Monday, December 8, 2008

"Oogedy boogedy"? Cute

The following Letter to the Editor was submitted 12-08-08 to the Sun Paper in response to Kathleen Parker's commentary and Jim Maher's letter published in the Sun.

I entered the debate on the problems with the GOP, "Readers speak out: the religious right and the election," Nov. 29, reacting to Kathleen Parker’s commentary in which she blamed the dismal election results on the "religious" problem, "the evangelical, right‑wing, oogedy‑boogedy branch of the GOP". She revisited this notion in her Dec. 5th commentary,” Them Oogedy‑Boogedy Blues”, as she felt obliged to define this new word, “oogedy-boogedy” that her friend had coined.
My description that,“Ms. Parker’s attempt to blame the “great big problem, GOD”, for the Republican Party’s woes, is classic liberal sleight of hand.” caused Jim Maher to laugh “out loud”, and onto your editorial page, Dec 2nd, “Kathleen Parker certainly no liberal”. This response to my challenge of her "conservative columnist" label, generated some twenty comments on baltimoresun.com.
In reviewing Parker’s archives for the past few months, I see that Mr. Maher was partially correct. She is not a liberal, but she is not a conservative. Parker puts out about nine commentaries each month. Most, of them only flirt with conservative principles. They seem to be sarcastic, witty, personality and policy critiques, which stay well within the status quo. They do not challenge on true conservative principles.
In foreign policy, has Ms Parker spoken out against our presence in the Iraq War, or Condi Rice’s statement to the Council on Foreign Relations, that the U.S. is in the business of spreading democracy? Has she written anything against the Federal Reserve, or Congress’s dereliction of duty to coin money and regulate its value? I also failed to find an opinion attacking the unpatriotic Patriot Act.
Maher was partially right, “Kathleen Parker certainly no liberal”. She is a neo-conservative! McCain is what our media and the national neo‑conservatives arranged for us to pick from. When defending conservative principles against liberals or neo-conservatives, is there really a difference?
Michael Hargadon

No comments: