb in Dr. Strangelove. But they will have free birth control and the POTUS will know who the hip hop stars are. And when things get worse, the answer will be more liberalism–just like here in California, where Democrats gained more seats in the legislature yesterday to the point that we now have a supermajority of one party rule. In other words, the worse things get here, the power of those causing the decline just keeps growing.

3. Finally, the USA may have become California last night. Our slide to an O second term began decades ago with San Francisco, which used to be ridiculed for its hyper liberalism. Then that liberalism took over the state: Our governor; lt. governor, attorney general, both our US Senators, and Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader, are all from SF. It is the political coronary artery for the entire state, and it eclipses all other potential centers of political power, despite those with far higher population. The AG, Kamala Harris, is a future national star and very left wing. I predict she will replace Feinstein or Boxer eventually, or perhaps, replace Gov. Brown.

So, SF begat CA, which now begat liberal USA. It’s all cultural; including a distinct anti-orthodox Christian disdain because of its perceived moralism, and about being part of the group, an embrace of collectivism and a rejection of individualism, properly understood. (Individualism today is deciding on your tattoo designs.) Very concerning, and perhaps irremediable.

By: Harry Coin

Harry Coin — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 00:55:17 +0000

Compare this with the energy behind what’s going in in California, Illinois, New York and in an extreme case Greece. Those folk deem it wise to believe further promises despite visible failure. There will come a reckoning for the media that spun and hid these facts. Food and Fuel expenses are up because the guy in charge forced us to burn 4 of 10 ears of corn as car fuel, being he’s ‘green’. Let the corn crop not have a good year or China buying … Who is hurt by that? Every meat product in the store is corn based. Corn oil is broadly used in dozens of other food products. All those will go up and who’s budget is harmed the most by stuff everyone has to buy everyday? ‘The Rich’– no, a few bucks more on gas and food isn’t much to them. But if gas money is an issue— and: Look at the explosion in food stamp users! You’d think there was a clue there! But, no, Obama hurt them and they voted for him anyhow. Buckle up, the crack salesmen are doing a land office business, the ones who promise ‘more’ are going to keep winning for the same reasons folk are sure buying lottery tickets when their monthly goverment checks come in is a good idea.

And wow did you see the news this morning? Everyone lost $250 / $10,000 in their retirement stock accounts — before lunch today. And the press– the reports are merely ‘post election, the focus returns to Europe’s woes, sunspots, and no mention of who it was that won. The stock futures tanked once it became clear who won. That’s what happened.

And remember how hard the whole world is teaching that tobacco use is a very bad idea. Marijuana, well, let’s make that legal! Hey! Like that line in ‘My Big Fat Greek Wedding’ ‘You don’t eat no meat! Ok. I’ll make lamb.”

“Forward” is a true promise, because ‘down’ is also ‘forward’.

By: Orthodox Collective

Orthodox Collective — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 23:18:23 +0000

[…] Collapse of the Christian Consensus? https://www.aoiusa.org/the-collapse-of-the-christian-consensus/Wednesday, Nov 7th 5:12 pmclick to expand…Seeking the Episcopacy: Salvation not Reputation […]