<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Random Predictions and Comments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/</link>
	<description>A First Things Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 13:05:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Presnall</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-12268</link>
		<dc:creator>John Presnall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Nov 2010 06:24:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=2552#comment-12268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pete is onto something. There is a distinction between policy conservatives and constitutionalist conservatives. The constitutionalists accuse the pragmatists of lacking an understanding of fundamental principle--usually having something to do with liberty. The policy oriented guys look to what is feasible in terms of facts on the ground--whether real fiscal facts or real political facts. The policy guys argue for what is possible in politics today. The constitutionalists argue for what ought to be done because they recognize that a constitutionalism which is based on the rule of law that one has given oneself requires a deep sense of self restraint. These two trends of conservatism speak past each other to say the least.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pete is onto something. There is a distinction between policy conservatives and constitutionalist conservatives. The constitutionalists accuse the pragmatists of lacking an understanding of fundamental principle&#8211;usually having something to do with liberty. The policy oriented guys look to what is feasible in terms of facts on the ground&#8211;whether real fiscal facts or real political facts. The policy guys argue for what is possible in politics today. The constitutionalists argue for what ought to be done because they recognize that a constitutionalism which is based on the rule of law that one has given oneself requires a deep sense of self restraint. These two trends of conservatism speak past each other to say the least.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ellie Light</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-12253</link>
		<dc:creator>Ellie Light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=2552#comment-12253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course the Catholic XChurch should compromise on abortion.  While we&#039;re at it why not go whole hog and become more progressive like the Anglicans, heck why not just adopt Voodoo while we&#039;re become more liberal?

And I agree that all those undocumented jihadies, I mean workers should become citizens.  I mean why obey the laws of the USA?  Aren&#039;t we all better off when we reward those who brake rigid, inflexible laws?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course the Catholic XChurch should compromise on abortion.  While we&#8217;re at it why not go whole hog and become more progressive like the Anglicans, heck why not just adopt Voodoo while we&#8217;re become more liberal?</p>
<p>And I agree that all those undocumented jihadies, I mean workers should become citizens.  I mean why obey the laws of the USA?  Aren&#8217;t we all better off when we reward those who brake rigid, inflexible laws?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Random Predictions and Comments » Postmodern Conservative &#124; A First Things Blog -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-12252</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Random Predictions and Comments » Postmodern Conservative &#124; A First Things Blog -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 09:27:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=2552#comment-12252</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Daily Breaking News , Joicelynne Slater. Joicelynne Slater said: Random Predictions and Comments: And in SENATE races: The only changes I see is that the Republican seems more lik... http://bit.ly/a9OWpq [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Daily Breaking News , Joicelynne Slater. Joicelynne Slater said: Random Predictions and Comments: And in SENATE races: The only changes I see is that the Republican seems more lik&#8230; <a href="http://bit.ly/a9OWpq" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/a9OWpq</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete Spiliakos</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-12248</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete Spiliakos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 00:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=2552#comment-12248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a place for an eventual limited amnesty, but only as part of a broader immigration and enforcment (and not merely border enforcement) package.  Ramesh Ponurru had some thoughtful (and moderate in the good sense) proposals on this subject in National Review.

Right now the best defenders of a decent welfare state that is consistent with broadly rising living standards are people like Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, Yuval Levin and Reihan Salam.

My head tells me eight Republican pick ups in the Senate, but my gut (and an unscientific  sense that Senate Republican candidates will tend to outperform their poll numbers) tells me nine.

You are right that Obama&#039;s popularity is holding up fine under very difficult circumstances.  A year of gridlock doesn&#039;t really serve conservative goals (though it is the best we can reasonably hope for on the really big things.)  The problem is that even a modest recovery coupled with the different turnout model of 2012 and the slow (but steady) demographic transformation of America puts Obama in a good place to win reelection and maybe make up for some of the congressional losses of this year.  

The big Republican challenge is to put choices to Obama that force him to either hurt his popularity or agree to move the country in a positive direction on issues like health care (repeal is something they should argue for, but is not enough.)  That would require well thought-out policies and a plan for selling them to the broad public.  I see no reason to believe that the Republican congressional leadership is up to this challenge.  I don&#039;t like their chances in  a public relations fight with Obama in a circumstance where the Republicans are seen as having some responsibility.

But we&#039;ll see.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a place for an eventual limited amnesty, but only as part of a broader immigration and enforcment (and not merely border enforcement) package.  Ramesh Ponurru had some thoughtful (and moderate in the good sense) proposals on this subject in National Review.</p>
<p>Right now the best defenders of a decent welfare state that is consistent with broadly rising living standards are people like Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, Yuval Levin and Reihan Salam.</p>
<p>My head tells me eight Republican pick ups in the Senate, but my gut (and an unscientific  sense that Senate Republican candidates will tend to outperform their poll numbers) tells me nine.</p>
<p>You are right that Obama&#8217;s popularity is holding up fine under very difficult circumstances.  A year of gridlock doesn&#8217;t really serve conservative goals (though it is the best we can reasonably hope for on the really big things.)  The problem is that even a modest recovery coupled with the different turnout model of 2012 and the slow (but steady) demographic transformation of America puts Obama in a good place to win reelection and maybe make up for some of the congressional losses of this year.  </p>
<p>The big Republican challenge is to put choices to Obama that force him to either hurt his popularity or agree to move the country in a positive direction on issues like health care (repeal is something they should argue for, but is not enough.)  That would require well thought-out policies and a plan for selling them to the broad public.  I see no reason to believe that the Republican congressional leadership is up to this challenge.  I don&#8217;t like their chances in  a public relations fight with Obama in a circumstance where the Republicans are seen as having some responsibility.</p>
<p>But we&#8217;ll see.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Cheeks</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2010/10/31/random-predictions-and-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-12247</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Cheeks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Oct 2010 22:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=2552#comment-12247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like RCP and this week they announced that the race in my district, the Ohio 6th, is up in the air. Given that hope and aware of just how strongly union and Democrat the district is, I&#039;m guessing the GOP takes 55-60 seat in the House, and 10 in the Senate with the caveat that the Tea Partiers will begin immediately the effort to remove any RINO who may reveal themselves to be unworthy. This is a real political rising!
Whoever wins for the GOP is going to be monitored by the TP very closely because the TPers are determined to, step-by-step, re-establish a republican gummint.

How do we do &quot;divided&quot; gummint when one pole of the tension is &#039;republicanism&#039; and the other a highly centralized statism? 
That is the Democratic Party is one that eschews the traditional &#039;American&#039; virtues and embraces the old, tired, and murderous psycho-pathologies of the past century. I can&#039;t see how there can be a dialectic between the Democrats and this new batch of conservative, American, Republicans. Politically, perhaps literally, one or the other has to be crushed.

However, &#039;divided&#039; gummint, assuming the conversation was grounded on intrinsic American principles rather than Marxist ones,  would prevent our Kenyan-Marxist president from continuing his agenda to create an all but enslaved proletariat.

If someone could explain to me how a Catholic, indeed any Christian could, without sin, be a member of a political party that kills its young, I&#039;d appreciate it. If the bishops seek to do God&#039;s will they would excommunicate any Catholic who was a member of the Democrat Party. It&#039;s that &#039;Imago Dei&#039; thing.

And finally, anyone living in this country &#039;illegally&#039; should be arrested and deported. However, Peter&#039;s correct in his critique of the Porchers. The first step to freedom is having the means of existing without standing in a gummint queue, and that means capitalism.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like RCP and this week they announced that the race in my district, the Ohio 6th, is up in the air. Given that hope and aware of just how strongly union and Democrat the district is, I&#8217;m guessing the GOP takes 55-60 seat in the House, and 10 in the Senate with the caveat that the Tea Partiers will begin immediately the effort to remove any RINO who may reveal themselves to be unworthy. This is a real political rising!<br />
Whoever wins for the GOP is going to be monitored by the TP very closely because the TPers are determined to, step-by-step, re-establish a republican gummint.</p>
<p>How do we do &#8220;divided&#8221; gummint when one pole of the tension is &#8216;republicanism&#8217; and the other a highly centralized statism?<br />
That is the Democratic Party is one that eschews the traditional &#8216;American&#8217; virtues and embraces the old, tired, and murderous psycho-pathologies of the past century. I can&#8217;t see how there can be a dialectic between the Democrats and this new batch of conservative, American, Republicans. Politically, perhaps literally, one or the other has to be crushed.</p>
<p>However, &#8216;divided&#8217; gummint, assuming the conversation was grounded on intrinsic American principles rather than Marxist ones,  would prevent our Kenyan-Marxist president from continuing his agenda to create an all but enslaved proletariat.</p>
<p>If someone could explain to me how a Catholic, indeed any Christian could, without sin, be a member of a political party that kills its young, I&#8217;d appreciate it. If the bishops seek to do God&#8217;s will they would excommunicate any Catholic who was a member of the Democrat Party. It&#8217;s that &#8216;Imago Dei&#8217; thing.</p>
<p>And finally, anyone living in this country &#8216;illegally&#8217; should be arrested and deported. However, Peter&#8217;s correct in his critique of the Porchers. The first step to freedom is having the means of existing without standing in a gummint queue, and that means capitalism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
