Let the government be the government & Let the church be the church.

This exactly the OPPOSITE of what the 16 million member Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land wants from the GOP. Land hopes this election helps RECOVER TO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT the cozy relationship and power granted them under George W. Bush - the inside track and advantage.

Can Any Good Thing Come Out of the efforts of the Texas Religious Right's 150 meeting?

Often in America "policies are adopted, not because they generate more benefit for the body politic, but because THEY BENEFIT AN IMPORTANT SET OF PEOPLE," writes one economist and political observer.

How does the nation benefit from their elevation of Rick Santorum to be their "blessed" choice for GOP presidential candidate?

What is the actual economic and political impact of the cabal of 150 "secret" neo-moral majority participants in coronating a "righteous choice" for the GOP presidential candidacy - Sen. Rick Santorum?

We have endured a long dark, dangerous tunnel of heavy influence by Rad Right Religionists whose influence on legislation has been ubiquitous: The horrific midnight Terri Schiavo, congressional fiasco, the appointment of an overabundance of uber-conservative Roman Catholics to the U.S. Supreme Court, the steady march of pro-lifers stymieing a woman's right to choice in her own health and wellbeing at the state legislative level; and on other issues such as: the decertification of collective bargaining; along with the Koch Bros. use of a multiplicity of astroturf organizations to roll back environmental rules and regulations (EPA) in order to richly "bless" their monolithic gas and oil holdings, the support of Grover Norquist's "No New Taxes" vow, legislation that is anti-science, etc.

Contrast: The Purity of the Founders Opposition to the "Establishment of Religion"

"To hear the Religious Right tell it, men like George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were 18th-century versions of Jerry Falwell in powdered wigs and stockings. Nothing could be further from the truth.

"Unlike many of today's candidates, the founders didn't find it necessary to constantly wear religion on their sleeves. They considered faith a private affair. Contrast them to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (who says he wouldn't vote for an atheist for president because non-believers lack the proper moral grounding to guide the American ship of state), Texas Gov. Rick Perry (who hosted a prayer rally and issued an infamous ad accusing President Barack Obama of waging a "war on religion") and former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum (whose uber-Catholicism leads him to oppose not just abortion but birth control)."

Source: Rob Benson of Americans United.

The Corrupt Practice of Marrying the Church to the State, as has been the thrust of the Rad Religious Right now for well over 30 years. Doing so has made a mockery of many of its own various doctrines, standards, and moral edicts. This "marriage" has made a circus out of the political ethical high ground to which these advocates publically and loudly aspire.

The Economists' term "Public Choice" is "Politics without romance"
Wishful thinking...presumes that participants in the political 'Public Choice' act in a beneficial manner.

"As (economist) James Buchanan has so artfully defined it, 'PUBLIC CHOICE' IS 'POLITICS WITHOUT ROMANCE.' The wishful thinking it displaced presumes that participants in the political sphere aspire to promote the common good. In the conventional 'public interest' view, public officials are portrayed as benevolent 'public servants' who faithfully carry out the "will of the people." IN TENDING TO THE PUBLIC'S BUSINESS, VOTERS, POLITICIANS, AND POLICYMAKERS ARE SUPPOSED SOMEHOW TO RISE ABOVE THEIR OWN PAROCHIAL CONCERNS."

Source: "Public Choice" by William F. Shughart II.

HOWEVER: Politicians are not glowing angles of virtue-Not even former Senator Santorum

"'Public choice' is the application of economic models of self-interest to political science. The central assumption is that politicians are not glowing angels of virtue but prone to the same self-interested behavior as we might expect from anyone else. Basically public choice is, in the words of James Buchanan, "politics without romance".

"Studying 'public choice' is vital because people are susceptible to misconceptions. The moment economists admit that the market is imperfect due to problems such as public goods provision or externalities there is mass zeal for corrective interventions such as subsidies and taxes. Yet, this may not always be a good idea. The more legitimate question to ask is not whether the market is perfect; but, whether the political process is better."

Source: "Wise as serpents" posted February 2, 2011.

In the quest for constructive economic answers, the so-called "values voters"-blind followers of Right Wing Religious leaders, such as the Texas 150-are lost sheep.

Religion as a motivation for running secular government, a very bad idea
The concept of the use of taxes to punish by withholding the revenues from things this group does not support, or by taxing things that this select group wishes to undermine or limit is an antique idea that still holds promise for some who believe themselves to be morally superior to American society.

The debate over Taxes serves many purposes - including ignorance

"Alfred Cecil Pigou was the father of the idea that taxes could be used to correct negative externalities. An idea that Bruce Yandle (Senior Fellow Bruce Yandle, Clemson Alumni Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus and Interim Dean of Clemson's College of Business & Behavioral Science) points out is gaining significant popularity in a myriad of arenas: taxes on soda (to curb obesity) and taxes on large banks (to curb risky behavior). But, EVEN PIGOU DID NOT BELIEVE THAT POLICY HAPPENED IN A VACUUM. He offered this valuable insight:

"[W]e cannot expect that any public authority will attain, or will even wholeheartedly seek, that ideal. Such authorities are liable alike to ignorance, to sectional pressure and to personal corruption by private interest. A loud-voice part of their constituents, if organized for votes, may easily outweigh the whole."

"In short, 'public choice' is worth studying because we need to understand: VOTES ARE TO POLITICIANS WHAT PROFITS ARE TO BUSINESSES.

"Sometimes policies are adopted, not because they generate more benefit for the body politic, but because they benefit an important set of people. Finally ---and this speaks to Pigou's statement that "authorities are liable alike to ignorance"--- even if politicians were well-intentioned, there is no single Great Mind that could calculate the social costs or benefits needed to arrive at a corresponding tax or subsidy."

Source: Economic and Compassion - Wise as Serpents February 2, 2011.

-----

The American people, if allowed to think for themselves outside the intense media and propaganda world of "spin," care intensely about themselves and their families. They even care about local community and their nation. However, if their emotions and personal sense of ethics can be sidetracked by promoters of single issues and raw emotional religious fervor and are counseled against raising taxes, then they won't "vote their pocketbooks" and the benefits to themselves and the nation will be dashed.

This the situation we face in the 2012 elections-during a time when not nearly enough attention is being placed on a satisfactory national recovery, all the while Congress acts in TeaPartisan gridlock. To suggest and recommend to the large block of "values voters" that Rick Santorum represents the best "values" choice for the American presidency masks the clear threat that Santorum's Opus Dei devotion to expanding Roman Catholic influence over the United States (Santorum's highest goal) remains a very serious threat to the nation's basic secular freedoms.

Voting the Texas 150's "values" and ignoring everyday economic reality spells disaster. Voting "values" and ignoring the threat that Santorum represents to the preservation of Jeffersonian separation of church and state is unconscionable.

Purposeful blindness to the condition of the economy
This is the situation we face in the up-coming 2012 elections. And that is exactly what a "pledged vote" and endorsement from the Religious Right delivered in year 2000, a disastrous outcome: A "right wing religious" block vote (based on its leadership's vetting and endorsement process) resulted in electing a clearly under-qualified, mentally confused and burned-out George W. Bush. This man endorsed by the "Christian" Religious Right as a "bornaganiner" brought down the nation: Bush's lack of proper presidential attention to known terrorist threats (as indicated in CIA presidential daily briefings) led directly to 9/11, failure to curb federal spending (scant vetoes of run-away deficits), a war of 'choice' not paid by foreign debit, also Bush's complete inability to sense and prevent widespread corruption (WorldCom, Enron, Abramhof/Reed) and catastrophic Wall Street, mortgage, and banking collapses.

Normal citizens consistently "vote their pocketbooks"-favor of their own "best interests"

"In modeling the behavior of individuals as driven by the goal of utility maximization-economics jargon for a personal sense of well-being-economists do not deny that people care about their families, friends, and community. But public choice, like the economic model of rational behavior on which it rests, assumes that people are guided chiefly by their own self-interests and, more important, that the motivations of people in the political process are no different from those of people in the steak, housing, or car market. They are the same human beings, after all. As such, voters "vote their pocketbooks," supporting candidates and ballot propositions they think will make them personally better off; bureaucrats strive to advance their own careers; and politicians seek election or reelection to office. Public choice, in other words, simply transfers the rational actor model of economic theory to the realm of politics." 

Source: Presentation on Decision Making: Theories & Concepts.


The problem of church rule over and against state secular sovereignty
The injection of religious sectarianism, proscribed human moral behaviors or acts, strict prohibitions on drug substances and alcohol, and advantage given to certain fundamentalist ideology moves the "rational actor model" of politics in a very particular direction: Religionist hoping to run or rule the public square and legislate intend to coerce (by government police powers under their control) certain "values" or "defined moral behaviors" in ways that skew and distort the public realm in many ways not in the greater public's present or future best interests, especially, economic well-being.

Seeing the huge advantage and loop hole created by this Evangelical/Pentecostal/Fundamentalistic/Opus Dei power grab; corporations and internationalists have moved in to logically and systematically work against the "economic and social well being" of these true believers and glean huge profits and relief from their release from onerous regulations and rules corporations constantly complain are the overreach of government; deregulation has become a basic goal (value) for the far right religious coalition.

If it were that the "true believers" were the only part of the population effected by this distortion, so be it. But such is not the case.

Why must the entire nation be forced, by a powerful and hell-fearing faction, to vote and work against their "own best interests"?

Again...Ask the secret Texas Religious Rightist 150.


Original.