Welp. The GOP got itself stuck with Trump. This articulates pretty well my thoughts since last November. I don't agree that Never Trumpers have simply failed to put on their "big-boy" and "big-girl" pants, to just vote for him. Judicial myopia. With a hat-tip to Anderson for some help there. I have never responded to the battle-cry, "Judges!" before now, and I'm not starting now.
If I could disregard social issues, (abortion, gay unions/"rights", etc.) I'd vote for Hillary without hesitation. If you don't live in the thought-world where that might be an option, well, there are no locks on the metaphorical doors; I will leave you to whatever emotivist rage against me you are feeling.
The argument goes something like this: As her e-mails and Goldman Sachs speeches might show, she is a relentlessly triangulating careerist. She's no progressive ideologue. She's tough as nails; that's why we don't like her. She's smart, and she's at least as good a deal-maker as the Republican nominee, and probably better. She'll want her signature things, but she's all too happy to quietly help Paul Ryan re-build his brand, even if it's on the hush-hush, and she takes the credit. Most importantly, she's had half-thoughts before her morning coffee better than anything her opponent has said or written. We probably won't cease to exist if she wins.
I can't disregard abortion, and all those other attacks on human dignity that are actually a part of the Democratic platform. There is a non-negligible chance that Hillary Clinton believes in abortion et al, really believes in it, and is willing to persecute those who fight against it. The worst-case scenarios might be real; the practice of religion in the US may be irrevocably changed. This is all the reason I need not to vote for her.
We haven't even talked about her e-mails yet. I've heard of innocent mistakes by good officers being punished far worse. And Secretary Clinton's willingness to continue lying about it speaks volumes about her temperament and judgment. I wouldn't be overly stunned if someone decided to prosecute after the election. Poor Nixon thought he was in the clear 2 years when it all came crashing down.
And what Clinton did is far worse.
No need to belabor that point. If you want the truth, I'm ashamed and disappointed that so many solid Catholics are simply falling in line with Trump. This is not Mitt Romney. This is not George H. W. Bush. This is not John McCain. The fact that this man shares the title "Republican nominee" with these good and heroic men slanders them, and brings us deserved shame. I don't think it's too strong a point. Character matters, and it still matters, even if you are blinded with the galling hypocrisy of the Democrats. I'd feel the same way if Trump were winning. The fact that he is not makes it easier, to be sure. I hope, however, that these strong words are making some of you uncomfortable. I think a good number of you have been ignoring your gag reflex this entire election cycle. If we do that for too long, no one continues caring about what Christians in public have to say. Worse still, we will be like the rest.
As a side-point, there is a narrative in vogue with Republican interventionists (or "hawks", if you like) that Democrats are weak in foreign policy, that even their well-intentioned hesitations embolden our enemies, and make us less safe. We have believed it for decades, and used it to win countless elections. It's false, and it has no basis in fact. We should be far more concerned that a willingness to use force is not joined with prudent moral reflection concerning the conditions under which force will be employed, and that this malady affects both parties.
If I could disregard social issues, (abortion, gay unions/"rights", etc.) I'd vote for Hillary without hesitation. If you don't live in the thought-world where that might be an option, well, there are no locks on the metaphorical doors; I will leave you to whatever emotivist rage against me you are feeling.
The argument goes something like this: As her e-mails and Goldman Sachs speeches might show, she is a relentlessly triangulating careerist. She's no progressive ideologue. She's tough as nails; that's why we don't like her. She's smart, and she's at least as good a deal-maker as the Republican nominee, and probably better. She'll want her signature things, but she's all too happy to quietly help Paul Ryan re-build his brand, even if it's on the hush-hush, and she takes the credit. Most importantly, she's had half-thoughts before her morning coffee better than anything her opponent has said or written. We probably won't cease to exist if she wins.
I can't disregard abortion, and all those other attacks on human dignity that are actually a part of the Democratic platform. There is a non-negligible chance that Hillary Clinton believes in abortion et al, really believes in it, and is willing to persecute those who fight against it. The worst-case scenarios might be real; the practice of religion in the US may be irrevocably changed. This is all the reason I need not to vote for her.
We haven't even talked about her e-mails yet. I've heard of innocent mistakes by good officers being punished far worse. And Secretary Clinton's willingness to continue lying about it speaks volumes about her temperament and judgment. I wouldn't be overly stunned if someone decided to prosecute after the election. Poor Nixon thought he was in the clear 2 years when it all came crashing down.
And what Clinton did is far worse.
No need to belabor that point. If you want the truth, I'm ashamed and disappointed that so many solid Catholics are simply falling in line with Trump. This is not Mitt Romney. This is not George H. W. Bush. This is not John McCain. The fact that this man shares the title "Republican nominee" with these good and heroic men slanders them, and brings us deserved shame. I don't think it's too strong a point. Character matters, and it still matters, even if you are blinded with the galling hypocrisy of the Democrats. I'd feel the same way if Trump were winning. The fact that he is not makes it easier, to be sure. I hope, however, that these strong words are making some of you uncomfortable. I think a good number of you have been ignoring your gag reflex this entire election cycle. If we do that for too long, no one continues caring about what Christians in public have to say. Worse still, we will be like the rest.
As a side-point, there is a narrative in vogue with Republican interventionists (or "hawks", if you like) that Democrats are weak in foreign policy, that even their well-intentioned hesitations embolden our enemies, and make us less safe. We have believed it for decades, and used it to win countless elections. It's false, and it has no basis in fact. We should be far more concerned that a willingness to use force is not joined with prudent moral reflection concerning the conditions under which force will be employed, and that this malady affects both parties.
Comments