I agree with this statement in half. The first sentence is bright and light. And I think that we could remove the word political from that sentence and have a thought that speaks on even more universal terms. The second sentence conditions it, and deliberately or accidentally, gelds it. It lets the “us” off the hook and puts “them” on the skewer.

When I flip on the TV at night, I can find the conservatives skewering the liberals. When I tire of that I can find the liberals skewering the conservatives. What I’m saying is that neither is helpful but both are a human tendency. Those of us who hold, shall we say, liberal view in relation to the macro world and conservative views in relation to the micro world are left feeling skewered from both sides.

Who am I to talk.

Thanks for pointing me that way.

I think the law should be fair to all, regardless of money or station. I think that one of the points of government is to intervene when the crooks cook the books or attempt other unfair advantage. I don’t think government can solve everything, but I do think it has a role in keeping our interactions fair. I do not think government has any business dictating personal behavior, including sexual preferences and what a person drinks, smokes, or ingests. I do think the government has a right to regulate dangerous or violent behavior. I do not think the government has any business confusing justified law with the commands of theology of any sort whatsoever. I think it is at least stupid, and probably outright criminal, when we take aggressive action on foreign soil for the wrong reasons or because of lies, or, as in Viet Nam, based on the predictions of spurious political theory. If the country is too poor to provide adequate health care to everybody, then the rich and powerful should not have access to better health care than the poor and defenseless. But they do. I think, with the Declaration of Independence and the constituion, that government derives its power from the consent of the governed. Government is not more authoritative than the individual, though the wise individual bows to his or her society. Nobody has a right to hurt, kill, or cheat anybody else. Government is not God. Government is us. And so on.

Certainly “conservatives” are as various as liberals. As I have said in many venues, if maybe not here, honorable “conservatives” and honorable “liberals” pretty much agree on the kind of country we want. What we disagree on are the methodologies to get there. As long as we are both willing to put reasonable limits on the behavior we will tolerate, I honor the disagreements about approach—though I will certainly argue strongly for my own, and certainly study the evidence.

However, right now, in what I think is a seriously misguided move, the Republican party is insisting that it has a unified face. It doesn’t, but insists on pretending that it does. It has also vigorously and vociferously identified itself with a world-view that I consider reactionary, ignorant, and belligent.

There are plenty of self-professed “liberals” I cannot stand. However, as nearly as I can tell, the “liberals” in general make no such pretense of unity. That’s the way I think Professor Fury intends his comments, and that is the way I took them and responded to them.

And it is very difficult NOT to be politicized nowadays.

Perhaps, in reality, though in a comic shorthand you might classify yourselves as liberals, perhaps, you only hold liberal views. There are conservatives like that too. Some folks I know hold some conservative views, but are not staunchly politicized. These are the folks who just can’t find it in themselves to do reverence. They might, though, be able to reach down into themselves for the sacrifice.