Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
If you review this thread you'll see that Mister Ohio argues for and against the presumption of innocence depending on whether or not the principal advances his extreme right-wing position in a particular context. So he argued for the presumption of innocence in the case of Kavanaugh and argues against it in the case of Andrew Gillum. I agree with you that it is a legal right that applies to the accused in a criminal trial. Neither Kavanaugh nor Gilliam have been charged with criminal offenses so the presumption of innocence is irrelevant to their situations at this time. When Mr Ohio misapplies the principal he is just parroting his idol Donald Trump. You will recall that that kind of mimicry was encouraged in the local church where the idol was Witness Lee. Habits learned by the herd die hard.
|
Probably best not to try to define the source of any of our positions.
I am a third generation Republican (don't have enough information to look beyond that). My Grandfather despised Roosevelt. I remember vaguely that my parents voted for Nixon in '60. But I learned something when I got home from school (in the Oak Cliff part of Dallas) somewhat joyfully declaring that Kennedy had been shot only to learn from my dad that it was not a good thing, and not something to be gleeful about.
Many years later I heard my dad referring to Bush (Sr) as being too liberal. (I have since learned that in his two terms as Congressman from Houston, he voted with Johnson (first term) as much as he did with Nixon (second term).) And several years after when I was listening to Limbaugh as he declared "America Held Hostage" during '93 and '94, I started moving down the rails with them.
But by the time McCain was nominated in 2008, the idea of Palin as VP was not good. McCain later expressed regret on that choice, preferring to have chosen Joe Lieberman. I was not quite there in 2008 (but would have voted for it). But I am now. I am probably a centrist that leans conservative. And since there is no such thing as a conservative Democrat anymore, that means Republican. But that armor has chinked.
It used to be that there was polar rhetoric in elections, but compromise and diligence to do the hard work of legislating. Now the rhetoric never stops and the poles too often are magnets that refuse anything that the ruling party does not want or cannot stop. The last vestiges of those "liberal" Republicans and "conservative" Democrats — like Bush, McCain, Lieberman, etc., are all but gone. (Sounds like something from Star Wars referring to the Republic's Senate in "A New Hope.") It is almost entirely at the poles now.
Voted yesterday. Couldn't vote for anyone who self-declared as Tea Party. So no Ted Cruz. No Kenny Marchant. Still voted for Abbott (governor). I am not "on board" with Beto, but I see someone with the sense to try to find common ground to get things done rather than just die for the party line. It is the sense that he cares about people at least as much as party or ideology that convinced me.
If this was 2020, I would not have voted for Trump. If he remained on the ballot, I would have voted for someone else, or done a write-in (like I did in 2016).
The base meaning of conservatism is the desire to not change. And even if I don't like all the proposals for change out there, not changing is not really an option. Change is a necessity.
And I have changed. About church. About politics. About my neighbor (literal and metaphorical). I live in the world, but also in a different kingdom. But we were left in this world to be salt and light and to love our neighbors as ourselves. In this world, I find that the poles of politics are hard to justify while claiming to love my neighbor as myself. And aligning myself with Trump is one of the most polar things I could possibly do. So I don't. And won't.