"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."

Dear John,

When contemplating the current incarnation of the Republican Party (the Party of Lincoln?), keep in mind Aquinas' observation that "sin" is always accompanied by loss of perspective/proportion.

Obama's actual statement concerning post high school education was a model of prudent proportion.

Alternatively, Santorum -- like Republican alarmists generally -- plunges into an Endless Ocean of Disproportion as if it were a warm bath drawn by "dear old Mom."

I see the bath as more of a pig wallow. 

In the parlance of traditional Catholic theology, Republicans choose -- and choose emphatically -- to live in a "state of sin."

Often, I close my emails wishing "Pax on both houses."

I am now persuaded, however, that Republicans do not want peace - either domestically or internationally.

As primary proponents of Uncle Sam's "Perpetual Warfare," they are now preparing another burst of belligerent aggression - this time with Iran. (No doubt, Tio Sam's resounding success in Afghanistan and Iraq has been motivational.) 

There is not a cell in the Republican Body Politic that perceives compromise as the cornerstone of peace. 

Sure, Neville Chamberlain is a caution to us all. 

But rather than fixating Chamberlain's extreme capitulation -- something quite other than wise compromise -- consider the mundane workings of Congress. 

Consider Grover Norquist. 

Consider taxation.

Consider debt ceilings. 

Consider "not sitting down with the enemy." 

Consider abortion. (To save the life of the mother? Cases of Rape? Incest? First trimester? Second Trimester? If you draw a line somewhere, others can draw a line elsewhere. http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2010/05/19/weekly-pulse-excommunicated-approving-lifesaving-abortion)

Consider chest-thumping belligerence. (Republicans have never met a war they didn't like.)

Consider Israel.

Consider Santorum's (inverted) projection that Obama wants to send everyone to left-wing, anti-religious indoctrination camps (aka colleges). 

Speaking of which... 

Although it is true that 62% of college students lose their faith prior to graduation, it is also true that a greater percentage of Americans lose their faith not going to college. Here's how Santorum's sophistry "plays out" - http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/college-kills-faith/  Remember: "Any text, without a context, is a pretext.")

***

It is "all about" Goldwater now:  "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." 

Couched in such lovely symmetry, extremism sounds noble - even necessary.

In fact, extremism has the worst record in politics and, when "successful," is the short road to catastrophe.

If politics is to work, two things are necessary: 

1.) Compromise

2.) Primary regard for Reason, Truth and Science - not Ideology.

May the Prince of Peace prevail

Alan

PS Concerning the west's determination to pummel Iran... I loathe Obama's saber-rattling; flirting with World War III for no good reason, not even the good of Israel. One left-wing friend refers to Obama as Israel's "lawn jockey."

PPS Moments ago, while riveted by an NPR report - http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/03/05/147807206/inconsistency-the-real-hobgoblin - about "leadership styles" and which of them gets the best results -- Foxes or Hedgehogs -- I realized that the key difference between the Nazism's nascent threat in the thirties and the threat represented by contemporary Iran is that Hitler began his horror with a series of land grabs. Currently, we lack courage to recognize that Abraham (Abram) began the Jewish experience with a land grab, a land grab reprised by 20th century Zionists. It is "the land grab" -- the brazen seizure of territory -- that defines a categorical difference between Nazism and anti-Zionist feeling across the Middle East. And lest we forget, Hitler was charismatic head of an industrial powerhouse. Correspondingly, there is NO charismatic leader in the Middle East... where the cumulative GDP of all Islamic nations is a trivial 4% of the world's GDP.)

The Party of Lincoln

Abraham Lincoln: "In my present position I could scarcely be justified were I to omit raising a warning voice against this approach of returning despotism. It is not needed nor fitting here that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions, but there is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effort to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor in the structure of government. It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded so far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life. Now there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them are groundless. Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."  Read more: State of the Union Address, (December 3, 1861) — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/t/hist/state-of-the-union/73.html#ixzz17XlRsbev

Rick Santorum acknowledges he may have misstated Barack Obama’s position on education and training

 Comments (14)03/04/2012

By Shira Schoenberg, Globe Correspondent

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum acknowledged today that he may have misstated President Obama’s position on education when he called Obama a snob for saying he “wants everyone in America to go to college.”

In fact, Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace pointed out that Obama actually asked every American to commit to a year of higher education – which could include community college, vocational training, or an apprenticeship. That is similar to what Santorum has said he supports.

Santorum, on Fox News, said he “read some columns where at least it was characterized that the president said we should go to four-year colleges.” “If it was in error, then I agree with the president that we should have options for people to go to a variety of different training options for them,” Santorum said.

Santorum’s campaign is at a critical juncture. After receiving little notice until January, Santorum came from behind to win nominating contests in Iowa, Missouri, Colorado, and Minnesota. But former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has won the most recent contests in Michigan, Arizona, and Washington. Both campaigns are now looking toward Tuesday, when 10 states will vote.

Santorum said his race is harder because former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is taking some of the conservative vote that might otherwise go to Santorum. In Washington State, where Romney won Saturday’s caucuses, and Texas Representative Ron Paul edged out Santorum for second place, Gingrich took 10 percent of the vote. When it comes to the “anti-Romney vote,” Santorum said, “Both Gingrich and I are out there slugging away.”

Raise Your Voice
Click to contact candidates or elected officials about this issue.Santorum declined to call on Gingrich to drop out, saying, “That’s up to him to decide.”

The Romney campaign on Saturday raised questions about Santorum’s ability to run a campaign, given that Santorum did not fill out full slates of delegates in all of Ohio’s congressional districts and may be ineligible for 18 of Ohio’s 66 delegates. He also did not qualify for the ballot in Virginia. Santorum said on Fox News that the delegates had to be filed in early December, while he was campaigning in Iowa and hovering at 2 percent in national polls, with limited resources. “We’ve done amazingly well for a campaign that early on didn’t have a lot of resources to go out and do things,” Santorum said.

Santorum also defended comments he made last fall when he said he believed birth control was wrong. “It’s not ok, it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that’s counter to how things are supposed to be,” Santorum said then.

Today, Santorum said he was reflecting the views of the Catholic Church. “We used to be tolerant of those beliefs. I guess now when now you have beliefs that are consistent with the church, somehow or other you’re out of the mainstream,” Santorum said.

Santorum said the debate over birth control today is about government intrusion on religious values. He defended the Blunt amendment, which failed in the Senate this week, which said employers can refuse to provide insurance coverage for anything they find morally objectionable – such as birth control or vaccines. “This is a conscience cause exemption, which used to be something that was unanimously agreed to,” Santorum said. “Government should not be forcing people to do things that are against their conscience.”

Wallace also asked Santorum why he only gave 2 percent of his income to charity, given his emphasis on the role of the church in helping the poor. Santorum said he has seven children, including one disabled child who is expensive to take care of – and whose care is not covered by insurance. But Santorum said, “It’s an area I need to do better and will do better.”


Shira Schoenberg can be reached at sschoenberg@globe.com. 

•