The religious, evangelical right insists that the United States is a Christian nation. Well, if that’s what they want to be it looks like the Christian Right better get away from conservative ideology because, they’ve got to reconcile this from the New Testament in the book of Matthew (verses 35 trough 40).
35”For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'”
The Tea Party is one of the foremost voices for the Christian Nation concept. Keep in mind…there is no (really no) historical evidence that the founding fathers ever intended to create a government of any religion. Quite to the contrary, they wanted to have religious freedom. That would be a country beholden to no religion. But, these right wing extremist don’t like the responsibility for anyone other than themselves.
I was recently having dinner with my aunt to prides herself on her devout commitment to Christianity. However, she explained to the rest of the family how she didn’t like paying taxes that ended up paying other peoples debts (which by the way you don’t pay any tax money to pay anyone else’s debts, but, that’s another story). Well…if you’re a Christian nation you shouldn’t have any problem with that at all. You also shouldn’t have any objection to welfare for the poor, for children, for the unemployed, or for foreign nations who are drowning in poverty. And, I don’t know how they can be against health care for everyone. Not if you believe in the portion of Matthew I’ve referred to above.
“Whatever you did for the LEAST of these brothers of mine, you did for me!”
The Christian right needs to learn something before they decide they want to claim the United States as a Christian nation…they need to learn what actually is the RIGHT thing to do! (We’re talking to you Sarah Pallin).
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Paul Krugman in his April 16, New York Times column wrote “On Tuesday, Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, called for the abolition of municipal fire departments.
Firefighters, he declared, “won’t solve the problems that led to recent fires. They will make them worse.” The existence of fire departments, he went on, “not only allows for taxpayer-funded bailouts of burning buildings; it institutionalizes them.” He concluded, “The way to solve this problem is to let the people who make the mistakes that lead to fires pay for them. We won’t solve this problem until the biggest buildings are allowed to burn.”
O.K., I fibbed a bit. Mr. McConnell said almost everything I attributed to him, but he was talking about financial reform, not fire reform. In particular, he was objecting not to the existence of fire departments, but to legislation that would give the government the power to seize and restructure failing financial institutions. But it amounts to the same thing.
Now, Mr. McConnell surely isn’t sincere; while pretending to oppose bank bailouts, he’s actually doing the bankers’ bidding. But before I get to that, let’s talk about why he’s wrong on substance.
In his speech, Mr. McConnell seemed to be saying that in the future, the U.S. government should just let banks fail. We “must put an end to taxpayer funded bailouts for Wall Street banks.” What’s wrong with that?
The answer is that letting banks fail — as opposed to seizing and restructuring them — is a bad idea for the same reason that it’s a bad idea to stand aside while an urban office building burns. In both cases, the damage has a tendency to spread. In 1930, U.S. officials stood aside as banks failed; the result was the Great Depression. In 2008, they stood aside as Lehman Brothers imploded; within days, credit markets had frozen and we were staring into the economic abyss. So it’s crucial to avoid disorderly bank collapses, just as it’s crucial to avoid out-of-control urban fires.
Since the 1930s, we’ve had a standard procedure for dealing with failing banks: the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has the right to seize a bank that’s on the brink, protecting its depositors while cleaning out the stockholders. In the crisis of 2008, however, it became clear that this procedure wasn’t up to dealing with complex modern financial institutions like Lehman or Citigroup.
So proposed reform legislation gives regulators “resolution authority,” which basically means giving them the ability to deal with the likes of Lehman in much the same way that the F.D.I.C. deals with conventional banks.”
In 1993 William Seidman (former Chairman of the FDIC) in his book “Full Faith and Credit” discussed his FDIC experience and the condition he found the FDIC in when he was appointed to the position as Chairman. He noticed that the division devoted to closing banks was woefully understaffed with permanent employees. As a result he determined that the FDIC needed a thousand employees, permanent staff, devoted to being ready to address bank failures in tough economic times. What Mr. Seidman said in his book was that he thought the FDIC needed these employees, even if they didn’t have anything to do, because as Mr. Seidman put it; “you don’t disband the fire department just because the town arsonist is in jail.”
Unfortunately, the incoming appointees by the George W. Bush Administration to the financial regulatory agencies came to office with an agenda. The agenda was a dismantling of the regulatory agencies. The agencies were downsized and the bank examiners were instructed to cut back on their examination time. The division at the FDIC devoted to closing banks was reduced to the size Mr. Seidman had sought to rectify and which he wrote about in his book. The purpose was simply to get the cat out of the house so the mice…or more aptly described “rats:…could have unfettered reign within the financial world. And…the result was the catastrophe we experienced in 2007 and 2008.
These examples by Paul Krugman and Bill Seidman are interesting metaphoric examples of the work of banking regulators. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. These are good illustrations of the need for financial regulatory reform, why there needs to be regulators of financial institutions and, in my opinion, why there needs to be a Consumer Protection Agency. These rules, these employees, and these agencies are needed for times of economic turmoil. Bankers left to their own devices will NOT act in the best interest of you or the economy as a whole. They will be driven by greed, and have no recollection of the last financial debacle. They will go for the easy profit, the big salary, and have no compunction to bending the rules to meet their own greedy desires.
The bankers at the top of the major institutions are not willing to do the hard work of the finance business. That business is making one small loan at a time. They are after the big kill. Their attitude is why make a lot of small loans when we can make one big one…the easy route.
They do not understand that long term economic expansion is built on loaning lots of people small amounts of money. They do not understand economic expansion is loaning small amounts of money to purchase washing machines, televisions, computers, cars and houses. It takes underwriting the loans to insure that the borrower is not overextending themselves.
So…we need a good, well equipped, well trained fire department. This department will be structured around a focused Federal Reserve, competent auditors at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, State Banking Commissions, Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and National Credit Union Administration. Finally, we’ll need a capable staff at the FDIC and a newly created Consumer Protection Agency to shut down banks or other large companies who comprise systemic risk to the country.
The FIRE DEPARTMENT is the perfect metaphor for our predicament.
Firefighters, he declared, “won’t solve the problems that led to recent fires. They will make them worse.” The existence of fire departments, he went on, “not only allows for taxpayer-funded bailouts of burning buildings; it institutionalizes them.” He concluded, “The way to solve this problem is to let the people who make the mistakes that lead to fires pay for them. We won’t solve this problem until the biggest buildings are allowed to burn.”
O.K., I fibbed a bit. Mr. McConnell said almost everything I attributed to him, but he was talking about financial reform, not fire reform. In particular, he was objecting not to the existence of fire departments, but to legislation that would give the government the power to seize and restructure failing financial institutions. But it amounts to the same thing.
Now, Mr. McConnell surely isn’t sincere; while pretending to oppose bank bailouts, he’s actually doing the bankers’ bidding. But before I get to that, let’s talk about why he’s wrong on substance.
In his speech, Mr. McConnell seemed to be saying that in the future, the U.S. government should just let banks fail. We “must put an end to taxpayer funded bailouts for Wall Street banks.” What’s wrong with that?
The answer is that letting banks fail — as opposed to seizing and restructuring them — is a bad idea for the same reason that it’s a bad idea to stand aside while an urban office building burns. In both cases, the damage has a tendency to spread. In 1930, U.S. officials stood aside as banks failed; the result was the Great Depression. In 2008, they stood aside as Lehman Brothers imploded; within days, credit markets had frozen and we were staring into the economic abyss. So it’s crucial to avoid disorderly bank collapses, just as it’s crucial to avoid out-of-control urban fires.
Since the 1930s, we’ve had a standard procedure for dealing with failing banks: the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has the right to seize a bank that’s on the brink, protecting its depositors while cleaning out the stockholders. In the crisis of 2008, however, it became clear that this procedure wasn’t up to dealing with complex modern financial institutions like Lehman or Citigroup.
So proposed reform legislation gives regulators “resolution authority,” which basically means giving them the ability to deal with the likes of Lehman in much the same way that the F.D.I.C. deals with conventional banks.”
In 1993 William Seidman (former Chairman of the FDIC) in his book “Full Faith and Credit” discussed his FDIC experience and the condition he found the FDIC in when he was appointed to the position as Chairman. He noticed that the division devoted to closing banks was woefully understaffed with permanent employees. As a result he determined that the FDIC needed a thousand employees, permanent staff, devoted to being ready to address bank failures in tough economic times. What Mr. Seidman said in his book was that he thought the FDIC needed these employees, even if they didn’t have anything to do, because as Mr. Seidman put it; “you don’t disband the fire department just because the town arsonist is in jail.”
Unfortunately, the incoming appointees by the George W. Bush Administration to the financial regulatory agencies came to office with an agenda. The agenda was a dismantling of the regulatory agencies. The agencies were downsized and the bank examiners were instructed to cut back on their examination time. The division at the FDIC devoted to closing banks was reduced to the size Mr. Seidman had sought to rectify and which he wrote about in his book. The purpose was simply to get the cat out of the house so the mice…or more aptly described “rats:…could have unfettered reign within the financial world. And…the result was the catastrophe we experienced in 2007 and 2008.
These examples by Paul Krugman and Bill Seidman are interesting metaphoric examples of the work of banking regulators. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. These are good illustrations of the need for financial regulatory reform, why there needs to be regulators of financial institutions and, in my opinion, why there needs to be a Consumer Protection Agency. These rules, these employees, and these agencies are needed for times of economic turmoil. Bankers left to their own devices will NOT act in the best interest of you or the economy as a whole. They will be driven by greed, and have no recollection of the last financial debacle. They will go for the easy profit, the big salary, and have no compunction to bending the rules to meet their own greedy desires.
The bankers at the top of the major institutions are not willing to do the hard work of the finance business. That business is making one small loan at a time. They are after the big kill. Their attitude is why make a lot of small loans when we can make one big one…the easy route.
They do not understand that long term economic expansion is built on loaning lots of people small amounts of money. They do not understand economic expansion is loaning small amounts of money to purchase washing machines, televisions, computers, cars and houses. It takes underwriting the loans to insure that the borrower is not overextending themselves.
So…we need a good, well equipped, well trained fire department. This department will be structured around a focused Federal Reserve, competent auditors at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, State Banking Commissions, Office of Thrift Supervision, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and National Credit Union Administration. Finally, we’ll need a capable staff at the FDIC and a newly created Consumer Protection Agency to shut down banks or other large companies who comprise systemic risk to the country.
The FIRE DEPARTMENT is the perfect metaphor for our predicament.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
WHICH IS IT, FAITH OR INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE?
I just got back from church. One of the junior ministers at my Methodist Church was filling in for the senior pastor. The junior minister places great importance, apparently, on the need to KNOW the existence of God and Jesus. I find it interesting that many, if not most; Christians give so little necessity to FAITH, and so much to indisputable evidence. Modern day evangelical Christians insist that you must “know” God exists and Jesus defeated death and rose from his tomb, and you’re just dumb if you don’t profess this with absolute certainty. It is compelling to me that the foundation of Christianity is based on faith…and, really many modern day Christians place very little importance on it. What is faith if it’s indisputable evidence? It’s really not faith at all is it?
Many evangelical Christians do not have a clue that those outside our belief look at us as arrogant. Why? Because we go around insisting we KNOW this and that. The fact of the matter is we don’t know this or that. We BELIEVE this and that. “Believing” is what Christianity is all about. You have to take Christianity on faith. We want to treat those unbelievers as stupid, but they’re not stupid at all. In fact, they’re the ones taking the logical argument. As much as my Christian friends and family may demean this argument…it really isn’t logical that someone can come back to life after being dead three days and continue to live two thousand years later. It’s not illogical of those who say this can’t happen to come to that conclusion…they just don’t believe. Non-belief on its own is not stupid at all…it’s completely logical. That’s the way Christianity is supposed to work. You have to believe it without the facts to assure you.
We need to stop treating anyone who doesn’t believe like we do as though they were ignorant animals. From my perspective belief in God is a bit richer if I believe without proof as opposed to knowing as indisputable God’s existence. It’s the difference in doing “good” for goods sake rather than doing good because you’ll get a reward for doing good. I’ve often said I wouldn’t even go into work if they didn’t pay me…but, I’ll go play golf or play with my grandchildren even when I know I won’t get paid. Why…because I love my grandkids, and in a lesser sort of way love to play golf, or tennis or any of the things I like to do even though there’s nothing in it for me. My guess is a lot of Christians might not be interested in the faith at all if they didn’t think there was a reward at the end of their lives…heaven.
This junior minister noted that even the “demons” know. Probably true! That’s the difference, we mortals don’t know…we just have to believe. That’s exactly the way it’s supposed to be. If we had indisputable evidence it wouldn’t be faith…it would be empirical evidence. No faith is required for indisputable facts. You don’t need to believe in gravity…you only need to throw a rock up into the air.
All religions need to recognize that generally speaking they all serve the same God. So, why is it that they use their particular organized sect as a “team” that is supposed to defeat, even unto death, the other teams who…as I said before, worship the same God. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God if you take the history of the Torah, Bible and Koran as historically accurate. The only difference in the organized religions is those who serve the monotheistic God, and those who are Polytheistic. So those who profess that there is only one God are basically on the same team…they just follow different prophets and place greater importance on the prophet they follow.
Unfortunately for reasons well beyond the tenets of their respective religions many of those followers think they have been instructed to destroy the followers of the competing prophets. However, isn’t it interesting that of each prophet’s teachings compassion for all God’s creation is at the core. Whether we’re Jew, Christian, or Muslim, we’re told to treat others like we want them to treat us. Every religions scripture has a similar instruction somewhere in its text. So, why do they choose to pursue destruction of the other’s religion…I’m going to go out on a limb with my thinking here and suggest “GREED.” It has nothing to do with the pursuit of their faith and everything to do with the pursuit of POWER.
Atrocious things have been done in the name of serving God. Every religion whether it be Judaism, Islam, and yes, Christianity (those crosses the KKK were burning didn’t connect them with the Hindus). Criminals on this earth have used God to excuse murder, prejudice, slavery and many other abuses of humanity. The perpetrators always want us to believe they are doing God’s will…that God told them to do whatever. Well…they aren’t doing God’s will…they’re serving their own purpose. Harboring child molesters in the name of saving a denominations perceived (or what’s left of it) good name is neither Christian or virtuous. And, how can a Christian with any conscience at all scoff at the idea of reducing nuclear weapons by 33%, and pledging not to attack a non-nuclear state with our nuclear weapons (the way Sarah Palin, the darling of the evangelical Christian right, did). Does she realize that a nuclear weapon will kill and maim children as well as any misfit government? Here again…it’s not about what God might be saying to anyone…it’s about the lust for power. God didn’t talk to George Bush anymore than he talks to me…and, God never lead me to believe that invading Iraq was his will. It was clearly George and Dick Cheney’s will.
There is not an explainable reason other than the lust for greed and ultimate power that prevents the world’s religions from getting along, and even working together. What religion wants to see a child suffer…whether it is by molestation of the clergy or nuclear holocaust?
We, in the Christian faith, have seen our religion hijacked by the commercialization of Christianity, mostly by conservative politics. It’s become the standard answer for why we go to war, why we shouldn’t pay taxes, why we shouldn’t provide healthcare to everyone, why we shouldn’t be good environmentalist, and why we need to believe totally in capitalism and nothing else. Modern evangelical Christianity and Roman Catholic churches are making plenty of money off commercial conservative Christianity. Why else would the Roman Catholic Church excuse child molestation in an effort to save face of the Roman Catholic Church…it’s about power, it’s about greed, and in Sarah Palin’s case of criticizing the reduction in nuclear weapons it’s about scoring what she thinks might be a political point. But it has nothing to do with anything God has or will say about anything to any particular person, religion, or denomination.
I am a believer! I’m a believer because I choose to be a believer. Those who choose not to believe are no worse or better than I am. I have no right to treat them indignantly. I may be wrong. They may be wrong. It’s to all of us who are Christians to give up our arrogance and realize that faith is absent fact. Because it’s absent fact we need to be at least willing to hear another point of view…in all humility. Who knows…God maybe talking to us!
Many evangelical Christians do not have a clue that those outside our belief look at us as arrogant. Why? Because we go around insisting we KNOW this and that. The fact of the matter is we don’t know this or that. We BELIEVE this and that. “Believing” is what Christianity is all about. You have to take Christianity on faith. We want to treat those unbelievers as stupid, but they’re not stupid at all. In fact, they’re the ones taking the logical argument. As much as my Christian friends and family may demean this argument…it really isn’t logical that someone can come back to life after being dead three days and continue to live two thousand years later. It’s not illogical of those who say this can’t happen to come to that conclusion…they just don’t believe. Non-belief on its own is not stupid at all…it’s completely logical. That’s the way Christianity is supposed to work. You have to believe it without the facts to assure you.
We need to stop treating anyone who doesn’t believe like we do as though they were ignorant animals. From my perspective belief in God is a bit richer if I believe without proof as opposed to knowing as indisputable God’s existence. It’s the difference in doing “good” for goods sake rather than doing good because you’ll get a reward for doing good. I’ve often said I wouldn’t even go into work if they didn’t pay me…but, I’ll go play golf or play with my grandchildren even when I know I won’t get paid. Why…because I love my grandkids, and in a lesser sort of way love to play golf, or tennis or any of the things I like to do even though there’s nothing in it for me. My guess is a lot of Christians might not be interested in the faith at all if they didn’t think there was a reward at the end of their lives…heaven.
This junior minister noted that even the “demons” know. Probably true! That’s the difference, we mortals don’t know…we just have to believe. That’s exactly the way it’s supposed to be. If we had indisputable evidence it wouldn’t be faith…it would be empirical evidence. No faith is required for indisputable facts. You don’t need to believe in gravity…you only need to throw a rock up into the air.
All religions need to recognize that generally speaking they all serve the same God. So, why is it that they use their particular organized sect as a “team” that is supposed to defeat, even unto death, the other teams who…as I said before, worship the same God. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God if you take the history of the Torah, Bible and Koran as historically accurate. The only difference in the organized religions is those who serve the monotheistic God, and those who are Polytheistic. So those who profess that there is only one God are basically on the same team…they just follow different prophets and place greater importance on the prophet they follow.
Unfortunately for reasons well beyond the tenets of their respective religions many of those followers think they have been instructed to destroy the followers of the competing prophets. However, isn’t it interesting that of each prophet’s teachings compassion for all God’s creation is at the core. Whether we’re Jew, Christian, or Muslim, we’re told to treat others like we want them to treat us. Every religions scripture has a similar instruction somewhere in its text. So, why do they choose to pursue destruction of the other’s religion…I’m going to go out on a limb with my thinking here and suggest “GREED.” It has nothing to do with the pursuit of their faith and everything to do with the pursuit of POWER.
Atrocious things have been done in the name of serving God. Every religion whether it be Judaism, Islam, and yes, Christianity (those crosses the KKK were burning didn’t connect them with the Hindus). Criminals on this earth have used God to excuse murder, prejudice, slavery and many other abuses of humanity. The perpetrators always want us to believe they are doing God’s will…that God told them to do whatever. Well…they aren’t doing God’s will…they’re serving their own purpose. Harboring child molesters in the name of saving a denominations perceived (or what’s left of it) good name is neither Christian or virtuous. And, how can a Christian with any conscience at all scoff at the idea of reducing nuclear weapons by 33%, and pledging not to attack a non-nuclear state with our nuclear weapons (the way Sarah Palin, the darling of the evangelical Christian right, did). Does she realize that a nuclear weapon will kill and maim children as well as any misfit government? Here again…it’s not about what God might be saying to anyone…it’s about the lust for power. God didn’t talk to George Bush anymore than he talks to me…and, God never lead me to believe that invading Iraq was his will. It was clearly George and Dick Cheney’s will.
There is not an explainable reason other than the lust for greed and ultimate power that prevents the world’s religions from getting along, and even working together. What religion wants to see a child suffer…whether it is by molestation of the clergy or nuclear holocaust?
We, in the Christian faith, have seen our religion hijacked by the commercialization of Christianity, mostly by conservative politics. It’s become the standard answer for why we go to war, why we shouldn’t pay taxes, why we shouldn’t provide healthcare to everyone, why we shouldn’t be good environmentalist, and why we need to believe totally in capitalism and nothing else. Modern evangelical Christianity and Roman Catholic churches are making plenty of money off commercial conservative Christianity. Why else would the Roman Catholic Church excuse child molestation in an effort to save face of the Roman Catholic Church…it’s about power, it’s about greed, and in Sarah Palin’s case of criticizing the reduction in nuclear weapons it’s about scoring what she thinks might be a political point. But it has nothing to do with anything God has or will say about anything to any particular person, religion, or denomination.
I am a believer! I’m a believer because I choose to be a believer. Those who choose not to believe are no worse or better than I am. I have no right to treat them indignantly. I may be wrong. They may be wrong. It’s to all of us who are Christians to give up our arrogance and realize that faith is absent fact. Because it’s absent fact we need to be at least willing to hear another point of view…in all humility. Who knows…God maybe talking to us!
Friday, April 9, 2010
THE PARTY OF “HELL NO” AND WE DON’T APOLOGIZE!
Sarah Palin’s latest attempt to resurrect the Republican Party was sprinkled with the most unpatriotic advice one could find from someone who drapes themselves in the United States uniform and the flag.
First, the Party of “HELL, NO!” I’m assuming besides saying “hell no” to health care reform, which thank goodness is now law, that they will say “hell no” to financial regulatory reform, and “hell no” to attempting to stimulate the economy with more job creation legislation like tax cuts to same businesses for hiring out of work workers, and additional investments in our infrastructure ripe with withering roads, bridges, schools, libraries, state and local buildings. I’m assuming they will be saying “hell no” to retrofitting all government owned buildings with energy efficient devices that might lower our need for Middle East oil and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. They will surely be saying “hell no” to tax incentives to develop solar, wind and new battery technology for additional sources of energy. They weren’t satisfied with being just the party of NO…Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, and John McCain (most surprising of all) want to be the party of “Hell No!” Their words…not mine!
Then the next little gem out of, the “half term” governor of Alaska, Sarah Pallin’s mouth was we’re American’s…we don’t apologize. All of you and any of your friends who happen to read this blog need to ask yourselves…is that what your families taught you…never apologize? Did your mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, aunts and uncles really tell you never to apologize? Probably not! Most of use grew up in families that when we misbehaved our mother’s marched us over to the offended party with our ear lobes in her hand while she waited and we told the person we wronged that we “APOLOGIZED” for what we’ve done. It’s an act of humility. And Sarah, the mental midget that she is, needs to explain to us why this is not an American value. It certainly makes me wonder exactly what kind of a “Christian” household Sarah grew up in and now lauds…refuses to apologize. Since when did arrogance become a virtue?
The Party of “Hell No” is not the country of “old fashioned” values they purport to be. When I was young my parents taught me that apologizing was the “right” thing to do. But, apparently today…it’s just the “left” thing to do!
A final dig at the Alaskan Governor who’s most well known characteristic is that she is a quitter…being a half term Governor as her crowning moment. She has described her most fond motto as “don’t retreat…RELOAD!” But, what really qualifies her as dumb is that she insists even as she expels this motto that it’s not a call to violence. YES IT IS! Words matter Sarah! You are certainly dumb enough to believe that “reload” is just innocuous…but, it’s not Sarah. There are people dumb enough to hang on your every word who believe it is just a demonstration of their second amendment rights to bring a loaded weapon to a political event attended by the President of the United States looking for a chance to fire that weapon. You’ve instructed them to reload. And, to think these people are the bastions of Christianity (at least as they see it). If you really want a biblical example you might try “turn the other cheek” rather that “reload.”
If you really want to see a totalitarian government, just elect the Tea Party to power. These people don’t believe in liberty or democracy…they want to tell you what you can and can’t do. And, speaking of death panels…if you can’t afford to pay for health benefits you will die under their heavy hand.
First, the Party of “HELL, NO!” I’m assuming besides saying “hell no” to health care reform, which thank goodness is now law, that they will say “hell no” to financial regulatory reform, and “hell no” to attempting to stimulate the economy with more job creation legislation like tax cuts to same businesses for hiring out of work workers, and additional investments in our infrastructure ripe with withering roads, bridges, schools, libraries, state and local buildings. I’m assuming they will be saying “hell no” to retrofitting all government owned buildings with energy efficient devices that might lower our need for Middle East oil and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. They will surely be saying “hell no” to tax incentives to develop solar, wind and new battery technology for additional sources of energy. They weren’t satisfied with being just the party of NO…Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, and John McCain (most surprising of all) want to be the party of “Hell No!” Their words…not mine!
Then the next little gem out of, the “half term” governor of Alaska, Sarah Pallin’s mouth was we’re American’s…we don’t apologize. All of you and any of your friends who happen to read this blog need to ask yourselves…is that what your families taught you…never apologize? Did your mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, aunts and uncles really tell you never to apologize? Probably not! Most of use grew up in families that when we misbehaved our mother’s marched us over to the offended party with our ear lobes in her hand while she waited and we told the person we wronged that we “APOLOGIZED” for what we’ve done. It’s an act of humility. And Sarah, the mental midget that she is, needs to explain to us why this is not an American value. It certainly makes me wonder exactly what kind of a “Christian” household Sarah grew up in and now lauds…refuses to apologize. Since when did arrogance become a virtue?
The Party of “Hell No” is not the country of “old fashioned” values they purport to be. When I was young my parents taught me that apologizing was the “right” thing to do. But, apparently today…it’s just the “left” thing to do!
A final dig at the Alaskan Governor who’s most well known characteristic is that she is a quitter…being a half term Governor as her crowning moment. She has described her most fond motto as “don’t retreat…RELOAD!” But, what really qualifies her as dumb is that she insists even as she expels this motto that it’s not a call to violence. YES IT IS! Words matter Sarah! You are certainly dumb enough to believe that “reload” is just innocuous…but, it’s not Sarah. There are people dumb enough to hang on your every word who believe it is just a demonstration of their second amendment rights to bring a loaded weapon to a political event attended by the President of the United States looking for a chance to fire that weapon. You’ve instructed them to reload. And, to think these people are the bastions of Christianity (at least as they see it). If you really want a biblical example you might try “turn the other cheek” rather that “reload.”
If you really want to see a totalitarian government, just elect the Tea Party to power. These people don’t believe in liberty or democracy…they want to tell you what you can and can’t do. And, speaking of death panels…if you can’t afford to pay for health benefits you will die under their heavy hand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
