This arrogant, cruel, and often stupid person is selling himself the same way all Republicans now sell themselves--as a good Christian man in relationship with God. And you know what? As long as he doesn't raise people's taxes, have sex with an intern, nor institute a draft, the evangelical crowd (if history is any guide) will accept that as good enough. Which is why the Christian experience has been so cheapened, that it can be simply turned into a greeting card, t-shirt, or bumper sticker. No deep thinking needed. Oh and of course, no one will check to see if he is actually treating people like a Christian. That is the wonderful thing about this. It is like a free pass. As long as you can shout Jesus loud enough, and invoke enough little churchy phrases, that constitutes a close personal relationship with God.
September 14, 2011
Perry as super Christian
Just read this and felt like returning to my Saturday night puke-fest. Unbelievable. This is what I just sent a friend as an email, and it works as an angry blog post too:
Sally Kern as member of IndigNation
Fred Clark nails it again, I think, in this brilliant piece: The IndigNation, defending bullies and the martyr Sally Kern | slacktivist. I have always tried to find a way to describe the victimhood of the right, but this is a better way of saying it.
Kern's arrogance at calling criticism of her "stoning" is really interesting, and speaks to another trend that I find very troubling in the far right--the complete unwillingness to admit error. Bush couldn't do it. Palin can't even conceptualize the idea, and it seems that Romney can only admit error when it was the right thing to do--like providing healthcare. I was thinking about that with regard to the death penalty, and Rick Perry's horrible record of being the most deadly governor in history, or some such fact. This has included several that were questionable at best, including the story of Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed in 2004 based on some very questionable evidence. Questionable enough, at least, to provide more than credible questions to his conviction. After the execution, when people wanted to inquire, Perry shut down the investigation, and still claims that there is no evidence of innocence. Except there was.
Conservative Christians are fond of quoting scripture when it helps their case. Verses condemning homosexuality are well known, and I have been told over and over that God "hates" homosexuality, and that is not up for debate. But as I have argued, it is amazing to me how many scripture verses on wealth, or poverty, or war and peace are equally as adamant as those on the OT on gays--but those are never read as absolutes. They are read with context and nuance and, ultimately, with the conclusion, "God didn't mean that being rich was a problem," or "God didn't really mean to love our enemies as ourselves" and surely "God didn't mean that if someone asks for our coat we should give them our shirt as well," because that would be welfare. As our friend Monk pointed out in the comments at ATK, the Bible is pretty strident about executing the innocent:
Funny how I have never heard that one before. Funny how that has never come up in conversation when invoking the scriptures to defend this institution. Sadly, I have had conversations with Christians where even the prospect of an innocent person being executed was not a deal breaker.
But imagine if all the scriptures were actually taken as seriously as the ones condemning homosexuality? Imagine the response to torture, or to cutting off funding for the disabled poor? Or perhaps, the Tea Party would have shuddered softly at the sound of the 200 plus executions rather than openly applauding. Or perhaps, even, if Rick Perry were half as devout as he claimed, he would have embraced the investigation into Willingham's execution as a chance to either exonerate the system, or provide an opportunity for asking forgiveness for failing God in this effort.
Yet, clearly, the only scripture verses that are really that sacred, are those that reinforce their pre-existing views. Because Perry and the Tea Party see the judicial system as flawed when it lets off someone like OJ Simpson, but without possibility of failure when it executes the huge numbers they run through their death chair. And not a thought seems to pass their mind that perhaps, perhaps, there is something worth checking out.
As many have noted, the states with the highest execution rates used to lead us in lynching. And I am afraid that the Tea Party crowd (as Monk again pointed out) that cheered Perry's execution record, is the same crowd that used to flock around the hanging black person for a picture.
That isn't Christian.
Kern's arrogance at calling criticism of her "stoning" is really interesting, and speaks to another trend that I find very troubling in the far right--the complete unwillingness to admit error. Bush couldn't do it. Palin can't even conceptualize the idea, and it seems that Romney can only admit error when it was the right thing to do--like providing healthcare. I was thinking about that with regard to the death penalty, and Rick Perry's horrible record of being the most deadly governor in history, or some such fact. This has included several that were questionable at best, including the story of Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed in 2004 based on some very questionable evidence. Questionable enough, at least, to provide more than credible questions to his conviction. After the execution, when people wanted to inquire, Perry shut down the investigation, and still claims that there is no evidence of innocence. Except there was.
Conservative Christians are fond of quoting scripture when it helps their case. Verses condemning homosexuality are well known, and I have been told over and over that God "hates" homosexuality, and that is not up for debate. But as I have argued, it is amazing to me how many scripture verses on wealth, or poverty, or war and peace are equally as adamant as those on the OT on gays--but those are never read as absolutes. They are read with context and nuance and, ultimately, with the conclusion, "God didn't mean that being rich was a problem," or "God didn't really mean to love our enemies as ourselves" and surely "God didn't mean that if someone asks for our coat we should give them our shirt as well," because that would be welfare. As our friend Monk pointed out in the comments at ATK, the Bible is pretty strident about executing the innocent:
Exodus 23:6 "Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits. 7 Have nothing to do with a false charge10 and do not put an innocent11 or honest person to death,12 for I will not acquit the guilty. (NIV)
Funny how I have never heard that one before. Funny how that has never come up in conversation when invoking the scriptures to defend this institution. Sadly, I have had conversations with Christians where even the prospect of an innocent person being executed was not a deal breaker.
But imagine if all the scriptures were actually taken as seriously as the ones condemning homosexuality? Imagine the response to torture, or to cutting off funding for the disabled poor? Or perhaps, the Tea Party would have shuddered softly at the sound of the 200 plus executions rather than openly applauding. Or perhaps, even, if Rick Perry were half as devout as he claimed, he would have embraced the investigation into Willingham's execution as a chance to either exonerate the system, or provide an opportunity for asking forgiveness for failing God in this effort.
Yet, clearly, the only scripture verses that are really that sacred, are those that reinforce their pre-existing views. Because Perry and the Tea Party see the judicial system as flawed when it lets off someone like OJ Simpson, but without possibility of failure when it executes the huge numbers they run through their death chair. And not a thought seems to pass their mind that perhaps, perhaps, there is something worth checking out.
As many have noted, the states with the highest execution rates used to lead us in lynching. And I am afraid that the Tea Party crowd (as Monk again pointed out) that cheered Perry's execution record, is the same crowd that used to flock around the hanging black person for a picture.
That isn't Christian.
September 13, 2011
What happens if you post a blog and no one reads?
:)
Or perhaps we are just in a time when people are busy with work, families, etc. I know it has been a rough couple of days for me. I contracted some kind of stomach bug that showed itself with a vengeance late Saturday night. I don't think I have ever been that sick, and I am still feeling a little run over.
But reading the news doesn't help either. As I posted earlier, it is hard to find the words to describe the Tea Party assholes who cheerfully shout "yes" to the question "should we let an uninsured person die rather than pick up the tab?" The same type of people, I am sure, cheered Rick Perry's record number of executions. And, I am sure, these are the same idiots who bought Sarah Palin's "death panel" nonsense. Seems like they really weren't concerned about death panels after all, just wanted to make sure it was applied to people they don't like.
As many of my FB friends have noted, many of them, undoubtedly, see themselves as strong believers. That is just a reminder to Christian conservatives what they have lost by selling their faith to the person who shouts "jesus" the loudest.
Yeah, you get these misanthropes. Running for President. With a crowd cheering them on, just as that same crowd would have cheered a public lynching 100 years ago.
My sense is that my conservative friends see the Tea Party the same way they do Rush Limbaugh or Pat Robertson--as an idiot who is unfortunately on the same side of the party line as they are. Of course, they miss how it is these idiots who are shaping their party's policies. But they also miss how their other Republicans are working steadily to stop government from working so they can run on the claim that government doesn't work well.
It won't get better, I am afraid, until grownup Republicans who actually do believe in good governing and don't want people to die in the streets start taking responsibility for who they elect. If the nutjobs in your base nominate a right wing idiot, you don't have to vote for him or her simply because they have an R next to their name. And maybe, just maybe, this bullshit of skating by as a low information voter has to stop. The stakes are just too high.
Or perhaps we are just in a time when people are busy with work, families, etc. I know it has been a rough couple of days for me. I contracted some kind of stomach bug that showed itself with a vengeance late Saturday night. I don't think I have ever been that sick, and I am still feeling a little run over.
But reading the news doesn't help either. As I posted earlier, it is hard to find the words to describe the Tea Party assholes who cheerfully shout "yes" to the question "should we let an uninsured person die rather than pick up the tab?" The same type of people, I am sure, cheered Rick Perry's record number of executions. And, I am sure, these are the same idiots who bought Sarah Palin's "death panel" nonsense. Seems like they really weren't concerned about death panels after all, just wanted to make sure it was applied to people they don't like.
As many of my FB friends have noted, many of them, undoubtedly, see themselves as strong believers. That is just a reminder to Christian conservatives what they have lost by selling their faith to the person who shouts "jesus" the loudest.
Yeah, you get these misanthropes. Running for President. With a crowd cheering them on, just as that same crowd would have cheered a public lynching 100 years ago.
My sense is that my conservative friends see the Tea Party the same way they do Rush Limbaugh or Pat Robertson--as an idiot who is unfortunately on the same side of the party line as they are. Of course, they miss how it is these idiots who are shaping their party's policies. But they also miss how their other Republicans are working steadily to stop government from working so they can run on the claim that government doesn't work well.
It won't get better, I am afraid, until grownup Republicans who actually do believe in good governing and don't want people to die in the streets start taking responsibility for who they elect. If the nutjobs in your base nominate a right wing idiot, you don't have to vote for him or her simply because they have an R next to their name. And maybe, just maybe, this bullshit of skating by as a low information voter has to stop. The stakes are just too high.
Tea Party Debate Audience Cheers Idea Of Letting Sick Man Without Insurance Die (VIDEO) | Election 2012
Don't really have to say much more about the Tea Party do you? Than This following last week's cheering of Perry's record executions?
I used to wonder why people were so resistant to universal care of some sort and argued that we already had it in the most inefficient form possible--the emergency room. But that was all predicated on the idea that we were civilized and relatively human so that we would never just allow someone to die without trying to provide care--even if they could not afford it.
Turns out, the Tea Party has the answer. Screw them. Let them die.
And some have wondered why I have no respect for the Tea Party.
I used to wonder why people were so resistant to universal care of some sort and argued that we already had it in the most inefficient form possible--the emergency room. But that was all predicated on the idea that we were civilized and relatively human so that we would never just allow someone to die without trying to provide care--even if they could not afford it.
Turns out, the Tea Party has the answer. Screw them. Let them die.
And some have wondered why I have no respect for the Tea Party.
September 4, 2011
Republicans as a crazy criminal gang
Worth the read, from the very clear recognition that the Ayn Rand wing wants to completely undermine the social safety net, to the pro-war regardless of the consequences wing. Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult | Truthout. But my favorite line was a quote he pulled from someone else. Best description of the Republican party to date:
"Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999.This is the party that once was headed by Dwight Eisenhower, but now very willingly holds a gun to the American economy for its own agenda. Amazing.
September 2, 2011
Christian America
As Obama's poll numbers drop, I start to get nervous that we are looking at electing another idiot. And that has made me pretty angry at my conservative Christian friends. I know they are better people than this. I don't get why they can look at the current GOP's and their war on the poor, disabled, environment, women, etc. and not wince. I don't get why they can't look at Obama and see someone who is shockingly conservative--given all the rhetoric about his radicalism.
But mostly, I am increasingly angry at conservative Christians. In the last 30 years, they have made Christian America a theme, and have nearly required that their politicians be conservative Christians. Reminds me of two responses. One was Anglican, who used to respond to the Christian America with the very apt response, "so how Christian did we act?" The other was a paraphrase on Ghandi, who famously said, when asked what he thought of western civilization, that he thought it "would be a good idea."
But set aside the history of Indian removals, land theft, treaty violations. And let's forget slavery, child labor, and the invasion of Mexico--by our supposedly Christian ancestors. Let's just look at the last 30 years. Conservative Christians have taken over the Republican party and routinely push their faith in our halls of government. How has that worked out? Are we a more moral people? Are we better to the poor and needy? Are we more about peace and less about war? Do we value honesty and ethics more?
When I watch Palin, Bachmann, Perry--all the favorites of the religious right--I am stunned by their hostility to others, their derision toward anyone who disagrees. And I am stunned by their heartlessness. And none of those actions cause any problems among their conservative backers. Christians I know and respect just shrug off behavior that they would never tolerate in their own kids.
And what about policies? It is harder to get an abortion in this country, that is for sure. If that is good for you, then I guess you cheer it. I am not convinced. And we seem to see less nudity in films. More violence, but less nudity. If that is good for you, then woohoo.
What else have we accomplished? We have more kids in poverty. We have a growing obesity problem. And, as I noted, while we might not show breasts as much in film, we had a very popular television show that celebrated and defended torture. We have more people, in general, in poverty. We have stagnating wages and vast and growing income inequality. We have a healthcare situation where some parts of America are like a developing country in need of Doctors without Borders, but the religiously pious call healthcare reform "socialism." We easily bomb other countries, but do very little about famine in Africa. Ethnic cleansing and genocide barely make the news, but we were consumed for months about whether the President was, in fact, born in Hawaii. We have Christians who now, routinely, deny scientific evidence, not because they see flaws in the methodology, or data collection, but because they just don't like the conclusion and don't "believe" it to be true. And we have Christian conservatives cutting funding for the neediest of the needy while cutting taxes for the rich and powerful.
If that is Christianity, then I am confused.
But mostly, I am increasingly angry at conservative Christians. In the last 30 years, they have made Christian America a theme, and have nearly required that their politicians be conservative Christians. Reminds me of two responses. One was Anglican, who used to respond to the Christian America with the very apt response, "so how Christian did we act?" The other was a paraphrase on Ghandi, who famously said, when asked what he thought of western civilization, that he thought it "would be a good idea."
But set aside the history of Indian removals, land theft, treaty violations. And let's forget slavery, child labor, and the invasion of Mexico--by our supposedly Christian ancestors. Let's just look at the last 30 years. Conservative Christians have taken over the Republican party and routinely push their faith in our halls of government. How has that worked out? Are we a more moral people? Are we better to the poor and needy? Are we more about peace and less about war? Do we value honesty and ethics more?
When I watch Palin, Bachmann, Perry--all the favorites of the religious right--I am stunned by their hostility to others, their derision toward anyone who disagrees. And I am stunned by their heartlessness. And none of those actions cause any problems among their conservative backers. Christians I know and respect just shrug off behavior that they would never tolerate in their own kids.
And what about policies? It is harder to get an abortion in this country, that is for sure. If that is good for you, then I guess you cheer it. I am not convinced. And we seem to see less nudity in films. More violence, but less nudity. If that is good for you, then woohoo.
What else have we accomplished? We have more kids in poverty. We have a growing obesity problem. And, as I noted, while we might not show breasts as much in film, we had a very popular television show that celebrated and defended torture. We have more people, in general, in poverty. We have stagnating wages and vast and growing income inequality. We have a healthcare situation where some parts of America are like a developing country in need of Doctors without Borders, but the religiously pious call healthcare reform "socialism." We easily bomb other countries, but do very little about famine in Africa. Ethnic cleansing and genocide barely make the news, but we were consumed for months about whether the President was, in fact, born in Hawaii. We have Christians who now, routinely, deny scientific evidence, not because they see flaws in the methodology, or data collection, but because they just don't like the conclusion and don't "believe" it to be true. And we have Christian conservatives cutting funding for the neediest of the needy while cutting taxes for the rich and powerful.
If that is Christianity, then I am confused.
September 1, 2011
Conservative Jesus Press conference
Washington, DC (AP) - After keeping a low profile, Conservative Jesus held his first public press conference early this morning to clarify the stances taken in his name. "WWJD? That was about me, so I thought I would be direct with the American people (who I prefer, naturally) about my beliefs. So many politicians like to claim to represent me (cough, cough, Obama), but only the conservative ones do," said CJ during his opening statement. A full transcript will be available later, but here are the highlights of CJ's policy, moral, and ethical beliefs.
--on climate change--"Humans can't be responsible because I am in charge. And there is no reason to stop making money to protect any part of my creation."
--on the poor and working class--"Snort. Those lazy people have gotten a free ride for far too long. Time for them to pay more in taxes. If they want government services like fire, police, and sanitation, time to step up and pay even more of their meager wealth."
--on political discourse--"Sure, I said a lot of things in the NT about treating people well, but that was only intended for your friends. You don't have to be respectful, honest, or anything to liberals."
--on the growing homeless--"Most of them are mentally ill."
--on the disabled poor--"Seriously? They want to stay alive? Ok, but don't ask the rich and powerful to do anything. Unless they want, of course, but I am not going to make them. As I often said, "Blessed are the rich and powerful because I like them SOOO much."
Conservative Jesus ended the press conference by praising Tea Party and Republican conservatives for holding to their principles of protecting the rich and powerful and demonizing the poor. "That is just how we did it in my day."
--on climate change--"Humans can't be responsible because I am in charge. And there is no reason to stop making money to protect any part of my creation."
--on the poor and working class--"Snort. Those lazy people have gotten a free ride for far too long. Time for them to pay more in taxes. If they want government services like fire, police, and sanitation, time to step up and pay even more of their meager wealth."
--on political discourse--"Sure, I said a lot of things in the NT about treating people well, but that was only intended for your friends. You don't have to be respectful, honest, or anything to liberals."
--on the growing homeless--"Most of them are mentally ill."
--on the disabled poor--"Seriously? They want to stay alive? Ok, but don't ask the rich and powerful to do anything. Unless they want, of course, but I am not going to make them. As I often said, "Blessed are the rich and powerful because I like them SOOO much."
Conservative Jesus ended the press conference by praising Tea Party and Republican conservatives for holding to their principles of protecting the rich and powerful and demonizing the poor. "That is just how we did it in my day."
August 29, 2011
Freedom Bible
No really. You can get your copy today (h/t to Greg). Though you can also get an American Patriot's Bible. My favorite comment in this one?
Christianity as consumer good. And I kind of get that. If you make Bibles, and run Bible stores, you need more versions. One isn't enough. And what better way to capitalize on tragedy like 9-11 or to profit from the people following Rick Perry than to put out a Holy Bible that is themed around your agenda. Brilliant.
I am telling you, we are closer and closer each day to a pain reliever ad featuring Jesus on the cross. Everything is for sale, and, in this case, Christians seem to be eager to sell it.
If you didn't think that God had a role in America you need this Bible. It will give you the answers on how God influenced our Country.Sigh.
Christianity as consumer good. And I kind of get that. If you make Bibles, and run Bible stores, you need more versions. One isn't enough. And what better way to capitalize on tragedy like 9-11 or to profit from the people following Rick Perry than to put out a Holy Bible that is themed around your agenda. Brilliant.
I am telling you, we are closer and closer each day to a pain reliever ad featuring Jesus on the cross. Everything is for sale, and, in this case, Christians seem to be eager to sell it.
Nothing is worth raising taxes
Even a major hurricane. Meanwhile, FEMA is running on empty with funds and so has had to cancel projects in Missouri rebuilding roads and buildings destroyed by that massive tornado.
This is what happens when one major party has decided, like small, bigoted children, to never raise taxes, even for the things that we all say we value. You want to help someone harmed by a major disaster? Take away the assistance for that disabled person first, or we won't help. Or stop helping that other community first.
Whatever you do, don't ask the super rich to pay a cent more in taxes. Not one red cent. Because, of course, the Republican party now is starting to believe that the working poor are the ones who are truly under-taxed. The working poor are the new "welfare queens," who are leaching off the "job creator" class.
This is disgusting politics, but it is also horrible economics. Those at the bottom who don't pay income taxes pay plenty in other taxes, of course, but they don't pay income taxes because they don't have enough income to qualify. Yet, I heard from one Republican asshat over the weekend that "52% of Americans pay no tax at all," while this upstanding citizen payed "all of his taxes." False, first of all. And amazing that, as Warren Buffett recently pointed out, some of those super rich pay a lower rate than you and I do. But we should not resent those hedge fund managers making billions and paying next to nothing in taxes. We should resent that person working at a minimum wage job (or two, or three) who doesn't pay income tax because every penny is devoted to trying to pay rent and groceries.
The Republican party is many things now. It is anti-science. It is anti-muslim. And it is cruel to an amazing point, that it wants all of us to look at anyone who is needy with contempt or suspicion. They want to take away your hard earned money, and should be resented. The only way they are worthy of helping is if they are begging at a soup kitchen, and willing to listen to a sermon. But if they are applying for any kind of aid, they are leaches on society, and should be shunned.
One thing for Republicans to embrace that. Still just blows me away that conservative Christians are watching this and cheering. Or sitting on their hands. This is not the America I thought it was. And this isn't the church I thought it was.
This is what happens when one major party has decided, like small, bigoted children, to never raise taxes, even for the things that we all say we value. You want to help someone harmed by a major disaster? Take away the assistance for that disabled person first, or we won't help. Or stop helping that other community first.
Whatever you do, don't ask the super rich to pay a cent more in taxes. Not one red cent. Because, of course, the Republican party now is starting to believe that the working poor are the ones who are truly under-taxed. The working poor are the new "welfare queens," who are leaching off the "job creator" class.
This is disgusting politics, but it is also horrible economics. Those at the bottom who don't pay income taxes pay plenty in other taxes, of course, but they don't pay income taxes because they don't have enough income to qualify. Yet, I heard from one Republican asshat over the weekend that "52% of Americans pay no tax at all," while this upstanding citizen payed "all of his taxes." False, first of all. And amazing that, as Warren Buffett recently pointed out, some of those super rich pay a lower rate than you and I do. But we should not resent those hedge fund managers making billions and paying next to nothing in taxes. We should resent that person working at a minimum wage job (or two, or three) who doesn't pay income tax because every penny is devoted to trying to pay rent and groceries.
The Republican party is many things now. It is anti-science. It is anti-muslim. And it is cruel to an amazing point, that it wants all of us to look at anyone who is needy with contempt or suspicion. They want to take away your hard earned money, and should be resented. The only way they are worthy of helping is if they are begging at a soup kitchen, and willing to listen to a sermon. But if they are applying for any kind of aid, they are leaches on society, and should be shunned.
One thing for Republicans to embrace that. Still just blows me away that conservative Christians are watching this and cheering. Or sitting on their hands. This is not the America I thought it was. And this isn't the church I thought it was.
August 25, 2011
Here are your Christian Republicans?
HuffPo has a story about Rick Perry and Phil Gramm working on a scheme in 2003 where Gramm's company (UBS) would purchase life insurance policies on teachers. The teachers families would get nothing, but UBS and the state of Texas would make big profits. This is hard to follow, but it seems like the deal ultimately fell through, but Gramm was later trying to do similar deals that would make his company huge profit using his protege (Perry)'s influence in state government.
Couple of points here. No wonder Republicans rail at government, because they are busy using government to make themselves rich. They know the corruption, because they are the corruption.
Second, I am more convinced than ever that the worst deal Christian conservatives ever made was to vote as a bloc for people who sold themselves as Christian conservatives who would return America to some mythic Christian past. They opened themselves up to any list of sociopaths who mouth Christian language on one hand, but pursue the most unChristian policies on the other. Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann are the fruit. Hell, it started with the idiot Bush--who is looking smarter and more moral by the moment when compared to his followers. What does that tell you?
Couple of points here. No wonder Republicans rail at government, because they are busy using government to make themselves rich. They know the corruption, because they are the corruption.
Second, I am more convinced than ever that the worst deal Christian conservatives ever made was to vote as a bloc for people who sold themselves as Christian conservatives who would return America to some mythic Christian past. They opened themselves up to any list of sociopaths who mouth Christian language on one hand, but pursue the most unChristian policies on the other. Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann are the fruit. Hell, it started with the idiot Bush--who is looking smarter and more moral by the moment when compared to his followers. What does that tell you?
August 22, 2011
Republican women?
What is it about them? They all seem to follow the Palin model of refusing to ever have made an error. In this case, it is Christine O’Donnell, who lies about her supposed persecution, then attacks anyone who disagrees. I think it is that sense of persecution that gets me with all of them. It could describe the entire far right--they all seem to think they are victims of some global conspiracy against them--even as they wield an amazing amount of power. What would they do if they were truly powerless?
I don't know. I just know that they don't represent women, conservatism, or the Republican party very well.
I don't know. I just know that they don't represent women, conservatism, or the Republican party very well.
August 19, 2011
It's only class warfare when we fight back
I don't think we need any more evidence of that than the response to Warren Buffett's great op-ed. Jon Stewart Highlights Conservative Hypocrisy On "Class Warfare" (VIDEO) | TPM LiveWire. Worth watching both clips, as he really takes apart both the idea that taxing the rich is class warfare, but also the reverse warfare that Fox and others are pushing about the bottom 50% not paying income taxes.
I find this all so disgusting. Everywhere I turn, there appears to be more and more attacks on the poor, and defense of the rich and comfortable. What troubles me the most is how many of them are Christian conservatives who seem to have forgotten just about every aspect of the faith's take on wealth and poverty. Instead, they have transformed Jesus into the patron saint of the SUV driving, gated-community class.
When did Christianity become about protecting the comfortable and chastising the uncomfortable? Obviously, not all do that, as we know from our friend Monk and others. But the the right wing Christians seem to worship Adam Smith more than the Christ they like to talk about.
I find this all so disgusting. Everywhere I turn, there appears to be more and more attacks on the poor, and defense of the rich and comfortable. What troubles me the most is how many of them are Christian conservatives who seem to have forgotten just about every aspect of the faith's take on wealth and poverty. Instead, they have transformed Jesus into the patron saint of the SUV driving, gated-community class.
When did Christianity become about protecting the comfortable and chastising the uncomfortable? Obviously, not all do that, as we know from our friend Monk and others. But the the right wing Christians seem to worship Adam Smith more than the Christ they like to talk about.
August 15, 2011
One of the super-rich says "stop coddling super-rich."
The entire thing is worth reading (not long) but here are a few gems from Warren Buffet's great op-ed. First, for those who seem to not quite grasp how much money the rich have gained while workers and middle class people have seen their incomes and benefits stagnate.
"Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent."Or for those who think that the rich already pay too much in taxes:
Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.And this may be my favorite since we always hear that higher tax rates make rich people angry and make them decide to not invest their money. I have always found that a completely ridiculous argument, since their other option is to sit on their money. No rich person does that unless they are misers hiding their money in mattresses. They invest because it is in their interest to do so, regardless of the tax rate they pay on those returns.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
August 5, 2011
Poll: Tea party support shrinks by half since 2010
I think it was Digby who made a pretty good point about this story that the Tea Party is shrinking. She said, and I agree, that the Tea Party's intransigence and power is over-played. That allows Republicans like Boehner to act as if they are more moderate, but all of them refuse to raise revenue, and all of them are aiming their guns at Medicare.
The Republican party has been taken over by psychos, and the Tea Partiers are just the most vocal of the idiots. But the reactionary politics are replete through the party.
But what is most interesting to me, is that even Republicans are mad at the party for their intransigence. But I suspect they will forget that in a year after they have heard ad nauseum about how Obama is an evil Kenyan.
Oh, and speak of that, they are already trying to blame Obama for the downgrade of our credit. That takes balls. Usually the kidnapper doesn't blame the cops for the fact that they are now considered criminals. Oh, and Michelle Bachmann is slamming Obama for celebrating his birthday party.
Wouldn't you hate to work for the Onion during this period in American history? How do you satirize such idiocy?
The Republican party has been taken over by psychos, and the Tea Partiers are just the most vocal of the idiots. But the reactionary politics are replete through the party.
But what is most interesting to me, is that even Republicans are mad at the party for their intransigence. But I suspect they will forget that in a year after they have heard ad nauseum about how Obama is an evil Kenyan.
Oh, and speak of that, they are already trying to blame Obama for the downgrade of our credit. That takes balls. Usually the kidnapper doesn't blame the cops for the fact that they are now considered criminals. Oh, and Michelle Bachmann is slamming Obama for celebrating his birthday party.
Wouldn't you hate to work for the Onion during this period in American history? How do you satirize such idiocy?
August 4, 2011
Church missing giant panda balloon
And it cost between 5 and 7 grand. Yeah, that's the takeaway from this story. Not that this ridiculous church has a "Kung Fu Panda movie theme" to attract new members. Yeah, I will take them seriously.
But it does make this post from 2004 seem less far fetched.
But it does make this post from 2004 seem less far fetched.
August 3, 2011
Religious thinking. Oh, and I am back.
Perhaps you noticed, or perhaps you didn't. We went to a wedding in Colorado this past weekend where I played my mandolin in front of a crowd for the first time ever. Actually, I played and sang three songs using the mando and guitar. I have sung at weddings before, but never played. It was a very interesting and enjoyable experience.
The drive back, however, was brutal. Descending into the plains and watching the temp go up was a bit depressing. I am sure glad there is no climate change, or this warmest July on record might concern me. Oh, and I watched in some horror as the Republican party put a gun to the head of our economy and demanded cuts for the poor and needy-without a dime more paid by the rich--or they would destroy our entire economy. That is the behavior of criminals, not leaders. Today, I read that Eric Cantor has laid it out--republicans will not raise taxes for Medicare or Social Security--so those of us who are looking at retirement better be rich. I have no idea how we will be able to pay for healthcare on a fixed income. Sure glad that the rich won't be asked to contribute. That would really suck. Perhaps the middle class will realize what this means for them. Perhaps. Perhaps if they think that only the poor will be hosed, they won't care, but if they realize that anyone who retires under Paul Ryan's plan will be looking at a fixed income and fixed voucher for healthcare. When healthcare costs rise above that? Oh well.
I honestly have no way of understanding that level of callousness. I really don't. I don't understand the rich saying, "fuck you" to the poor and middle class, but it is inconceivable that middle class people seem to be voting with them. I know what it will mean for SOF and myself. It won't be good. We can prepare for retirement at a reasonable level, but if we have to save for skyrocketing healthcare costs--if we can even get insurance--then I don't see that turning out well. If my conservative Christian friends care about that, I would like to know what they plan on doing. Because voting for these criminals is not going to be good for any of us. I don't care how loud they are against gays and abortions.
Anyway.
Speaking of Christian thought, Greg had a very interesting post from his intersession class about how many Christians imagine God. In this case it was about whether God could do anything or had to live under some of the rules he laid out for humanity. I have thought about that in the context of genocide, since the OT God tended to favor wiping people out--but also told us to not murder. Greg, as he often does, captures the contradiction of believing that God can do whatever he wants:
Ok.
The drive back, however, was brutal. Descending into the plains and watching the temp go up was a bit depressing. I am sure glad there is no climate change, or this warmest July on record might concern me. Oh, and I watched in some horror as the Republican party put a gun to the head of our economy and demanded cuts for the poor and needy-without a dime more paid by the rich--or they would destroy our entire economy. That is the behavior of criminals, not leaders. Today, I read that Eric Cantor has laid it out--republicans will not raise taxes for Medicare or Social Security--so those of us who are looking at retirement better be rich. I have no idea how we will be able to pay for healthcare on a fixed income. Sure glad that the rich won't be asked to contribute. That would really suck. Perhaps the middle class will realize what this means for them. Perhaps. Perhaps if they think that only the poor will be hosed, they won't care, but if they realize that anyone who retires under Paul Ryan's plan will be looking at a fixed income and fixed voucher for healthcare. When healthcare costs rise above that? Oh well.
I honestly have no way of understanding that level of callousness. I really don't. I don't understand the rich saying, "fuck you" to the poor and middle class, but it is inconceivable that middle class people seem to be voting with them. I know what it will mean for SOF and myself. It won't be good. We can prepare for retirement at a reasonable level, but if we have to save for skyrocketing healthcare costs--if we can even get insurance--then I don't see that turning out well. If my conservative Christian friends care about that, I would like to know what they plan on doing. Because voting for these criminals is not going to be good for any of us. I don't care how loud they are against gays and abortions.
Anyway.
Speaking of Christian thought, Greg had a very interesting post from his intersession class about how many Christians imagine God. In this case it was about whether God could do anything or had to live under some of the rules he laid out for humanity. I have thought about that in the context of genocide, since the OT God tended to favor wiping people out--but also told us to not murder. Greg, as he often does, captures the contradiction of believing that God can do whatever he wants:
"Another student took issue. God can do what he wants, she insisted. Then you can't trust him, I replied. Why not? Because if he can do what he wants, he can lie to you and you may not be saved after all. He doesn't lie, she said. You said he can do whatever he wants. He can, but he doesn't lie. How can you know that? Because he says his word can be trusted. But you said he can do whatever he wants. She failed to realize the contradiction she'd wandered into."This is my experience as well. God is so big and outside our consciousness, but then he is clearly this one thing. And he doesn't like this, or that. And he isn't female. And he prefers Israel to Iran. And he doesn't like gay sex or feminist women. And he doesn't sweat torture. But you can't put him in a box.
Ok.
July 26, 2011
Southern Baptist shameless liar--Richard Land
I have been watching Land off and on over the years, and have had moments where I almost respected him. He was one of few SBC leaders to apologize for slavery and segregation--albeit years after when it was safe to do.
But it is clear that he is a shameless liar for the right. And a further reminder that the bogie men of my youth were misplaced. It wasn't the feminists I needed to fear, but the Souther Baptist leaders--wrapped in the flag and carrying a Bible.
I will also say that watching the Republican party drive our country's economy off the cliff, I am reminded how many of them proclaim their Christian faith. That has worked out so well, hasn't it?
But it is clear that he is a shameless liar for the right. And a further reminder that the bogie men of my youth were misplaced. It wasn't the feminists I needed to fear, but the Souther Baptist leaders--wrapped in the flag and carrying a Bible.
I will also say that watching the Republican party drive our country's economy off the cliff, I am reminded how many of them proclaim their Christian faith. That has worked out so well, hasn't it?
Don't dare tell me Republicans care about the deficit
Because they don't. I read yesterday that this debt crisis will surely end up raising the cost of borrowing for the country. A 1% increase in the interest rate will cost us an additional trillion fucking dollars in interest payments. So when Boehner and Cantor and the rest of the Republican assholes say they are only interested in us "living within our means," they are lying through their teeth.
This is not about the deficit. This is about two things. One, is the Tea Party idiots who have taken a pretty decent democratic model and fucked it up. Turns out that democracy doesn't actually work well when one side doesn't believe in compromise or negotiation. And the Second is the conservative right's absolute hatred of any social safety net.
My Republican friends all tell me they support some safety net, they just want it under control. Well, they should really check with the sociopaths running their party, because the GOP would prefer that Grannie be left on the sidewalk when she can no longer afford her meds or rent.
Don't tell me they care about the deficit, and don't tell me that the GOP doesn't hate poor and working people.
This is not about the deficit. This is about two things. One, is the Tea Party idiots who have taken a pretty decent democratic model and fucked it up. Turns out that democracy doesn't actually work well when one side doesn't believe in compromise or negotiation. And the Second is the conservative right's absolute hatred of any social safety net.
My Republican friends all tell me they support some safety net, they just want it under control. Well, they should really check with the sociopaths running their party, because the GOP would prefer that Grannie be left on the sidewalk when she can no longer afford her meds or rent.
Don't tell me they care about the deficit, and don't tell me that the GOP doesn't hate poor and working people.
July 24, 2011
Taxes as wasted consumer spending
Interesting to talk to people about taxes. I understand that historically people have not wanted to pay taxes, and of course, we have our "taxation without representation" cry from the American Revolution (that is partially true, at least). And there is little doubt that the Republican party has seized on that as a rallying cry and easy way to get votes. "I will cut your taxes, no matter how low they get, and you can be free and have what you want." That is a pretty easy sell.
But what bugs me is how dismissive conservatives have become about taxes as if they are all bad. I know I have said this before, but my taxes go to help disabled and poor--to help people overseas avoid malaria and AIDS. Of course, my taxes also go to sugar subsidies and torture rooms. None of us ever get everything we want from taxes or government--a truism if there ever was.
However, in this day and age where we are supposed to imagine the federal government as a household budget that should live within its means, it might be instructive to take those Republican tactics and actually put them through a household budget. (Make no mistake, the largest economy in the world should not be managed as a household budget, but just hear me out.)
First, of course, this national household budget has done the opposite of what most actual budgets try to do--it has taken a purposeful salary reduction and is always fighting to bring in less money. I know of no household who does this on purpose. Second, this national budget seems to see all taxes and expenditures as wasteful. It is as if we, as a family, simply decided to not pay for a roof, because it was not fun, or tires for the car, or oil changes for the car. So many of those costs are not ones that we get to enjoy or play with, but are ever so necessary and are not wasteful at all. They allow us to have cover, or transportation, or heat and air, etc.
But Conservatives have sold the bill of goods that your tax money doesn't get you anything, because it goes to the government instead of to something you like. But it goes to invest in schools, and public health, and infrastructure, and the healthcare for others. Because we all live in a broader community and are harmed when our neighbors are sick or under educated, or when the roads and sewers don't work.
If Progressives could do anything, it would be to identify the actual benefits from taxes--things that benefit even the anti-tax people. Things like Medicaid support for nursing home care, or matching funds for police and fire services, or for cleaner and healthier water systems. Investments in technology that, I would argue, probably lay somewhere in the process of every technology we enjoy today. Investments that have allowed millions to build small and large businesses.
But what bugs me is how dismissive conservatives have become about taxes as if they are all bad. I know I have said this before, but my taxes go to help disabled and poor--to help people overseas avoid malaria and AIDS. Of course, my taxes also go to sugar subsidies and torture rooms. None of us ever get everything we want from taxes or government--a truism if there ever was.
However, in this day and age where we are supposed to imagine the federal government as a household budget that should live within its means, it might be instructive to take those Republican tactics and actually put them through a household budget. (Make no mistake, the largest economy in the world should not be managed as a household budget, but just hear me out.)
First, of course, this national household budget has done the opposite of what most actual budgets try to do--it has taken a purposeful salary reduction and is always fighting to bring in less money. I know of no household who does this on purpose. Second, this national budget seems to see all taxes and expenditures as wasteful. It is as if we, as a family, simply decided to not pay for a roof, because it was not fun, or tires for the car, or oil changes for the car. So many of those costs are not ones that we get to enjoy or play with, but are ever so necessary and are not wasteful at all. They allow us to have cover, or transportation, or heat and air, etc.
But Conservatives have sold the bill of goods that your tax money doesn't get you anything, because it goes to the government instead of to something you like. But it goes to invest in schools, and public health, and infrastructure, and the healthcare for others. Because we all live in a broader community and are harmed when our neighbors are sick or under educated, or when the roads and sewers don't work.
If Progressives could do anything, it would be to identify the actual benefits from taxes--things that benefit even the anti-tax people. Things like Medicaid support for nursing home care, or matching funds for police and fire services, or for cleaner and healthier water systems. Investments in technology that, I would argue, probably lay somewhere in the process of every technology we enjoy today. Investments that have allowed millions to build small and large businesses.
July 23, 2011
On Evangelicals and the GOP
As we watch the GOP drive our economy over the cliff rather than possibly cause the elites any discomfort, I have been thinking about how the evangelicals I know can support these policies. Part of it is in these "dog whistle" moments such as when Tim Pawlenty names Jesus as one of his favorite political heroes, but then will govern as a purely conservative politician--with no real mention of Jesus when he cuts programs for the poor or defends torture.
For my evangelical friends, I think they have been co-opted in a way that they don't even understand. The GOP knows they are very uncomfortable with abortion and gay rights, and largely uninformed about broader political issues. So, they will vote for the GOP out of an assumption of moral superiority, and never really check back. They vote for Republicans on the basis of being "pro-life" and then never notice that the GOP defends and openly encourages torture and more war. They vote for fiscal responsibility and look the other way while the party defends only the rich. Our friend Kevin Powell caught this nice bit from Huffington Post on why evangelicalism is losing the younger generation, and a big part of that is their sexism and complete sell out to conservative politics.
I am starting to think that Google+'s new approach to social networking is a good way to see the evangelical's political world. One circle is the personal relationship where God is about them, and their personal "walk with Christ." That is where the lion's share of evangelicals books and discussions trend--how can you walk closely with God and how can he make you happier.
Then there is that circle named politics. It is one filled with myths about "pulling your self up by your bootstraps," and "individualism" and "the market economy" solving everything. It is a cold and ruthless place where people who don't work hard enough get left behind, and those who don't have enough to pay for healthcare are on their own. It is the world of Thomas Hobbes rather than that of the Gospel. And that is important, because in that circle, the only Bible verses are about God smiting people who are gay and the assumption that abortion is evil.
When we want to be spiritual, we enter the spiritual circle and talk about relationships over religion. When we want to be political, we switch circles and talk about tough choices and how wasteful government is. There is only one place for Christianity in politics. It is to get an entrance ticket, and then never be asked about it again--and then only for conservatives.
Sad. As SOF reminded me this afternoon, the OT has a lot of challenges to that kind of politics, but all we hear about are the passages from Leviticus about homosexuality. Nothing about abandoning the poor. Nothing about the evils of the rich exploiting the poor. Nothing about the need for people of faith to defend the oppressed rather than the comfortable.
For my evangelical friends, I think they have been co-opted in a way that they don't even understand. The GOP knows they are very uncomfortable with abortion and gay rights, and largely uninformed about broader political issues. So, they will vote for the GOP out of an assumption of moral superiority, and never really check back. They vote for Republicans on the basis of being "pro-life" and then never notice that the GOP defends and openly encourages torture and more war. They vote for fiscal responsibility and look the other way while the party defends only the rich. Our friend Kevin Powell caught this nice bit from Huffington Post on why evangelicalism is losing the younger generation, and a big part of that is their sexism and complete sell out to conservative politics.
I am starting to think that Google+'s new approach to social networking is a good way to see the evangelical's political world. One circle is the personal relationship where God is about them, and their personal "walk with Christ." That is where the lion's share of evangelicals books and discussions trend--how can you walk closely with God and how can he make you happier.
Then there is that circle named politics. It is one filled with myths about "pulling your self up by your bootstraps," and "individualism" and "the market economy" solving everything. It is a cold and ruthless place where people who don't work hard enough get left behind, and those who don't have enough to pay for healthcare are on their own. It is the world of Thomas Hobbes rather than that of the Gospel. And that is important, because in that circle, the only Bible verses are about God smiting people who are gay and the assumption that abortion is evil.
When we want to be spiritual, we enter the spiritual circle and talk about relationships over religion. When we want to be political, we switch circles and talk about tough choices and how wasteful government is. There is only one place for Christianity in politics. It is to get an entrance ticket, and then never be asked about it again--and then only for conservatives.
Sad. As SOF reminded me this afternoon, the OT has a lot of challenges to that kind of politics, but all we hear about are the passages from Leviticus about homosexuality. Nothing about abandoning the poor. Nothing about the evils of the rich exploiting the poor. Nothing about the need for people of faith to defend the oppressed rather than the comfortable.
Republican economics: cut wages, cut benefits, turn employees over to Medicaid--cut Medicaid
Saw this tweet a few minutes ago:
If this isn't a war on the poor, then someone should explain it to me.
In Arizona, 2700 Wal-Mart workers are on Medicaid because it is impossible for them to afford healthcare.”Just did a simple Google Search.
If this isn't a war on the poor, then someone should explain it to me.
July 22, 2011
Republicans are irresponsible. Period.
Word comes tonight that Republicans have broken off talks with the White House on the debt ceiling. As Pandagon notes, this isn't rational:
A Republican friend of mine asked me if I thought that Republicans didn't care about the poor and elderly. I told him, truthfully, that I thought most actual Republican voters were not like that. He is a good example of someone who does a lot of work to help people. But he doesn't seem to recognize what his party is doing in his name. He has been distracted by abortions and gays, and simply assumes that the Republicans are actually fiscally responsible.
They are not. And they aren't even close.
"I love Republicans saying no plan has been offered and then saying that Obama's plan would be terrible. #logic"What I love is that Republicans are so concerned about the deficit that they want only the poor and elderly to pay. Rich Republicans and Democrats need not be bothered. But if you are poor and disabled, or elderly and on a fixed budget, or about to be elderly, or about to be poor--their word to you is to "suck it."
A Republican friend of mine asked me if I thought that Republicans didn't care about the poor and elderly. I told him, truthfully, that I thought most actual Republican voters were not like that. He is a good example of someone who does a lot of work to help people. But he doesn't seem to recognize what his party is doing in his name. He has been distracted by abortions and gays, and simply assumes that the Republicans are actually fiscally responsible.
They are not. And they aren't even close.
July 21, 2011
Allen West claims that we don't like him because he is a black conservative
And even says that we are mad because he got off our "21st-century plantation, and they cannot afford to have a strong voice such as mine out there, reverberating and resonating across this country."
Yeah? No. Actually, we don't like you because you are an asshole who took a criticism of your policy stances (legitimate) and then decided to respond by disparaging a woman as not "a Lady" and therefore not worthy of his respect.
West: Wasserman Schultz And Dems Attack Me Because I'm A Black Conservative (AUDIO) | TPMDC
Oh, and remember that this is the guy who tortured a detainee in Iraq, was nearly charged for it, and brags about it to this day.
Asshole.
Yeah? No. Actually, we don't like you because you are an asshole who took a criticism of your policy stances (legitimate) and then decided to respond by disparaging a woman as not "a Lady" and therefore not worthy of his respect.
West: Wasserman Schultz And Dems Attack Me Because I'm A Black Conservative (AUDIO) | TPMDC
Oh, and remember that this is the guy who tortured a detainee in Iraq, was nearly charged for it, and brags about it to this day.
Asshole.
July 18, 2011
First economic disaster caused by spite
Watching this horror show in Washington is making me a little ill. We have Republicans openly arguing that their government should default on its debts as a statement of fiscal responsibility. Yes, they think that not paying what we owe is responsible.
Idiots.
And let's not forget that a good bulk of the economic problems we have were created by Republicans. Though, if you ask them, they have forgotten all of that.
But their goal is not to actually reduce spending. Or to help the economy. It is to kill the social safety net and, most importantly, to defeat Obama. Even if that means harming the economy for all of us.
Reminds me of that Seinfeld episode. Seinfeld Scripts - The Wig Master:
Idiots.
And let's not forget that a good bulk of the economic problems we have were created by Republicans. Though, if you ask them, they have forgotten all of that.
But their goal is not to actually reduce spending. Or to help the economy. It is to kill the social safety net and, most importantly, to defeat Obama. Even if that means harming the economy for all of us.
Reminds me of that Seinfeld episode. Seinfeld Scripts - The Wig Master:
"Scene cuts to the Andover shop.
Jerry: 'Excuse me I'd like to return this jacket.'
Teller: 'Certainly. May I ask why?'
Jerry: '........For spite...'
Teller: 'Spite?'
Jerry: 'That's right. I don't care for the salesman that sold it to me.'
Teller: 'I don't think you can return an item for spite.'"
Bachmann Nation: Where facts don't matter
The Washington post has a poll that shows that a majority of Republicans and Tea Partiers think that the debt ceiling doesn't need to be raised and nothing bad will happen if it is not.
Which reminds me of why the Republican part has become so unbelievable. They simply reject inconvenient facts. So a vast majority of evolutionary biologists knows that evolution is fact, not some vague idea? You find the one scientists who has questions and he or she becomes your standard bearers. Vast majority of climate scientists believe climate change is human caused? You just find that one guy (I was sent a link one time that proved climate change wasn't real--it was from an astrologer) and you just say, "there are many theories out there. The science isn't in."
Except it is. But when you are a Bachmann Republican, you just "conclusion shop" until you can find a historian who has Paul Revere ringing bells, or an economist who thinks that the default is no big deal. It doesn't matter if the guy is an idiot, because his knowledge doesn't matter either. What only matters is what you want to believe. There is a part of me that is a little jealous of that. I wish I could just deny my fears about climate change or economic collapse.
But I live in a real world where species adapt, and carbon increases the temperature, and when one of the biggest economies in the world refuses (out of spite) to pay its bills, there are going to be consequences.
In other words, I think, therefore I am no longer even eligible for the Republican party.
Which reminds me of why the Republican part has become so unbelievable. They simply reject inconvenient facts. So a vast majority of evolutionary biologists knows that evolution is fact, not some vague idea? You find the one scientists who has questions and he or she becomes your standard bearers. Vast majority of climate scientists believe climate change is human caused? You just find that one guy (I was sent a link one time that proved climate change wasn't real--it was from an astrologer) and you just say, "there are many theories out there. The science isn't in."
Except it is. But when you are a Bachmann Republican, you just "conclusion shop" until you can find a historian who has Paul Revere ringing bells, or an economist who thinks that the default is no big deal. It doesn't matter if the guy is an idiot, because his knowledge doesn't matter either. What only matters is what you want to believe. There is a part of me that is a little jealous of that. I wish I could just deny my fears about climate change or economic collapse.
But I live in a real world where species adapt, and carbon increases the temperature, and when one of the biggest economies in the world refuses (out of spite) to pay its bills, there are going to be consequences.
In other words, I think, therefore I am no longer even eligible for the Republican party.
Um, GOP? You do realize that is a cliff you are driving us over, right?
Every Major Credit Agency Prepares to Downgrade U.S.
Oh, that's right. You are all fucking idiots. Club for Growth tells Republicans: Trigger a Default or Else.
Oh, that's right. You are all fucking idiots. Club for Growth tells Republicans: Trigger a Default or Else.
Why Americans Think All Politicians Fail Them
David Frum has an excerpt of his recent column on why Americans think all politicians fail them, but I think he overlooks--at least from the part that I can read--the role that his own party has played in this. After several decades now of demonizing government, why would he think that the public would somehow trust their representatives in that government?
In fact, there seems to be this scenario going on--since Watergate. Republicans tell the public that government and politicians are evil and can't be trusted. Republicans then win elections on that claim, then take steps to prove that government is destructive and harmful to the public. Then blames Democrats for their own failings.
Rinse and repeat.
In fact, there seems to be this scenario going on--since Watergate. Republicans tell the public that government and politicians are evil and can't be trusted. Republicans then win elections on that claim, then take steps to prove that government is destructive and harmful to the public. Then blames Democrats for their own failings.
Rinse and repeat.
July 17, 2011
Breaking Up with God: A Love Story
I mentioned this book before, but finally finished it yesterday. Not because it is a difficult read--quite the opposite--but I just was distracted with a few other things. So yesterday afternoon, I found myself crying a few times as I followed her journey. Greg's review is really good, and he explains this book better than I can.
This book won't be for everyone. I think that is fairly obvious. But her questions about God sounded like those in my own head. And her frustration with the church's simplification echoed my own. My own experience was like this:
In summary, God is so much bigger than we can even imagine, but he prefers America, hates anyone who criticizes Israel, hates gay marriage, and likes capitalism and private property. But we can't really know him. If something good happens that we prayed for--that is proof that God answers prayer. If something bad happens that we prayed for--that is proof that we can't understand God's purpose and will. Even though we understood it when we liked the outcome.
God becomes, in that sense, everything and nothing. He is in complete control, but sometimes things happen that he clearly could not have wanted to happen, but he allowed that to happen because of some other reason. We are to have a close personal relationship with him--closer than that with our closest human connections, but can't really know him. And he might still smite us--as he has that opportunity and his "ways are higher than our ways."
She recounts a similar response to the torture revelations from Iraq. I think it is hard to completely explain how difficult that moment was for me. Well, not that moment as I am well aware of the evil that men do. But when the conservative church endorsed, or at best, shrugged off the evil of torture, something died for me. Their God didn't mind that because, as Bristol Pail said the other day, "God is on our side." He prefers us to those Muslims. I expected those who talked about how big God was, and who recounted the stories of Jesus as shepherd, finding that one lost sheep--I expected them to weep when they discovered that Bush was torturing in our name.
But they didn't. They didn't even come close. And their God didn't say anything to them. Still hasn't.
This book won't be for everyone. I think that is fairly obvious. But her questions about God sounded like those in my own head. And her frustration with the church's simplification echoed my own. My own experience was like this:
Evangelical: God is so much bigger than you can even imagine.
Me: So he might actually be she?
Evangelical: Don't be silly. He is just like a father.
Me: So there is no way he would wipe out populations of people, right?
Evangelical: No, he can do that and be just like your father too.
In summary, God is so much bigger than we can even imagine, but he prefers America, hates anyone who criticizes Israel, hates gay marriage, and likes capitalism and private property. But we can't really know him. If something good happens that we prayed for--that is proof that God answers prayer. If something bad happens that we prayed for--that is proof that we can't understand God's purpose and will. Even though we understood it when we liked the outcome.
God becomes, in that sense, everything and nothing. He is in complete control, but sometimes things happen that he clearly could not have wanted to happen, but he allowed that to happen because of some other reason. We are to have a close personal relationship with him--closer than that with our closest human connections, but can't really know him. And he might still smite us--as he has that opportunity and his "ways are higher than our ways."
She recounts a similar response to the torture revelations from Iraq. I think it is hard to completely explain how difficult that moment was for me. Well, not that moment as I am well aware of the evil that men do. But when the conservative church endorsed, or at best, shrugged off the evil of torture, something died for me. Their God didn't mind that because, as Bristol Pail said the other day, "God is on our side." He prefers us to those Muslims. I expected those who talked about how big God was, and who recounted the stories of Jesus as shepherd, finding that one lost sheep--I expected them to weep when they discovered that Bush was torturing in our name.
But they didn't. They didn't even come close. And their God didn't say anything to them. Still hasn't.
July 15, 2011
Fundamentalism means never having to compromise
After all, when you know the ultimate truth, compromising with lesser beings is pretty silly. I get that. But of course, these people don't actually have the ultimate truth, and their methods have been clearly ineffective. Of course, I am talking about Republicans on taxes.
Jesus. I get it. As Tracy Jordan once said on 30 Rock, "I get it, Jack, Republicans want less taxes, more guns, and the end of the gun tax." And I get how tax cuts can be effective in certain situations. The idea of "supply side" economics is to encourage the "supply" of goods--with the theory being that if you have a supply problem, incenting or encouraging production and investment will then benefit from demand. But the problem with Republicans is that they have decided that every economic situation could benefit from more supply. But in this recession, supply has never been the problem. Inventory has stacked up because people lack the ability to consume. That is the demand side, not the supply side, and merits a different approach.
But for modern Republicans, there is no economic problem that cannot be solved by a tax cut. Even when it won't work. And that has led to this kind of unbelievable zeal that puts, as Meyerson notes, tax cuts over even helping the disabled or the poor. Ever.
Here is the funny thing. Every Republican I have talked to in person claims that they are not opposed to raising some taxes. Yet their leadership drives us off a cliff. Somehow I don't think the elected Republicans fear their base leaving them. So I am not sure I trust my Republican friends that much.
Jesus. I get it. As Tracy Jordan once said on 30 Rock, "I get it, Jack, Republicans want less taxes, more guns, and the end of the gun tax." And I get how tax cuts can be effective in certain situations. The idea of "supply side" economics is to encourage the "supply" of goods--with the theory being that if you have a supply problem, incenting or encouraging production and investment will then benefit from demand. But the problem with Republicans is that they have decided that every economic situation could benefit from more supply. But in this recession, supply has never been the problem. Inventory has stacked up because people lack the ability to consume. That is the demand side, not the supply side, and merits a different approach.
But for modern Republicans, there is no economic problem that cannot be solved by a tax cut. Even when it won't work. And that has led to this kind of unbelievable zeal that puts, as Meyerson notes, tax cuts over even helping the disabled or the poor. Ever.
In Minnesota, a state with a Democratic governor and a Republican legislature, Gov. Mark Dayton sought to raise taxes on only the relative handful of Minnesotans with annual incomes in excess of $1 million. The legislature opposed that, insisting on cuts (including to services for those with disabilities) that Dayton wouldn’t countenance.Or in California where Jerry Brown offered to deregulate some areas and even cut state pensions if Republicans would allow the people to decide on tax increases. But Republicans have decided no tax cuts, ever.
Here is the funny thing. Every Republican I have talked to in person claims that they are not opposed to raising some taxes. Yet their leadership drives us off a cliff. Somehow I don't think the elected Republicans fear their base leaving them. So I am not sure I trust my Republican friends that much.
July 13, 2011
The Christian right and White Supremacy
Sarah Posner has a piece on the connections between the far right and the White Supremacy and neo confederate movement. It is worth a read.
But to be very clear, and I am sure Ms. Posner would agree, this is not to suggest that conservative Christians are racist. But it does suggest that there are connections that many of them don't even realize. In fact, I am becoming more and more convinced that the conservative Christians are largely ill-informed about what their politicians are doing in their name. I don't think they realize much of the insanity, and this is just another example. It doesn't excuse their ignorance, but it may explain why they have become supporters for a party that is increasingly racist and certainly only interested in the interests of the rich and powerful.
But to be very clear, and I am sure Ms. Posner would agree, this is not to suggest that conservative Christians are racist. But it does suggest that there are connections that many of them don't even realize. In fact, I am becoming more and more convinced that the conservative Christians are largely ill-informed about what their politicians are doing in their name. I don't think they realize much of the insanity, and this is just another example. It doesn't excuse their ignorance, but it may explain why they have become supporters for a party that is increasingly racist and certainly only interested in the interests of the rich and powerful.
July 11, 2011
Goddamn Republican idiots
Seriously. Maybe it is the heat getting to me, but I am finally realizing that Republicans are going to sink our economy to prove that they are fiscally responsible. They are goddamned fucking idiots. And that is the nicest thing I can say about them right now.
Let's start with this nice little chart. Look at the down arrows since Bush took office, and look at how big those down arrows are. And notice how many of these fuckers voted consistently for every goddamned one of those tax cuts during two wars.
Now read what the conservative Economist has to say about this crisis.
Now read what the intellectually dishonest and seemingly endlessly stupid Republicans have to say about the negotiations. Meanwhile, Obama has actually floated over 3 trillion dollars in cuts, in exchange for minor increases in revenue that only close loopholes, they don't even raise marginal rates. And Obama, damn it, is actually floating raising the retirement age for Medicare--Jesus Fucking Christ--while Republicans refuse to even close one goddamned loophole.
These people are nuts. There is nothing worse than ignorant people who believe that compromise is evil, and Republicans have given us a whole fucking caucus of them. I hope you all enjoy their "fiscal responsibility" when our economy slides back into recession.
What fucking morons.
Let's start with this nice little chart. Look at the down arrows since Bush took office, and look at how big those down arrows are. And notice how many of these fuckers voted consistently for every goddamned one of those tax cuts during two wars.
Now read what the conservative Economist has to say about this crisis.
The sticking-point is not on the spending side. It is because the vast majority of Republicans, driven on by the wilder-eyed members of their party and the cacophony of conservative media, are clinging to the position that not a single cent of deficit reduction must come from a higher tax take. This is economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical.
Now read what the intellectually dishonest and seemingly endlessly stupid Republicans have to say about the negotiations. Meanwhile, Obama has actually floated over 3 trillion dollars in cuts, in exchange for minor increases in revenue that only close loopholes, they don't even raise marginal rates. And Obama, damn it, is actually floating raising the retirement age for Medicare--Jesus Fucking Christ--while Republicans refuse to even close one goddamned loophole.
These people are nuts. There is nothing worse than ignorant people who believe that compromise is evil, and Republicans have given us a whole fucking caucus of them. I hope you all enjoy their "fiscal responsibility" when our economy slides back into recession.
What fucking morons.
July 10, 2011
The nature of God
How is that for a grandiose blog title? Yeah, I thought so too.
But I am reading this book, thanks to Greg's review. It is a great book, and has already spurred some thoughtful conversations about the nature of God. For me, one of the best examples was the discussion about Aaron and the Golden Calf--including the part where Moses has some 3,000 people killed according to God's order. As I noted to a friend, I find that God hard to understand in the context of the "personal relationship" God that I am supposed to see as Father. Yeah, except my own father never claimed that he could kill me and be right to do so.
But that is the nature of evangelical language right now, and I think that needs to be rethought. Greg once again highlights an example from this last week's tragic case of a baseball fan dying trying to catch a foul ball. Just an awful story, and as it turns out, the player who threw him the ball--Josh Hamilton--responded to it with this empty, but all too common response:
But I am reading this book, thanks to Greg's review. It is a great book, and has already spurred some thoughtful conversations about the nature of God. For me, one of the best examples was the discussion about Aaron and the Golden Calf--including the part where Moses has some 3,000 people killed according to God's order. As I noted to a friend, I find that God hard to understand in the context of the "personal relationship" God that I am supposed to see as Father. Yeah, except my own father never claimed that he could kill me and be right to do so.
But that is the nature of evangelical language right now, and I think that needs to be rethought. Greg once again highlights an example from this last week's tragic case of a baseball fan dying trying to catch a foul ball. Just an awful story, and as it turns out, the player who threw him the ball--Josh Hamilton--responded to it with this empty, but all too common response:
I can't imagine what they're going through right now. I can't imagine. All I can think about is praying for them and knowing that God has a plan. You don't always know what that plan is when those things happen, but you will.As Greg notes, this is the kind of response that means absolutely nothing. The same thing could be said if a person has a personal victory, or when the Japanese nuclear plant leaked. It has no meaning, or has very bad meaning. And, as Greg notes, there is a better response:
"This is a tragedy, and I can't explain it, but I believe God will ultimately bring something good out of all this."Instead, we get the vapid and meaningless response that so many evangelicals use without even thinking.
USA Women win one of the most amazing contests I have ever seen
Wambach, Solo key dramatic US win over Brazil - World Soccer - Yahoo! Sports
What a damn game. It had everything. Bad luck, bad refs, some nice plays, and then one phenomenal cross in extra time when the game was just about done--followed by a header into the back of the net. Then another great save in penalty kicks to push the Americans past the Brazilians.
The bad ref just about ruined it all, and highlights how a bad ref can really screw up this game. Of course, they can fuck up any sport, but the premium on scoring in soccer really makes it a bigger impact--at least to me.
But what a game.
What a damn game. It had everything. Bad luck, bad refs, some nice plays, and then one phenomenal cross in extra time when the game was just about done--followed by a header into the back of the net. Then another great save in penalty kicks to push the Americans past the Brazilians.
The bad ref just about ruined it all, and highlights how a bad ref can really screw up this game. Of course, they can fuck up any sport, but the premium on scoring in soccer really makes it a bigger impact--at least to me.
But what a game.
July 8, 2011
More on the debt crisis
Meant to post this very good NPR story on what the default would do to our economy. Still amazes me that supposedly fiscally "responsible" people would threaten to not pay our obligations. Shame on them.
And here is a great look at how different the two sides see the poor and rich. Orrin Hatch thinks that the poor aren't doing enough on the debt crisis because many of them are too poor to pay federal income taxes. Never mind that income inequality continues to grow, and those poor are losing ground, not gaining, and never fucking mind that they pay a lot of other kinds of taxes at a regressive level. Never mind. Just protect the rich.
Steve asked about Social Security cuts. Here is what I found. My problem with any of this is that while many people will be able to manage this without a significant hardship, there are those who will be barely scraping by who will hurt. That is the option v. asking the people who's income has increased nearly exponentially over the last 30 years. Nothing fair or just or moral about that.
And here is a great look at how different the two sides see the poor and rich. Orrin Hatch thinks that the poor aren't doing enough on the debt crisis because many of them are too poor to pay federal income taxes. Never mind that income inequality continues to grow, and those poor are losing ground, not gaining, and never fucking mind that they pay a lot of other kinds of taxes at a regressive level. Never mind. Just protect the rich.
Steve asked about Social Security cuts. Here is what I found. My problem with any of this is that while many people will be able to manage this without a significant hardship, there are those who will be barely scraping by who will hurt. That is the option v. asking the people who's income has increased nearly exponentially over the last 30 years. Nothing fair or just or moral about that.
July 7, 2011
More on the GOP's war on the poor
Saw this tweet from columnist Charles Blow:
Those people will miss meals, suffer more hardship, and in some cases will die sooner than they would have.
On the other hand, the rich are being asked to dip into their rising wealth. Inequality is growing at leaps and bounds, but we will continue to ask the poor to contribute to the deficit and bow to the wealthy.
And clearly, for conservative Christians, social justice is simply not important.
CharlesMBlow: ...Pain for Dem constituents (the poor) will be real. There are many of them. Pain for Repubs will be on principle. How many ppl own jets?And it is worth walking out. The cuts that Republicans have already enacted and are pushing for will result in actual and real deprivation. Elderly people who can't quite have their prescription and their food. Or middle class people struggling to pay for nursing home care--or that family with the disabled child.
Those people will miss meals, suffer more hardship, and in some cases will die sooner than they would have.
On the other hand, the rich are being asked to dip into their rising wealth. Inequality is growing at leaps and bounds, but we will continue to ask the poor to contribute to the deficit and bow to the wealthy.
And clearly, for conservative Christians, social justice is simply not important.
GOP and the wealthy win
Two stories from this morning that completely ruined my coffee. The first Chris Hayes called "terrifying" is this story about Obama floating deep Social Security cuts to assuage the fucking ransoming GOP. Yeah, let's take the best social safety net of the last 100 years and offer it up as a chip to hijackers for what? Yeah, for what? For nominal talks about closing loopholes--oh, and the GOP says that any loophole closed has to be paid for. No new revenue. Fuckers.
But when asked about the idea of shared sacrifice, the GOP is clear about who they serve. Leave 'Em Alone! Republicans Explain How The Rich Can Contribute To Debt Reduction | TPMDC.
A shorter version? The rich make jobs, and they already pay taxes, so leave them alone. Beg them to stay and make jobs. That is their sacrifice. Never mind that they continue to get richer and richer and leave people behind. And never mind that all of this is intended on further distancing the rich from any obligation to the poor and middle class.
A bad day, and a bad day for Obama. He is selling us out.
But when asked about the idea of shared sacrifice, the GOP is clear about who they serve. Leave 'Em Alone! Republicans Explain How The Rich Can Contribute To Debt Reduction | TPMDC.
A shorter version? The rich make jobs, and they already pay taxes, so leave them alone. Beg them to stay and make jobs. That is their sacrifice. Never mind that they continue to get richer and richer and leave people behind. And never mind that all of this is intended on further distancing the rich from any obligation to the poor and middle class.
A bad day, and a bad day for Obama. He is selling us out.
July 6, 2011
So Casey Anthony was found not guilty?
And here is the deal. I had not heard of the trial until yesterday's verdict. I saw buzz on Facebook and had to google the name. I guess that proves that I don't watch cable news and that the news I read online doesn't cover this kind of story.
But now I am caught up, and my reaction is that our country is seriously messed up. This is the story that captivates the entire nation, while Republicans threatening to crater our economy is simply ignored. I am certainly not saying that the death of this little girl is trivial, because it certainly is not. It is a deeply tragic story. But watching the news last night, I saw a level of obsession with the story, the characters, and the outcome that seemed to belie the context.
So I have multiple objections. The first is the same I felt after the OJ trial when people start slamming the jury. Nancy Grace doesn't get to execute people she thinks are guilty, and the system is set so that it is difficult to convict people. But further, I am always amused (if amusement is the right word--and I don't think it is) when people are so dismissive of a jury verdict like this, but somehow convinced that all the people we execute are dead-bang guilty. If the system is so flawed to let this woman wrongly slide, why are they not skeptical about the people sent to the chair?
And the other is, as always, a sense that the media focuses on the easy, and ignores the difficult. I understand the grief over this little girl, but, as I noted, there are key political issues that go unnoticed. Republicans killing the economy is one, but another and equally vexing one is the budget cuts that will endanger thousands of young girls like Caylee Anthony. How do people express grief over one lost girl, but have no difficulty voting to cut off funding for thousands of kids, some of whom have disabilities or are in foster care?
But the media prefers these stories because they have natural drama, and require almost no intelligence to sell. And the public prefers a story that is simple to those that are tough to understand.
And we are all lessened.
But now I am caught up, and my reaction is that our country is seriously messed up. This is the story that captivates the entire nation, while Republicans threatening to crater our economy is simply ignored. I am certainly not saying that the death of this little girl is trivial, because it certainly is not. It is a deeply tragic story. But watching the news last night, I saw a level of obsession with the story, the characters, and the outcome that seemed to belie the context.
So I have multiple objections. The first is the same I felt after the OJ trial when people start slamming the jury. Nancy Grace doesn't get to execute people she thinks are guilty, and the system is set so that it is difficult to convict people. But further, I am always amused (if amusement is the right word--and I don't think it is) when people are so dismissive of a jury verdict like this, but somehow convinced that all the people we execute are dead-bang guilty. If the system is so flawed to let this woman wrongly slide, why are they not skeptical about the people sent to the chair?
And the other is, as always, a sense that the media focuses on the easy, and ignores the difficult. I understand the grief over this little girl, but, as I noted, there are key political issues that go unnoticed. Republicans killing the economy is one, but another and equally vexing one is the budget cuts that will endanger thousands of young girls like Caylee Anthony. How do people express grief over one lost girl, but have no difficulty voting to cut off funding for thousands of kids, some of whom have disabilities or are in foster care?
But the media prefers these stories because they have natural drama, and require almost no intelligence to sell. And the public prefers a story that is simple to those that are tough to understand.
And we are all lessened.
July 5, 2011
Even David Brooks thinks the GOP is crazy
And this is close to the best, concise explanation I have read:
"The members of this movement have no sense of moral decency. A nation makes a sacred pledge to pay the money back when it borrows money. But the members of this movement talk blandly of default and are willing to stain their nation’s honor.
The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor.
But to members of this movement, tax levels are everything. Members of this tendency have taken a small piece of economic policy and turned it into a sacred fixation. They are willing to cut education and research to preserve tax expenditures. Manufacturing employment is cratering even as output rises, but members of this movement somehow believe such problems can be addressed so long as they continue to worship their idol."
July 4, 2011
Ok, this made my day--Should we teach Math in schools?
A wonderful parody of the questions posed to Miss USA contestants about teaching evolution in schools. For all the people who use the word "believe" in conjunction with "evolution."
July 3, 2011
The 4th of July
This has never been my favorite holiday. Maybe it was my dislike of large group picnics. I don't know. I know I have enjoyed some individual 4ths, but not all of them. Maybe it is because the dogs never enjoy the noise.
I remember the first summer we had Streak. Anglican's apartment had a great view of the fireworks, so we all went down there to watch, and I brought this little dog who had adopted us. He was so scared. He spent the entire fireworks with his head under my arm. Damn I miss him. I am watching my thumbnail grow out with a little sadness. He bit me during a treatment and the mark is just about gone. That has been a pretty steady reminder, though I know I don't need that to remember him. But it is still sad.
We have tried to rehabilitate this weekend, mostly by trying to spend it with friends. Last night we had a couple over and tonight we head to more friends. That will be good.
I think I have always struggled with the patriotism part. I get loving your country. I just am not sure what to think about people loving it in such an angry and hateful way. I read this week about a congressman from Georgia who said that he would do anything "short of shooting them" when he saw illegal immigrants. I suspect he sees himself as an uber patriot. As do most conservatives.
Yet, it makes me feel a little ill. And the conservative war on people continues. Minnesota has shut down state offices (non essential) primarily because Republicans refuse to raise taxes on anyone. That makes no sense to me, but those Republicans will tell me that they believe in freedom and that they are patriots.
And I read that across the country, not only are women seeing abortion outlawed, but states are starting to criminalize any kind of miscarriage. I get the opposition to abortion, but this is going a step beyond. And what amazes me about this kind of law, is that I am pretty sure that the upper middle class white wife will not have her miscarriage questioned. I am pretty confident of that. If that is small-government, then I have to just throw up my hands. That is fascism. That is what a totalitarian state does--not one that preaches freedom.
I do love this country. I refuse to wave a flag and won't put one up on the house. But I have deep respect for our country's history and actual freedoms. I still consider our constitution a brilliant document. I believe our system is amazing, and one way it has proven that is how much expansion and access we have added since the original document. I believe in what Herbert Croly called "the promise of American life." But I don't see it in conservative thought today. All I see is hate and bigotry and stupidity.
We can do better. On this 4th, I will remember my friend Streak, and I will think of all my friends and family around the country and here in town. I will think of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice fighting for us, and for those others who have stood up for the least of these here at home.
I remember the first summer we had Streak. Anglican's apartment had a great view of the fireworks, so we all went down there to watch, and I brought this little dog who had adopted us. He was so scared. He spent the entire fireworks with his head under my arm. Damn I miss him. I am watching my thumbnail grow out with a little sadness. He bit me during a treatment and the mark is just about gone. That has been a pretty steady reminder, though I know I don't need that to remember him. But it is still sad.
We have tried to rehabilitate this weekend, mostly by trying to spend it with friends. Last night we had a couple over and tonight we head to more friends. That will be good.
I think I have always struggled with the patriotism part. I get loving your country. I just am not sure what to think about people loving it in such an angry and hateful way. I read this week about a congressman from Georgia who said that he would do anything "short of shooting them" when he saw illegal immigrants. I suspect he sees himself as an uber patriot. As do most conservatives.
Yet, it makes me feel a little ill. And the conservative war on people continues. Minnesota has shut down state offices (non essential) primarily because Republicans refuse to raise taxes on anyone. That makes no sense to me, but those Republicans will tell me that they believe in freedom and that they are patriots.
And I read that across the country, not only are women seeing abortion outlawed, but states are starting to criminalize any kind of miscarriage. I get the opposition to abortion, but this is going a step beyond. And what amazes me about this kind of law, is that I am pretty sure that the upper middle class white wife will not have her miscarriage questioned. I am pretty confident of that. If that is small-government, then I have to just throw up my hands. That is fascism. That is what a totalitarian state does--not one that preaches freedom.
I do love this country. I refuse to wave a flag and won't put one up on the house. But I have deep respect for our country's history and actual freedoms. I still consider our constitution a brilliant document. I believe our system is amazing, and one way it has proven that is how much expansion and access we have added since the original document. I believe in what Herbert Croly called "the promise of American life." But I don't see it in conservative thought today. All I see is hate and bigotry and stupidity.
We can do better. On this 4th, I will remember my friend Streak, and I will think of all my friends and family around the country and here in town. I will think of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice fighting for us, and for those others who have stood up for the least of these here at home.
July 1, 2011
Asking middle class workers to take pay cuts? Good sense. Asking corporate jet owners to pay more in taxes? Class warfare.
The wealthy are angry as hell, and they aren't going to take it any more! How dare Obama talk about the elite paying a little more? That is, as all the right wing punditry knows, class warfare. Asking people to not retire until age 69 is not. Nor is removing Medicare and gutting Medicaid. Why do the poor people need healthcare any way? Or assistance for nursing homes.
Why don't they do what the wealthy do and just pay for it out of their other fund?
No, when Obama dares to ask corporate jet owners to pay a little more in taxes, he has crossed a line of fairness that we all see. We all are concerned about those rich fuckers, aren't we?
And what is Obama and his evil Socialist Muslim conspiracy asking for? Good question:
To deal with this crisis, Republicans are adamant that we cut. Cut. Cut. And then cut some more. It is going to be painful, warned Paul Ryan. But better to cut cut cut now than see the economy completely collapse--you know, like when we decide to arbitrarily default on our debts. Oh wait. No, the Republicans are worried WORRIED that if we don't address entitlements, somewhere down the line, we will all be in deep shit. And so we have to make those painful decisions now.
Except if you are wealthy. Then you get a tax cut now and a "thank you" for being wealthy.
#whyaretherichtheonlyonesaskednottosacrifice?
Why don't they do what the wealthy do and just pay for it out of their other fund?
No, when Obama dares to ask corporate jet owners to pay a little more in taxes, he has crossed a line of fairness that we all see. We all are concerned about those rich fuckers, aren't we?
And what is Obama and his evil Socialist Muslim conspiracy asking for? Good question:
"What they're talking about is a proposal by the president to have corporate jets depreciated over seven years, rather than the five years provided for now by, yes, a current loophole.
I will allow you a moment to regain your composure, or simply jar yourself awake again after reading that sentence, because this represents the sort of Existential Fucking Threat to the Republic that gets Republicans into a serious lather. Corporate jets depreciating over seven years, rather than five? My God, what monsters have we become? It's all right to nix new school lunch standards because feeding kids healthier food would cost more. It's all right to break labor agreements. Heaven knows it's all right to cut food stamp assistance or unemployment insurance, or tell seniors that Medicare is going away and good luck finding private insurance, pals. Austerity is the buzzword of the day—but tax depreciation over SEVEN years instead of FIVE? To the battlements! The comfortable, leather-appointed battlements!"
To deal with this crisis, Republicans are adamant that we cut. Cut. Cut. And then cut some more. It is going to be painful, warned Paul Ryan. But better to cut cut cut now than see the economy completely collapse--you know, like when we decide to arbitrarily default on our debts. Oh wait. No, the Republicans are worried WORRIED that if we don't address entitlements, somewhere down the line, we will all be in deep shit. And so we have to make those painful decisions now.
Except if you are wealthy. Then you get a tax cut now and a "thank you" for being wealthy.
#whyaretherichtheonlyonesaskednottosacrifice?
June 30, 2011
Rick Perry calls us all to a Christian prayer
This is, as Sully says, "Christianism," rather than Christianity. This is so inappropriate, and so much pandering to right wing fundamentalism that it makes me a little ill. And that says nothing about the fact that some of the things he is talking about aren't spiritual problems at all--they are about political choices. And this from the guy refusing to raise taxes while he cuts funding for poor kids. Fuck that.
Christianism Watch - The Dish | By Andrew Sullivan - The Daily Beast
Christianism Watch - The Dish | By Andrew Sullivan - The Daily Beast
June 29, 2011
President Obama Demands Action From House GOP on Jobs, Taxes | TPMDC
President Obama Demands Action From House GOP on Jobs, Taxes | TPMDC:
"He repeatedly framed the debate in class terms, accusing the GOP of shielding the rich and powerful from sacrifices while demanding more hardship for poor and middle-class Americans.
'Before we ask our seniors to pay more for Medicare, before we cut our children's schools, we should ask corporate jet owners to pay more,' he said. 'I don't think that's real radical. I think the majority of Americans agree with that.'"
June 28, 2011
Michele Bachmann is our Fundy Troll
Well, probably not, but she is just as dumb, and the GOP, true to form, looks poised to give us someone even dumber than Sarah Palin and George Bush? Is that even possible?
But in this great list of Michele Bachmann stupidity, there is this gem on evolution:
Seriously, does the GOP now just consciously look for the dumbest candidates they can find? Or do they just tap Pat Robertson's graduates without looking?
But in this great list of Michele Bachmann stupidity, there is this gem on evolution:
"'Where do we say that a cell became a blade of grass, which became a starfish, which became a cat, which became a donkey, which became a human being? There’s a real lack of evidence from change from actual species to a different type of species. That's where it's difficult to prove.'"You know what? That is difficult to prove. That missing link between a blade of grass and a starfish--or that other tricky evolutionary stage where donkeys become humans.
Seriously, does the GOP now just consciously look for the dumbest candidates they can find? Or do they just tap Pat Robertson's graduates without looking?
June 27, 2011
June 24, 2011
God caught backing three different GOP candidates
Hat tip to Smitty for this insightful satire on those who claim to hear God's voice. Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and Michele Bachmann all claim that God is telling them to run, so he obviously is pulling for them. I wonder how that will work out in the debates.
God hasn't been universally generous with his support. He went out of his way to let Mike Huckabee know that he shouldn't run for president, lest he take his focus off the much more important task of producing a series of conservative American history DVDs. And though God arranged for Sarah Palin to be chosen as John McCain's running mate in 2008, there's nothing to indicate that he backs her potential candidacy in 2012. Nevertheless, the fact that God has privately encouraged the candidacies of three different Republicans may cause voters to question whether, in reality, he really even has any preference at all.
God could not be reached for comment by press time, because, a spokesman says, he was helping a baseball player hit a game-winning home run, giving an old churchgoing lady the winning lottery numbers, making sure that a plane made it through the turbulence okay, helping someone survive a heart attack, and also, just for fun, creating a new animal that's like a cross between a leopard and an alligator.
Conservatives used to be rooted in reality
And used to be cautious. That is a point that Sullivan has made many times--that a Burkean conservative would not dismantle the welfare state willy-nilly, because that would be disastrous.
But the point about being rooted in reality and facts, and being suspicious of theory is Zakaria's best point in How Conservatism Lost Touch with Reality - TIME. This is not new to us, but a good rundown of where conservatives simply ignore reality in favor of what they want to be true.
The list is really endless, actually. Support for abstinence only even though study after study shows that it doesn't work as well as comprehensive sex ed. Or denial of climate change or evolution simply because they don't like what those might mean.
I would welcome a debate with conservatives who have both feet in reality. Watching the debate on taxation is like pushing through fog. Even though our taxes are at a historic low, every Republican bitches about how high our taxes are.
But the point about being rooted in reality and facts, and being suspicious of theory is Zakaria's best point in How Conservatism Lost Touch with Reality - TIME. This is not new to us, but a good rundown of where conservatives simply ignore reality in favor of what they want to be true.
"Many Republican businessmen have told me that the Obama Administration is the most hostile to business in 50 years. Really? More than that of Richard Nixon, who presided over tax rates that reached 70%, regulations that spanned whole industries, and who actually instituted price and wage controls?
In fact, right now any discussion of government involvement in the economy — even to build vital infrastructure — is impossible because it is a cardinal tenet of the new conservatism that such involvement is always and forever bad. Meanwhile, across the globe, the world's fastest-growing economy, China, has managed to use government involvement to create growth and jobs for three decades. From Singapore to South Korea to Germany to Canada, evidence abounds that some strategic actions by the government can act as catalysts for free-market growth."
The list is really endless, actually. Support for abstinence only even though study after study shows that it doesn't work as well as comprehensive sex ed. Or denial of climate change or evolution simply because they don't like what those might mean.
I would welcome a debate with conservatives who have both feet in reality. Watching the debate on taxation is like pushing through fog. Even though our taxes are at a historic low, every Republican bitches about how high our taxes are.
Is privatization the answer to our economic woes?
So say many of the far right. Government is evil, after all, and incompetent, while private enterprise is governed by the invisible hand. This fundamentalist view of the market never ceases to amaze me, even when that "invisible hand" put kids in mines. Those same conservatives won't even acknowledge that government was the entity that got those kids out of mines.
But back to the fundamentalist market. If the free market is always better than government, then it stands to reason that private prisons would be more efficient than public. But as this report suggests, those private prisons mean that they are always pushing for more customers. More laws that put people in prison, after all, makes those private prisons that much more profitable. What goal would those private prisons have for reducing recidivism, or even encouraging release for good behavior. Those social goods would cost them money.
Ugh.
And apropos of our conversation in the last thread, Republicans are bragging about the fact that raising taxes is a non-starter. McConnell laughs at the idea and Boehner explicitly says that it won't happen, because we don't have a "revenue problem." That just annoys the crap out of me, as we see more and more calls for the poor to sacrifice, but no calls for the same for the wealthy. On the contrary, they want them to get more in tax breaks.
Obviously I have been reading TPM this morning, but another of their stories caught my eye on this topic. The CBO actually projects that if we allowed the Bush cuts to finally expire, kept the ACA intact and allowed it to do its work--that the deficit would gradually disappear.
But back to the fundamentalist market. If the free market is always better than government, then it stands to reason that private prisons would be more efficient than public. But as this report suggests, those private prisons mean that they are always pushing for more customers. More laws that put people in prison, after all, makes those private prisons that much more profitable. What goal would those private prisons have for reducing recidivism, or even encouraging release for good behavior. Those social goods would cost them money.
Ugh.
And apropos of our conversation in the last thread, Republicans are bragging about the fact that raising taxes is a non-starter. McConnell laughs at the idea and Boehner explicitly says that it won't happen, because we don't have a "revenue problem." That just annoys the crap out of me, as we see more and more calls for the poor to sacrifice, but no calls for the same for the wealthy. On the contrary, they want them to get more in tax breaks.
Obviously I have been reading TPM this morning, but another of their stories caught my eye on this topic. The CBO actually projects that if we allowed the Bush cuts to finally expire, kept the ACA intact and allowed it to do its work--that the deficit would gradually disappear.
June 21, 2011
Why do Republicans only ask the poor to sacrifice?
I understand asking people to do more with less. I get the idea of tightening our belt. But why is it that conservatives only want to ask those who can least afford it to tighten their belts, but tell the richest people that they will actually be more rich?
Growing Chorus Of Republicans Demand Social Security Cuts In Deficit Deal | TPMDC
Growing Chorus Of Republicans Demand Social Security Cuts In Deficit Deal | TPMDC
June 17, 2011
Dogs and humans
SOF found this great story about how dogs are cued to our facial expressions, and we both thought that we didn't need a study to prove that. We have watched our dogs respond to our emotions and our expressions, and our language. I always remember fondly that Alafair would leave the room if I used the f-bomb. She was so sweet.
This week I have been thinking a lot about my animal friends and missing Streak more than I expected. Last night, we went to dinner at our favorite Thai place. A couple came and ordered takeout, and the husband stayed outside because they had a bird. She said it was an African Gray and was considered one of the smartest birds in the world--with the vocabulary of a 2 or 3 year old child. I watched in amazement as the man cuddled the bird in his hands and talked to him. It was incredibly sweet. She invited us to come out and meet the bird and I realized that I was nearly in tears. I saw in that relationship the one we had with Streak and just missed him so intensely.
While we have always said that Grace was no replacement for Streak, I think in the back of my brain, there was this sense that she filled a hole for us. And she has. She has been wonderful. Today, I took them on a quick walk and we went past a house where one of the neighborhood cats lives, and always comes out to see us. Lemon always loved Streak and would just rub up against him. Grace has quickly learned Lemon's house and today laid down on the lawn to await him. She is so smart, and just so sweet.
But I still miss my friend.
This week I have been thinking a lot about my animal friends and missing Streak more than I expected. Last night, we went to dinner at our favorite Thai place. A couple came and ordered takeout, and the husband stayed outside because they had a bird. She said it was an African Gray and was considered one of the smartest birds in the world--with the vocabulary of a 2 or 3 year old child. I watched in amazement as the man cuddled the bird in his hands and talked to him. It was incredibly sweet. She invited us to come out and meet the bird and I realized that I was nearly in tears. I saw in that relationship the one we had with Streak and just missed him so intensely.
While we have always said that Grace was no replacement for Streak, I think in the back of my brain, there was this sense that she filled a hole for us. And she has. She has been wonderful. Today, I took them on a quick walk and we went past a house where one of the neighborhood cats lives, and always comes out to see us. Lemon always loved Streak and would just rub up against him. Grace has quickly learned Lemon's house and today laid down on the lawn to await him. She is so smart, and just so sweet.
But I still miss my friend.
June 14, 2011
On exceptionalism
A thoughtful post from Smitty on exceptionalism:
"How unfortunate that today much religion seems to be a force for making people unexceptional, for making them part of a rather unimaginative and uneducated crowd. Spiritually and theologically we are being 'dumbed down' in our outlook and perspective. Jesus took exception with those who were judgmental, but today faith seems to have become the means for exercising a severe judgmentalism. Jesus took exception with those who were violent, but how many times have we heard our nation's war-making justified on religious grounds?"
Pink is for Girls
Or maybe not. Certainly not always, as Natalie shows very clearly. Couple of interesting things here. One is the consumerism that drives much of our cultural discussions, and two is the sense that so many people assume that what is has always been. We can see that in a lot of areas, which makes teaching history so damn interesting.
June 13, 2011
June 12, 2011
We love the Ten Commandments--but hate the foreigner
Fred does a great job of connecting those two threads in how Alabama both embraces the symbols of God, but then take pride in their turning away the alien and the outsider. I am not sure I am ready to say that God hates this kind of law--as Fred does--because I am loathe to speak for God. But he makes a great point.
But further, and speaking to older threads about Republicans embracing cruelty, he reminds us that they decided that "empathy" was bad.
But further, and speaking to older threads about Republicans embracing cruelty, he reminds us that they decided that "empathy" was bad.
That word empathy has, astonishingly, been turned into a partisan and contentious term. That’s astonishing because it required one group of people to surrender their claim to it — to voluntarily position themselves as being against the idea of our shared humanity. That stance is so outlandish that it leaves me gasping and grasping for a response. I’m not eager to accuse an entire political party of being sociopaths, but what can one say when members of that party, unchallenged by their fellows, rush forward unprompted to declare themselves proud enemies of empathy and proud advocates of sociopathy? They’re accusing themselves of something truly appalling, should we take them at their word? Or should we patiently attempt to explain that this isn’t really something that anyone wants to say about themselves, even while they push an agenda increasingly demonstrating that maybe in their case it is?
Sunday thoughts
Just returned from another hour of puppy training. Very helpful, but I must say that we are all exhausted. It might be the sinus infection I am fighting for me, but trying to get a rambunctious border collie to behave in a Petsmart is the other part, I am sure. Have to rest up, though because tonight we get to see David Olney and Sergio Webb at a house concert.
------
The conversation with Andy was also exhausting, perhaps because I have less patience with fundamentalism than I once did. But my last comment pretty much summed up my frustration with any of the "Bible said it, I believe it, and that does it" crowd. As I noted, when the Bible says homosexuality is bad, there is no discussion of motives, no parsing of context, no suggestion of language barriers. It is just assumed to be iron-clad law. But when the Bible says that being wealthy is bad, and even an impediment to God--that is prone to interpretation. It is only when you love money more than God--though who the hell admits that? Or when the Bible says that we are to love our enemies, the fundies, to a person, don't think that includes terrorists or really dangerous people. Surely Jesus didn't intend that we actually "turn the other cheek," right?
And to be fair, I have no clue. I think that we live in a far more complex economic system to conclude that charging interest is evil. And I have no intention of letting a terrorists kill me in my house if I have other choices. But neither am I convinced that either Genesis is a scientific or historical document, nor that the sexual norms of an ancient tribal society are exactly the same as ours, or should be.
But if we are going to parse some of it, then insisting on absolutism for the part that doesn't effect you? That is just self-centered and inconsistent.
------
Ok, one more question. Conservatives constantly say that cutting taxes on the rich helps the economy (always) because those rich people then invest in companies that create jobs and increase our tax revenue. Well, I think they are actually lying about the last part, and that they don't even intend for it to increase revenue, but that is another question. But about the job creation and investment, why do we always assume that the rich will invest that money here? Why do we think automatically that their investment dollars won't go to China or India?
------
The conversation with Andy was also exhausting, perhaps because I have less patience with fundamentalism than I once did. But my last comment pretty much summed up my frustration with any of the "Bible said it, I believe it, and that does it" crowd. As I noted, when the Bible says homosexuality is bad, there is no discussion of motives, no parsing of context, no suggestion of language barriers. It is just assumed to be iron-clad law. But when the Bible says that being wealthy is bad, and even an impediment to God--that is prone to interpretation. It is only when you love money more than God--though who the hell admits that? Or when the Bible says that we are to love our enemies, the fundies, to a person, don't think that includes terrorists or really dangerous people. Surely Jesus didn't intend that we actually "turn the other cheek," right?
And to be fair, I have no clue. I think that we live in a far more complex economic system to conclude that charging interest is evil. And I have no intention of letting a terrorists kill me in my house if I have other choices. But neither am I convinced that either Genesis is a scientific or historical document, nor that the sexual norms of an ancient tribal society are exactly the same as ours, or should be.
But if we are going to parse some of it, then insisting on absolutism for the part that doesn't effect you? That is just self-centered and inconsistent.
------
Ok, one more question. Conservatives constantly say that cutting taxes on the rich helps the economy (always) because those rich people then invest in companies that create jobs and increase our tax revenue. Well, I think they are actually lying about the last part, and that they don't even intend for it to increase revenue, but that is another question. But about the job creation and investment, why do we always assume that the rich will invest that money here? Why do we think automatically that their investment dollars won't go to China or India?
June 10, 2011
Inequality
Everything I read tells me that our nation's inequality is growing. Saw this on twitter tonight:
What puzzles me is why this is not a concern for so many conservatives? Do they simply not believe it to be true?
According to Barron's, real family incomes have fallen 2% since 2000 while corporate profits have increased 70% over the same span #fbI went to check the Barron's site and this story is behind a paywall, but this matches every other study that I have seen.
What puzzles me is why this is not a concern for so many conservatives? Do they simply not believe it to be true?
Conclusion shopping--conservatives and bad thinking
Saw yesterday that not only is Rick Perry thinking about running for President (since Newt is crashing and burning), but he is also pandering like crazy to the religious right by endorsing this prayer concert or whatever the hell it is.
There is a lot that bothers me about this. First and foremost is the intermingling of politics and prayer, but more troubling to me is the bad thinking. I am reminded of how people processed the Minneapolis bridge collapse, or even the Japanese nuclear disaster--with many referring to them as "acts of God." They weren't. They were the products of human choice. The absolute same can be said about the debt crisis. This is not some act of God which humans are helpless to solve--it is the clear result of bad political decisions. Bad spending choices, and bad tax policy combine together to give us a debt crisis. If I were so arrogant to say what God thinks, I would speculate that he is looking at this and thinking, "fix it yourself. You created it."
I would actually argue that conservatives are mired in nothing but bad thinking right now. Facts seem to matter not at all to them. Facts about climate change, evolution, supply side economics--none of those things actually seem to penetrate the fundamentalist brain. All that matters is what you believe. When you believe that God can or should fix the debt crisis, you do, and you don't listen to mere mortals who point out that people like Rick Perry take federal money to shore up their budgets, while they cut taxes and cut programs for the poor and the sick. Facts, facts. Blah blah blah blah. What matters is what I believe, not what I actually know.
I was thinking about that yesterday when I read this story about Paul Ryan actually suggesting that we should default as a country (for the first time since America first borrowed money in the 1790s) in order to get our economic house in order. I have to say that I am really starting to question Ryan's intelligence. Either he is stupid or he is malevolently destructive.
But inside that Republican narrative is a fascinating bit of bad thinking. Several months ago, no one of Ryan's rank would suggest default was a possibility. That was left to the fringe. But a few financial people suggested it--just a few--and it took off among the wingnut right. The vast majority of thinking people think that defaulting is not only not conservative, but downright irresponsible. But Ryan and his idiots found one or two people to say it was ok to do--and that becomes their reality.
That is exactly how these same people process evolution and climate change. The vast majority of scientists who study these issues believe that evolution is fact and that humans are contributing greatly to our climate change. But the right finds one or two scientists who question, and those one or two become their reality. I would suggest that is a very stupid way to process complex issues, and a horrible way to formulate public policy.
But, as I said, when all that really matters is what you want to believe, then facts and evidence really don't matter. And that is sad--or would be sad if it weren't so damn dangerous.
Right now, America is in crisis: we have been besieged by financial debt, terrorism, and a multitude of natural disasters. As a nation, we must come together and call upon Jesus to guide us through unprecedented struggles, and thank Him for the blessings of freedom we so richly enjoy.
There is a lot that bothers me about this. First and foremost is the intermingling of politics and prayer, but more troubling to me is the bad thinking. I am reminded of how people processed the Minneapolis bridge collapse, or even the Japanese nuclear disaster--with many referring to them as "acts of God." They weren't. They were the products of human choice. The absolute same can be said about the debt crisis. This is not some act of God which humans are helpless to solve--it is the clear result of bad political decisions. Bad spending choices, and bad tax policy combine together to give us a debt crisis. If I were so arrogant to say what God thinks, I would speculate that he is looking at this and thinking, "fix it yourself. You created it."
I would actually argue that conservatives are mired in nothing but bad thinking right now. Facts seem to matter not at all to them. Facts about climate change, evolution, supply side economics--none of those things actually seem to penetrate the fundamentalist brain. All that matters is what you believe. When you believe that God can or should fix the debt crisis, you do, and you don't listen to mere mortals who point out that people like Rick Perry take federal money to shore up their budgets, while they cut taxes and cut programs for the poor and the sick. Facts, facts. Blah blah blah blah. What matters is what I believe, not what I actually know.
I was thinking about that yesterday when I read this story about Paul Ryan actually suggesting that we should default as a country (for the first time since America first borrowed money in the 1790s) in order to get our economic house in order. I have to say that I am really starting to question Ryan's intelligence. Either he is stupid or he is malevolently destructive.
But inside that Republican narrative is a fascinating bit of bad thinking. Several months ago, no one of Ryan's rank would suggest default was a possibility. That was left to the fringe. But a few financial people suggested it--just a few--and it took off among the wingnut right. The vast majority of thinking people think that defaulting is not only not conservative, but downright irresponsible. But Ryan and his idiots found one or two people to say it was ok to do--and that becomes their reality.
That is exactly how these same people process evolution and climate change. The vast majority of scientists who study these issues believe that evolution is fact and that humans are contributing greatly to our climate change. But the right finds one or two scientists who question, and those one or two become their reality. I would suggest that is a very stupid way to process complex issues, and a horrible way to formulate public policy.
But, as I said, when all that really matters is what you want to believe, then facts and evidence really don't matter. And that is sad--or would be sad if it weren't so damn dangerous.
June 8, 2011
Why won't evangelicals address torture?
Because I am off for a bit, perhaps, and trying to keep Gracie from eating stuff she shouldn't (remote control--saved, checkbook cover--chewed, leash for Abbie--chewed, toilet paper roll--shredded) I have been thinking about my evangelical past. That, and I have been working with our electric company to get our service line buried and have found their customer service to, well, suck.
So over the last few years, I have reconnected with a few people from my evangelical past--all through the glories of Facebook. Man, what a ride. From reconnecting to a former girlfriend, only to find out that she thought torture was ok, because of the "torture that the families of lost service men and women experience," or mad about healthcare because she honestly thought it meant her paying for the healthcare of the person next door who bought a 300,000 dollar house instead of healthcare. Or the guy from my church league basketball team who turned out to be one of the bigger assholes I had ever met--complete with bashing any government spending and regulation all while living in a suburb of Dallas built with government dollars.
Those were the negative ones. The others have been mostly benign. But when some of them have challenged my liberalism, or made snide comments on my wall, I have emailed them questions. Nicely, mind you, but I have asked them questions about why the people who helped me form my moral world view seem to have little to no problem with torture? Or why they believe that God created the world in 7 literal days, but have no problem with humans trying to destroy that creation? Or why, as people called to help the poor, they vote for policies that clearly help the rich, and demonize the poor.
All of these questions I have asked, in addition to asking anyone to give me an example of Sarah Palin acting in a manner other than a vindictive bitch.
Nothing. Well, not nothing. From one, I got a grudging acknowledgement that torture was mostly wrong. But the terrorists are worse, he said.
The rest? Empty echo chamber. People who routinely post Bible verses can't answer a simple question of why they voted for torture enablers and why they have no problem voting for people who still defend torture. Or a simple question of what the poor and elderly are supposed to do when Paul Ryan's budget is put into law.
Evangelical Christians--if you want me to even come close to respecting a group of Christians who have been miserably wrong on race and torture and gender equality--then you better actually figure out a way to make a cogent argument. And you better figure out that might include atoning for supporting torture. Or segregation.
Otherwise, spare me.
So over the last few years, I have reconnected with a few people from my evangelical past--all through the glories of Facebook. Man, what a ride. From reconnecting to a former girlfriend, only to find out that she thought torture was ok, because of the "torture that the families of lost service men and women experience," or mad about healthcare because she honestly thought it meant her paying for the healthcare of the person next door who bought a 300,000 dollar house instead of healthcare. Or the guy from my church league basketball team who turned out to be one of the bigger assholes I had ever met--complete with bashing any government spending and regulation all while living in a suburb of Dallas built with government dollars.
Those were the negative ones. The others have been mostly benign. But when some of them have challenged my liberalism, or made snide comments on my wall, I have emailed them questions. Nicely, mind you, but I have asked them questions about why the people who helped me form my moral world view seem to have little to no problem with torture? Or why they believe that God created the world in 7 literal days, but have no problem with humans trying to destroy that creation? Or why, as people called to help the poor, they vote for policies that clearly help the rich, and demonize the poor.
All of these questions I have asked, in addition to asking anyone to give me an example of Sarah Palin acting in a manner other than a vindictive bitch.
Nothing. Well, not nothing. From one, I got a grudging acknowledgement that torture was mostly wrong. But the terrorists are worse, he said.
The rest? Empty echo chamber. People who routinely post Bible verses can't answer a simple question of why they voted for torture enablers and why they have no problem voting for people who still defend torture. Or a simple question of what the poor and elderly are supposed to do when Paul Ryan's budget is put into law.
Evangelical Christians--if you want me to even come close to respecting a group of Christians who have been miserably wrong on race and torture and gender equality--then you better actually figure out a way to make a cogent argument. And you better figure out that might include atoning for supporting torture. Or segregation.
Otherwise, spare me.
June 6, 2011
Today's GOP
Couple of points. First, any of them who like Sarah Palin need to see a therapist. Ditto that if they are conservative Christians who say they vote by Christian values. I have a challenge out there for anyone to show me an example of Palin treating anyone with Christian values who is not one of her supporters. When I get some proof of that, I will rethink the idea that she is a resentful, mean-spirited bitch.
Second, I mostly hear from conservatives that racism is an old issue. The fact (as Monk brings up often) that the Southern strategy was where the GOP started appealing to southern racists in an effort to shore up the South is irrelevant, in their minds. Just as many people note wryly, that there are no racists any more--no one wants to see themselves as racists--then no current Republicans will even acknowledge the open racism of their Confederate flag support, or the on again, off again support for "state's rights," or their support for Conservative Citizens Councils (once just openly White Citizens Councils). And now, with no racism intended, I am sure (blerg), southern states are doing everything they can to make voting harder. For people who believe our system is perfect, it is amazing how little faith they have in actual democracy.
Second, I mostly hear from conservatives that racism is an old issue. The fact (as Monk brings up often) that the Southern strategy was where the GOP started appealing to southern racists in an effort to shore up the South is irrelevant, in their minds. Just as many people note wryly, that there are no racists any more--no one wants to see themselves as racists--then no current Republicans will even acknowledge the open racism of their Confederate flag support, or the on again, off again support for "state's rights," or their support for Conservative Citizens Councils (once just openly White Citizens Councils). And now, with no racism intended, I am sure (blerg), southern states are doing everything they can to make voting harder. For people who believe our system is perfect, it is amazing how little faith they have in actual democracy.
June 3, 2011
History #AccordingtoPalin
Let's see if this works. You probably have heard that Sarah Palin was caught explaining that Paul Revere did his ride (very noisily according to her) to stop the British from taking away our guns. This has spurred some very funny twitter traffic, which you should be able to see here. Otherwise, just search twitter for #AccordingtoPalin.
Democrats and faith
Monk, Steve and I have an interesting conversation the comments, but I thought this was worth raising in a separate post. Monk and Steve both have suggested that Democrats have done a bad job of reaching out to religious people. But I argue that they have reached out as best they could, given the political realities and philosophical differences.
After all, how do Democrats--trying to emphasize separation of Church and State, while also downplaying the need to elect Christians to office, all while emphasizing social justice themes--fair taxation, help for the poor, protection for the environment, etc. How do you do that AND reach out specifically to people of faith? Are they not reaching out to people interested in those themes already?
I argue that Republicans are able to do that because their base believes that Christians are morally superior, and therefore have a monopoly on faith and morality. Their base also believes that Christians should rule, and that our country should be considered a Christian one. But Democrats don't believe either of those things.
After all, how do Democrats--trying to emphasize separation of Church and State, while also downplaying the need to elect Christians to office, all while emphasizing social justice themes--fair taxation, help for the poor, protection for the environment, etc. How do you do that AND reach out specifically to people of faith? Are they not reaching out to people interested in those themes already?
I argue that Republicans are able to do that because their base believes that Christians are morally superior, and therefore have a monopoly on faith and morality. Their base also believes that Christians should rule, and that our country should be considered a Christian one. But Democrats don't believe either of those things.
June 2, 2011
Quote of the day
"Why do republicans get to claim God and religion as their own when their policies go against 1000 years of traditions such as healing the sick and helping the poor.." Thom Hartmann
June 1, 2011
Ralph Reed--scumbag
Why is it that the party that likes to talk about moral values the most is the same one where being a lying, cheating, scumbag is no barrier to success?
GOP Presidential Candidates Sign Up For Ralph ‘Corporate Humper’ Reed’s Conference | ThinkProgress
GOP Presidential Candidates Sign Up For Ralph ‘Corporate Humper’ Reed’s Conference | ThinkProgress
Wednesday roundup
I know this is a common refrain from me, but I am still incredibly annoyed at how many conservative Christians are far more conservative than Christian. I think of a distant relative-in-law who stopped talking to me because I supported Obama. If I were an atheist who hated Obama, I suspect he would have no problem talking to me.
But it is even more disheartening when the leadership of the SBC gets it so wrong. Not surprising, mind you, but still disheartening because I know there are many Southern Baptists who listen to these people. Not all, as they are a group that doesn't emphasize that kind of loyalty, but many--especially in the south listen to idiots like Robert Jeffress who most recently took potshots at Obama's faith. Jeffress, much like Franklin Graham, is a political hack, not a man of God.
But what bothers me even more than people like Jeffress saying this, is that I know that a good part of the GOP faithful will just shrug it off--if they don't agree openly. Just as they shrug off the sociopathic Bachmann, or the equally twisted Sarah Palin. Palin, mind you, just cheered the smell of emissions at a motorcycle rally the same day that a new report shows that our production of CO2 went up dangerously this last year. Very hard to take people seriously who on Sunday preach a literal creation story and on Tuesday vote to destroy that same creation. Very hard.
-----
Speaking of Palin, she is on her bus tour. If you haven't seen a picture of the bus, it has her signature, a picture of the Constitution, and images of America. Everyone assumes this means she is running for President next year, and that would not completely surprise me. But there is, as the whore Mike Huckabee voiced, more money to be had if you are a pundit for Fox, and I would be surprised if Palin left that money on the table. Further, a Andy Borowitz keeps joking, if she runs, Palin would have to actually think about governing. I think his funniest tweet on this was something like, "the question isn't if Palin is going to run, it is who will replace her when she quits in 2014."
We can put Palin in that category of people who disappoint me, but not nearly as the people who follow her.
-----
Finally, a thoughtful discussion on taxes by our favorite conservative, Bruce Bartlett. Republicans continue to act as if our taxes are too high, when they are clearly not.
But it is even more disheartening when the leadership of the SBC gets it so wrong. Not surprising, mind you, but still disheartening because I know there are many Southern Baptists who listen to these people. Not all, as they are a group that doesn't emphasize that kind of loyalty, but many--especially in the south listen to idiots like Robert Jeffress who most recently took potshots at Obama's faith. Jeffress, much like Franklin Graham, is a political hack, not a man of God.
But what bothers me even more than people like Jeffress saying this, is that I know that a good part of the GOP faithful will just shrug it off--if they don't agree openly. Just as they shrug off the sociopathic Bachmann, or the equally twisted Sarah Palin. Palin, mind you, just cheered the smell of emissions at a motorcycle rally the same day that a new report shows that our production of CO2 went up dangerously this last year. Very hard to take people seriously who on Sunday preach a literal creation story and on Tuesday vote to destroy that same creation. Very hard.
-----
Speaking of Palin, she is on her bus tour. If you haven't seen a picture of the bus, it has her signature, a picture of the Constitution, and images of America. Everyone assumes this means she is running for President next year, and that would not completely surprise me. But there is, as the whore Mike Huckabee voiced, more money to be had if you are a pundit for Fox, and I would be surprised if Palin left that money on the table. Further, a Andy Borowitz keeps joking, if she runs, Palin would have to actually think about governing. I think his funniest tweet on this was something like, "the question isn't if Palin is going to run, it is who will replace her when she quits in 2014."
We can put Palin in that category of people who disappoint me, but not nearly as the people who follow her.
-----
Finally, a thoughtful discussion on taxes by our favorite conservative, Bruce Bartlett. Republicans continue to act as if our taxes are too high, when they are clearly not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)