Homepage
Newsletter
Search
Updates
About
Adler
Dolhenty
Adventures
Philosophers
Critiques
Glossary
Quotations
Mini-courses
Aquinas
Essays
Philosophy
Politics
Religion
Education
Science
Media
FAQ
Ask
Guestbook
Forum
Bookstore
Emporium
Newsstand
Calendar
Subscribe
Feedback
Tell a friend
Votecaster
Cartoons

Newsletter Archive 25
Newsletter Front Page

Archive Index


Click Here for New & Used College Textbooks at Discount Prices

Click Here for College Education Information & Study Resources


Shop Amazon Stores in the Radical Academy

Bookstore
Magazine Outlet
Music Store
Classical Music Store
Video Store
DVD Store
Computer Store
Camera & Photo Store
Computer/Video Games
Software Store
Musical Instruments
Outlet Store
Cellular Phones
Toys & Games
Tools & Hardware
Automotive Store
Outdoor Living
Consumer Electronics
Home & Garden
Kitchen & Housewares
Baby Superstore
Apparel & Accessories
Gourmet Food
Grocery Store
Sporting Goods
Jewelry & Watches
Health & Personal Care
Beauty Store


Academy
Showcase
Specials

Index for this page...(Be aware some links below may have expired.)


Posted July 8, 2003

Latest Kelsey Grammer Lesson

When Kelsey Grammer guest-hosted the Letterman show, he let the cat out of the bag about the way conservatives are treated in left-leaning Hollywood.

In his monologue, he shared with the audience: "Some of you may or may not know this. I've recently come out of the closet, actually, in Hollywood. I'm a Republican, you see. It's a dangerous thing to do in Hollywood because it means you are very isolated and lonely."

The actor went on to describe what a small group of Hollywood Republicans that he hangs out with did recently for kicks. He quipped, "Last weekend, just for fun, we kidnapped Michael Moore and gave him a decent haircut and some clothing."

Grammer also commented on the latest cynical ploy by Democrats to create a hubbub over not finding the actual WMDs in a country the size of California. "John Kerry's been leveling some real shots at President Bush lately," he said. "I want you to give them some time … don't forget they're still looking for O.J.'s weapons."

The "Frasier" star appeared recently on "Fox & Friends," too, and revealed that he was a "pro-Bush guy."

(Source: The Left Coast Report by James L. Hirsen and the staff of NewsMax. If you would like a subscription, please visit http://NewsMax.com/email.shtml)


Posted July 8, 2003

Alarmed Republicans, Conservatives Swell ACLU Ranks

Membership in the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has surged dramatically -- and a large part of that increase is from conservatives and Republicans.

That's striking, because conservatives have traditionally loathed the ACLU. So why the change?

It's because lots of liberty-minded conservatives are becoming alarmed that the Bush administration's draconian anti-terrorism measures (such as the police-state USA PATRIOT Act) are threatening the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and fundamental American liberties.

So alarmed, in fact, that they're willing to form unlikely alliances and coalitions in order to defend those values.

Arch-conservative former U.S. Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) is now a consultant for the ACLU. And the ACLU has formed lobbying alliances with conservative groups such as the American Conservative Union, Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum, and Americans for Tax Reform.

In all, a whopping 100,000 new members have joined the ACLU since the Sept. 11 attacks. The ACLU and other observers believe that a large percentage of those new members are conservatives. This new conservative support has pushed the ACLU's membership to an all-time high: 400,000 dues-paying members.

The new funds have in turn allowed the ACLU to publicize the Bush administration's war against our liberties. An example: a new $3.5 television advertising campaign -- the ACLU's first-ever TV ad -- has a narrator saying, "Look what (Attorney General) John Ashcroft is doing to our Constitution," while hands cross out and cut up the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The USA PATRIOT Act and similar Bush administration measures have "scared a lot of conservatives," Bob Barr says. "They now recognize that we do have common ground with the ACLU."

Similarly, David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, observes: "On the right and left -- for different reasons and coming from different places -- there is concern about the government listening to everyone's phone conversations and reading people's mail. And when you share those kinds of concerns with other people, you damn sure better get together with them."

Needless to say, conservatives are not embracing the whole ACLU agenda. Many conservatives remain horrified at the ACLU's support of gay rights, abortion rights, gun control and similar non-conservative positions.

But the police state that Ashcroft and Bush seem to be busily erecting has scared enough liberty-minded conservatives to convince them to make at least a temporary, conditional alliance with liberals (and libertarians).

And for now, at least, the ACLU has positioned itself as the biggest and most effective voice speaking out against the new anti-terrorism acts.

(Source: Chicago Tribune: http://www.aberdeennews.com/mld/aberdeennews/news/politics/6033039.htm - and the information was provided by James W. Harris of the Advocates for Self-Government. James W. Harris is co-editor of the Liberator Online. If you wish to subscribe to the Liberator Online, visit: http://www.self-gov.org/liberator/maintain.html.)


Posted July 8, 2003

Aristotle and Us, by Christopher Flannery

Are we experiencing a global religious war, a "clash of civilizations," or "the end of history"? Does American foreign policy represent a "Hobbesian" approach to the world in contrast to Europe's "Kantian" approach? Must we insist upon or put aside considerations of "good and evil" when we discuss foreign affairs? Is there such a thing as a "just war," and if so, what is it, and did we just wage one?

These questions and others of equal scope have been forced to the forefront of public debate by the great events, not only of the past year and a half but of the past decade and a half. They all remind us why Aristotle considered the art or science of politics to be the most comprehensive and authoritative -- the architectonic -- art or science.

Politics cannot avoid consideration of first principles and final ends. It cannot avoid the most comprehensive questions about human choices and actions, about human purposes, about the human good. This is why Aristotle understood practical wisdom -- the defining virtue of the statesman -- to be the most comprehensive and authoritative intellectual and moral virtue: the capacity to know what is good and to know how to do it in the most complex and momentous situations.

It is the necessity for this understanding of politics that gave rise 25 years ago to the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy.

For signs that Aristotle continues to speak to prospective statesmen in the English-speaking world, see the most recent Claremont Review of Books for Susan D. Collins's thought-provoking review of a handful of recent English translations of Aristotle's indispensable Nicomachean Ethics.

For signs that, when Aristotle speaks, people listen, see Carnes Lord's review, in the same issue, of Aristotle and Modern Politics, where Lord explains Aristotle's "ability to appeal to self-confessed liberals, libertarians, communitarians, social democrats, and otherwise respectable American scholars in search of exits from various blind alleys of contemporary thought and practice."

To refresh yourself on the intricacies of "Just-War Theory," and its applications to our recent (current?) war, you will not find a more lucid guide than Michael Uhlmann, who writes on "The Uses and Abuses" of the doctrine in the same action-packed issue.

Aristotle would also without question agree that the Claremont Review of Books is, in itself, beautiful, and pleasant to the touch. Please subscribe, or seek it out at your local newsstand or bookseller, so that your fingers and eyes can serve your mind as nature meant them to do.

(Christopher Flannery is a Professor of Political Science at Azusa Pacific University, an associate editor of the Claremont Review of Books, and a senior fellow of the Claremont Institute, and this article is archived at http://www.claremont.org/writings/precepts/030617flannery.html.)



Newsletter Front Page

Archive Index



-- Top of Page --

[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]

Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, & 2002-03 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.