BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

jps

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:04:33 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:19:15 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:23:44 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:18:04 -0500, wrote:

Refer to previous post for previous postings

If a Republican or Republicans subscribe to a particular set of moral
strictures, tenets, precepts, and disapprobations, then those persons
have a system by which a violator of those strictures can be judged
for having done so. If there is no value system, there can be no
condemnation. If one can condemn hypocrisy, one has a value system
and is summarily evaluated by that same system. To accuse Republicans
of hypocrisy is itself a hypocrisy. No Republican can take another
Republican to task if the other has crossed the ethical line that
Republicans generally adhere to.

Correction: No Republican can take another Republican to task if
there is no ethical line (such as the moral suasion that Republicans
generally adhere to) for the other to cross.

You're arguing on behalf of that ethical line, right?

It just so happens that for many candidates drawing that ethical line
is a source for money and votes.

It's not the ethical line that they're being castigated for, it's the
cynical use of it for advantage and profit.

Right?

If the focii of the argument were simply avaricious candidates and
venal politico's, then that discussion might have merit. In an
examination of value systems for groups of persons of a particular
political persuasion, it doesn't.

In your opinion.