Archive for the ‘US Politics’ Category
Thursday, April 24th, 2008 |
Mike Gallagher only wanted you to believe he predicted an Obama win on Tuesday:
You may recall that I predicted an Obama victory yesterday in Pennsylvania. Naturally, I didn’t believe he would win. But I wanted to trick Democrats in Pennsylvania into thinking that I did. I wanted to send them into the voting booths and vote for Hillary just to prove me wrong.
Sigh. Not a whole lot to say about this, but it does strike me as a bit childish to pull this "I just wanted you to think that’s what I was thinking" stuff at this point in the game. In the world of talking heads we live in, it’s not too much to ask that you simply admit when you’re wrong. It’ll be forgotten the next day anyway.
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Saturday, February 16th, 2008 |
Charles Barkley says that he gets sick when he hears the word “conservative” because “they’re just fake Christians, as I call them.” Clip below:
[dailymotion x4e0qt]
This got me to thinking. Which party is the party of Biblical values? Why don’t we take a look at some important issues in this election as well as major differences between the parties and see how we dastardly Christians fare, eh?
Right to Life/Abortion
Conservatives say:
That all men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights…life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That life, as an inalienable right, is granted by God at the moment of conception and should be protected by the same government that drafted the document declaring the right of all to it.
Liberals say:
That pregnancy is not equal to life and that a fetus is a clump of cells. That women should have the right to terminate a pregnancy under the law as an issue of privacy.
The Bible says:
That life is given by God in the womb — “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee…” Jeremiah 1:5
That taking the life of a child is spilling innocent blood — “Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood.” Psalms 106:37-38
If a life is a life in the womb according to Jeremiah, and the taking of innocent life is considered evil, I would say that this one falls to the conservative view point.
Point for Conservatism.
Welfare and Entitlement
Conservatives say:
People should work to build better lives for themselves. The Platform of the GOP claims a goal of moving welfare recipients off the rolls and into jobs. That while the government should provide assistance to those in true need that we should not create a “welfare state” where people choose to live off of the government instead of by their own hand.
Liberals say:
People are entitled to a certain level of dignity through income. If they are unable to earn the income they require the government should provide assistance for those who have a disability, lack education or job training, unskilled laborers whose jobs may have been outsourced, substance abuse or addiction issues, etc. They believe that government should support them until such time as they are ready to get back on their feet.
The Bible says:
“Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. ” (2 Thessalonians 3:8-12)
But what about those who can’t take care of themselves? Doesn’t the Bible say that we should help those who can’t help themselves? Actually, the Bible says that family should first take care of their needy:
“But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.” (1 Timothy 5:4)
What about those without family? The Bible, in that instance, calls upon the church to care for “true widows”:
“Honour widows that are widows indeed.” (1 Timothy 5:1)
However, the Word is careful to remind us that family should take the charge first, and the chapter outlines certain restriction of who qualifies as a “widow indeed”. (A widow indeed is supposed to be over 60, never divorced, well reported, raising her children and doing good works…)
“If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.” (1 Timothy 5:16)
Perhaps one of the most intersting accounts of government involvement with the poor is found in Ezekiel:
“Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.” (Ezekiel 16:49-50)
So the Bible actually counts not strengthening the hand of the poor and needy, or assisting them in ways that allow them to provide for themselves (their “hand”) as “iniquity” or sin.
While this one is hard to judge, and I truly believe that many liberals want to provide for the poor for good reasons and because they genuinely feel for the people in these positions, we must recognize that if we’re talking about “fake Christianity” that true Christianity, based 100% on what the Bible has to say about the issue, is probably more harsh on the subject of welfare than even the most radical conservatives.
Point for Conservatism.
Conservatism seems to be on the side of “true Christianity” on these first two points. We’ll take on two more issues next go ’round and see how the movement fairs. So far, however, Chuck isn’t looking very bright.
Posted in US Politics | 4 Comments »
Monday, September 3rd, 2007 |
From the AP comes this disturbing article:
CHICAGO - A new analysis suggests there’s been a huge increase in the number of U.S. children diagnosed with bipolar disorder, but experts question whether the surge is real and say some kids have been mislabeled.
Researchers looked at the number of times children under 19 went to the doctor and were diagnosed with or treated for bipolar disorder, also known as manic depression. They found a 40-fold increase, from an estimated 20,000 visits in 1994 to 800,000 in 2003. The jump coincided with children’s rising use of antipsychotic medicine.
The numbers echo other estimates suggesting as many as 1 million U.S. children are bipolar, but it remains a controversial diagnosis in children. That’s partly because their symptoms often differ from adults’, and because most powerful antipsychotic drugs used to treat bipolar disorder were approved for adults and have not been well-studied in children.
The Baby Boomers and Gen-X are too selfish to worry about anyone other than themselves. So rather than take time away from their plastic surgeries, self-absorbed pampering, metro-sexuality, and over-indulgent 2 or 3 income lifestyles, they prefer to dope their kids and turn them into drooling, mindless cretins who are then propped up against a T.V. or plugged into an iPod to be raised by whatever voice is loudest in popular culture.
This is only part of the problem, however. What happens when that generation begins to have children? How will they deal with the stress of reality in the face of all the entertainment and phony culture? Or is there maybe no coincidence that less people are getting married, staying married, having children and more are pushing for abortion “rights”, euthanasia, and right-to-die legislation?
Forget global warming. We’ll either be dead or too doped up to care if it ever becomes a real problem.
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Wednesday, August 29th, 2007 |
Dear Mr. Buffett:
I recently read an article where you claimed that the United States Tax Code is designed to benefit the super wealthy and not the “earning” class. You said, “This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter.”
I believe, in all sincerity, that you’re an extremely intelligent man who should be commended for your success and for your generosity. So you can imagine my shock when I read such stupid words being attributed to you.
My fear is that perhaps you’ve forgotten how you made your money.
You realized at a young age that there were loopholes that any ordinary American could use to their advantage you wrote-off your bicycle purchase of $35 when you were just 13 years old on your first tax return. Were you wealthy then? Or were you simply an intelligent young man?
My problem with your statement is that it invalidates your entire life. Either you are the “Oracle of Omaha” or you’re nothing more than the story of a lucky break given to a rich kid. Your statement goes beyond entitlement and into the realm of fostering stupidity and ignorance. You assume that the average American is too stupid to understand the loopholes that you understood when you were 13.
The issue is not that we’re stupid, but that people like you have allowed us to become lazy. “Are you paying too much in taxes? Well don’t worry about learning how to save money when you file we’ll just change the law so that you won’t have to pay.”
So here’s an idea: instead of fostering those ideas of insignificance, laziness, and entitlement among those poorest among us, why not use some of that $30 billion you’re giving to the Gates Foundation over in Africa to set up schools or education programs here in the States that would teach the poor how to save money on their taxes?
Don’t give up on us and say we’re too stupid to understand. That’s the lazy way out, and you, Mr. Buffett, are anything but lazy.
Thanks for listening,
Wes Comer
Posted in Musings, US Politics | No Comments »
Saturday, August 18th, 2007 |
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Saturday, August 18th, 2007 |
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Wednesday, August 15th, 2007 |
From the Marine Civil Affairs office in Ramadi, taken in January:
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Monday, August 13th, 2007 |
YIKES.
I haven’t checked out the Nashville is Talking blog in a while because, frankly, I thought the way that WKRN handled the situation with Britney was pathetic. I meandered over that way today, however, and almost wretched. It’s kind of like Britney got evicted from a house she built, and now it’s entirely overrun by loony squatters who’ve used the bathroom on the floor, and written their names on the walls, and broken the windows…
What am I trying to say? IT’S CREEPY. That site is just CREEPY now. I feel like I’m about to get canabalized when I visit. Britney and I rarely agreed politically, but she at least kept a clean house.
Ugh. I need to go take a shower.
Maybe A.C.’s right about me today…
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Monday, August 13th, 2007 |
Obama’s statement on Rove’s departure from BarackObama.com:
“Karl Rove was an architect of a political strategy that has left the country more divided, the special interests more powerful, and the American people more shut out from their government than any time in memory. But to build a new kind of politics, it will take more than the departure of a man or even an Administration that constructed the old it will take a movement of everyday Americans committed to changing Washington and reclaiming their government.”
I expect to hear this from Chris Matthews, Alan Colmes, and the Olberman, but not from a presidential candidate. It kind of reminds me of one of the last lines of the Pixar movie The Incredibles when a mole-like man on a giant drill burst out of the ground and shouts, “BEHOLD! The Underminer! I am beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!”
Am I the only one that thinks that 99% of politics is a constant downer? I mean, really. The media serves up all this trash about Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan because even that drivel is better than the vomit slinging that has become American politics.
I didn’t comment much on Rove earlier because what’s the point? We’re going to essentially know who the next President is in February — should I really take the time to comment and tear down and insult someone who is leaving their job? Honestly — someone tell me the point! Or is it that we’re just so self-absorbed that we feel our opinions and witty observations are so finely sharpened that the world would be lacking if we didn’t take one last slice out the person?
Come on, candidates. Show me that you have the capacity to leave some things unsaid and that there’s more than just dirt beneath you.
Posted in US Politics | 1 Comment »
Monday, August 13th, 2007 |
I have no opinion on this story.
In fact, I find myself increasingly anticipating the 2008 election. I think we’re all ready for change — many of us are discontent with the direction things are going, although we may have very different reasons for feeling that way. While this represents some change on behalf of the administration (prepare for a bunch of “the scarecrow lost his brain” jokes) I don’t think it really makes a difference at this point. Karl’s magical aura disappeared when the Republicans lost in ‘06 so I don’t think his significance is anywhere near the level it once was.
So apparently I have an opinion, it’s just cynical and jaded.
Long live, Fred.
Posted in US Politics | 1 Comment »
Tuesday, August 7th, 2007 |
If anyone is keeping track, I’m back in East Tennessee. I’m also tired. I’m also also leaving again tomorrow for a church trip.
Enjoy the other interwebs whilst I’m gone.
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Sunday, July 29th, 2007 |
The last couple of weeks have been downright crazy and this week is no exception. Right now I’m sitting at the desk in my room at the Desert Ridge Resort & Spa in Phoenix, AZ on business for one of my clients. It’s beautiful, and it’s hot. (The high today so far is 100°, and Wednesday the heat index is supposed to hit 120°!!!) I’ll be here all week this week (through Thursday) for an international gathering of bomb squad technicians. It’s really interesting stuff.
I’ll also be spending my down time on a project that has detracted and distracted from the site in its current format — I’m writing a book. I’ll have more details about that later, but for now I’m really excited just to have a few days where I can sit and commit to writing a hefty amount each day.
There won’t be much posting here until I return so I encourage you to visit a couple of great blogs in my absence:
Terry Frank (as always)
Blue Collar Muse
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
Wednesday, July 11th, 2007 |
I’ve heard of the 13th Amendment before. It was an amendment to abolish slavery and was ratified by all the states with the exception, I believe, of Mississippi. This, however, is a completely different 13th Amendment. As much as I hate the Kos this is an interesting look at constitutional history:
“If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”
Nothing really juicy here, but it’s interesting to see the documents and, since this is the Daily Kos, hear the suggestions for Sir Giuliani at the end.
Posted in US Politics | 2 Comments »
Thursday, July 5th, 2007 |
[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/rw2nkoGLhrE" width="480" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
Posted in US Politics | 1 Comment »
Monday, July 2nd, 2007 |
Enjoy your freedom, Scooter.
Posted in US Politics | No Comments »
