Interpretation, “Living Document” – Progressive fallacies.
“I do belong to the school of thought that interprets the constitution to mean that our government exists to serve the American people. That is it’s only reason for existence. The constitution fleshes out how it serves the people.”
In the discussion this person also implied that the phrase “to promote the general welfare” in the preamble allowed for exceeding the constraints of the Constitution if it was deemed (by who I wonder?) in the interest of the people. This person was also adamantly anti-tea party and had a pretty deep-seated disdain for Sarah Palin and was pro-Obama. Just to give you some context.
Government exists to serve the people.
I agree. The issue arises not from debate over that statement, but over the question of “how does government serve the people?”
The United States Constitution in clear English language and with both specific and some broader law sets out the rules regarding “how?”.
The term “Living Document” with the context of interpretation comes from the title of a book written in 1937 by Professor Howard McBain. The idea was one that has been supported by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Louis Brandeis, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson and Al Gore but never mentioned or alluded to by any of the founders. Generally most supporters of this concept were and are progressives. Some might even be categorized as socialists.
While some might think there is nothing wrong with socialism, I contend that socialism on a national scale is contrary to individual liberty and freedom, the founding principles of our nation.
If you’ll notice Holmes and Brandeis were Justices on the Supreme Court. Supporting the idea of interpretation allows the Supreme Court to Legislate from the bench rather than simply apply the Constitution, which was the original intent of the Court. So this concept is one that provides The Court with broader power than granted within the document.
The concept of being able to stretch, bend the language of the Constitution through interpretation is most desirable to those who wish to act outside of its constraints.
No one can legitimately argue that one of the primary purposes of the Constitution and intent of the founders was to prevent tyranny. That is why the document restrains the powers of Government over the individual and empowers the people to stand against the Government if it exceeds its mandated restraint.
Now the Document does allow for “life” in that it may be amended, but outside of that process I believe that it was meant to be strictly construed.
The idea that we needed to search for the meaning or interpret intent of the U.S. Constitution was not something that the founders factored into the document and the concept of interpretation did not rise until the dawn of progressivism.
The erroneous concept of interpretation and flexibility outside of the amendment process is the only way progressives can circumvent the Constitution, and effect change it outside the amendment process while still claiming to be defending and abiding by its laws.This “school of thought” is actually subverting and disregarding the primary function of the Constitution to preserve individual liberty and prevent tyranny.
Neuroscience expert reveals link between defective brain and Conservatism!
Recently Janeane Garafolo, actress, political activist and now apparent expert neuroscientist revealed her findings in an interview with Eccorazzi.com
Ms. Garafolo said about Republicans and Conservatives:
“Their policies have destroyed us and most of the world – that’s a fact not an opinion. Their policies of deregulation, pre-emptive strikes, unmitigated support for Israel to the detriment of the Israelis, Palestinian’s, Americans, the British. Every single policy that “conservative republicans” have put forth since Reagan has destroyed us. And we affect most of the world, so why do they still get a say? That’s what blows my mind. It’s almost like self-flagellation or masochism in some way. We keep going to that portion. They are NEVER going to compromise. The thing is that the more you give in to something like that, the more they take advantage.
The reason a person is a conservative republican is because something is wrong with them. Again, that’s science – that’s neuroscience. You cannot be well adjusted, open-minded, pluralistic, enlightened and be a republican. It’s counter-intuitive. And they revel in their anti-intellectualism. They revel in their cruelty.
I don’t know if you heard me talking to Jenny a while ago, but I was saying that first you have to be an asshole and then comes the conservatism. You gotta be a dick to cleave onto their ideology.”
Come on, Janeane, tell us how you really feel! Did a conservative sodomize her at some point in her childhood? I have heard that she is a child of Conservative parents. Does Ms. Garafolo have transferred hatred for conservatives because she hates her parents? Maybe it’s a psychological issue she has never dealt with?
On Sarah Palin:
“Probably what most people think about Sarah Palin. She’s small-minded and mean-spirited. It has nothing to do with gender — I don’t give a shit about her gender — she is what the Republican Party has become: obstructionist, contrarians, small-minded, all of these things. She just happens to be attractive. There’s definitely something wrong with her. She’s lacking in so many areas. Of course she’s successful with a segment of the country because she represents that lesser segment of the country. It’s people’s lesser nature – their human frailty. You know whatever’s wrong with them is what she is about.”
So what’s wrong with Sarah Palin?
“It’s not even nutty. It really is neuroscience. I truly believe that it has something to do with their limbic brain. I really believe that some people’s limbic brain dominates more than others. Our limbic brain controls all our emotions and it causes us to be irrational. Our limbic brain goes into action when we’re ecstatic, frightened, when we’re having sex. I really believe that if a neuroscientist examined the brain of somebody who identified as a conservative, they would find it’s wired differently.”
It’s all clear now. Political views are caused by defective organic neurological disorder! Perhaps we should get the AMA to list conservatism as a mental illness. Wow, I never knew! According to her definition this is a disorder or disability; Ms. Garafolo should, as a good and proud Liberal, fight for government sponsored disability and treatment for Conservatism.
Well, if talking out of ones ass were an Olympic Sport, Ms.Garafolo would be the Michael Phelps of the sport.
Apparently Ms. Garafolo feels that anyone who differs from her political stance is mentally defective. Elitist, narcissistic, and ignorant, are the labels I would attach to the petite, troll like Ms. Garafolo. She fails to see that it was conservative values that kept her clothed fed and provided for in her childhood; yeah she’s “open-minded”, “pluralistic” and “well adjusted”.
Can anyone who spews this kind of vitriol be considered enlighten or intelligent?
Not in my book, and for me that’s the one that counts.
File Janeane Garafolo under “Just another ignorant left wing ideologue.” Neuroscience indeed.
A brief commentary on the First and Second Amendments
It amazes me that there is so much litigation when the liberties and rights are spelled out so clearly in our Constitution. I am aware of people calling themselves atheists screaming about how they want “God” removed from our money etc. because it offends them. I’m sorry, as far as I can tell, no where is it written or implied that we have the right to be free from being offended or to be free from others exercising their religious beliefs. As an atheist I am of the opinion that these people are not atheists (someone who doesn’t believe in the existence of God or gods) but they are Anti-theists, they hate religion and have contempt for those who believe in God.
Under the Bill of Rights we are granted the right to free exercise of religion. More specifically we are granted the right that Congress shall make no law… prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Looking at the first Amendment I wonder how a school allowing a moment or several minutes of reflection violates the principles of the First Amendment. The idea of separation of church and state, again as far as I can grasp, only applies to the making of laws regarding the establishment of, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; so how does a moment of quiet reflection in school, public or not, violate the spirit of the First Amendment?
Also, while we’re at it, the much debated 2nd Amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Notice the words “a free State”? A disarmed people are subject to tyranny and are unprotected. Our forefathers understood this, why can’t the anti gunners? “The people” as intended in the constitution means individuals, not the Government as some would have you believe. Look at the Fourth Amendment which uses the same language “The right of the people to be secure…” the term “the people” means you and me as individuals. Ask yourself this: Is it better to endure the occasional misuse of a firearm by an individual or individuals and to punish those individuals who commit crimes with firearms; or is it better to subject an entire nation to the potential of tyranny and oppression? Since when has prohibition of anything ever stopped those who want to use the prohibited items for illegal purposes from getting those items? If anything it creates a criminal underground market and increases the danger to society. Think about that!
Let’s get back to basics and re-establish this country as a land of liberty!
Why I’m a true Liberal.
After 47 years on this planet; after serving in the United States Marine Corps from 1979 to 1983; after joining because Iranian radicals held American citizens hostage; after spending a career in Law enforcement; I can say I am a true Liberal.
Allow me to explain: I believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I am an atheist but I respect the rights of others to believe and worship to whatever extent makes them better individuals and citizens. I support equal rights under the law for all Americans regardless of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or political opinion.
We do have, as citizens of this country responsibility for our part. We cannot expect the Federal Government to take care of us simply based on our existence. We are given opportunity; failing to act on that gift ought not to make us wards of the state. The government is not your parent. If you don’t save, or sacrifice, or work, why should you be given anything?
During the 2008 election cycle I found the voices of Sandra Bernhardt, Jenine Garafolo, Margaret Cho, Rossane Barr and Doug Stanhope ignorant, disgusting, unfunny, pitiful and reprobate. Not for their political views but because they lack the ability to express their politics without hatred and vulgarity. Sarah Palin offends them because she differs politically, and morally. Why not build up the candidate that you support rather than degrade a woman who chooses to do what she felt was right for her. That’s a display of strength, not weakness. These individuals so lacked the intellectual ability to articulate their point that they spewed nothing but vulgar hatred in response to someone who differed from their ideology.
“Pro choice” means supporting choice in determining reproductive decisions. To me this means supporting those who choose to bring pregnancies to full term as well as those who choose for personal or medical reasons to terminate the pregnancy. This doesn’t appear to be the case for “Liberals”. For “Liberals” it means only supporting those who choose to terminate pregnancy. For “Liberals” it seems that abortion is the only choice they support. Calling themselves “pro-choice” is intellectually dishonest; they ought to call themselves “pro-abortion” because that is the accurate label. As a point of interest “Liberals” are often anti-gun and pro-abortion and anti-death penalty.
Conservatives can be equally dichotomous, being pro-life and pro-gun and death penalty. How is that conservative? Well I’m ready for the change and I hope it’s good.
The Real Enemy
Intolerance is the enemy. The finest of the founding principles of America are based on tolerance. We have a “Bill of Rights” not a “Bill of Exclusions”.
It seems apparent that two of the driving forces behind violent conflict and oppression are the concepts of fundamentalist ideology and intolerance. When belief in a cause, movement, race or religion becomes so strong and focused that a group believes it is the only acceptable existence for all, that group becomes a dangerous entity. Anyone not adhering to the beliefs of such a group is viewed as a threat and they become an enemy, less than human; they become disposable. This is the psychological process that allows us to kill other human beings. Think about the people you marginalize because they are a threat to your way of life. I don’t know that there is or can be an answer to this problem.
On one side, as a benevolent society we don’t want to harm the civilian population of our political or ideological enemies. On the other hand it is from the civilian population that the military, political, and ideological support springs. How can you subdue an enemy if you don’t defeat the ideology that fuels its existence? It is the nature of some men to strike out at those they feel are responsible for their lack of self worth or anyone they perceive as a threat. This is visible in our own society when we see people burst from the confines of acceptable behavior and wipe out former spouses, co-workers or even a stranger in traffic. On an individual basis we view this as an aberration, but the feeling is much more prevalent than one might expect. Imagine if this happens in a group of people; imagine the harm they are able to justify, the ideology in the name of their oppression. We only have to look to Nazi Germany to see this on a national scale.
The fundamentalist Islamic world is intolerant of anything non-Muslim. This is of great concern because they believe that the supreme force of human existence, God, supports their cause. They believe that this divine support makes their cause righteous and it marginalizes all non-Muslims as infidels. While there are many moderate Muslims, it seems they are more than willing to turn a blind eye to atrocities committed by the fundamentalists against Infidels because the infidel is outside the grace of God; they are reprobate. As insane as this might sound we non-Muslims are viewed as a threat to all things sacred to fundamentalist Islam. So they have made us their enemy and we have only two choices, passively submit to their ideology or fight to defend ourselves from their attacks.
If we choose to defend ourselves, we must accept that in a war even the innocent may die and develop a stomach for doing what it takes to win a war. The idea that war can be waged without civilian casualties is a ridiculous notion. In World War II civilian members of my own family were killed in British and American bombings of Germany. The price for your government and or ideology and support of it is that you may be a casualty of a war against that ideology and or government. After all can any government or ideology exist without the support of its populace?
Unfortunately mankind is not ready to “Just get along.” And war is an unfortunate byproduct of ideology. As Sherman said before burning Atlanta, “…War is cruelty…” there is no way to make it pleasant; and the more unpleasant it is, the more likely a speedy resolution is.
Hey, Mike Lupica, You Suck!
Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News is another Palin hating, Obama loving Liberal masquerading as a journalist. His effort to turn the death of a New York City Narcotics Officer and National Guardsman Deon Taylor into an anti Palin political statement is another sickening example of the fecal smearing pro-Obama/Biden, anti-McCain/Palin propaganda perpetrated in the Liberal slanted press. Instead of reporting on the facts of Officer Taylor’s service and death as an American hero, Lupica instead used Taylor’s sacrifice to further his own political view by attempting to imply that Governor Palin fails to recognize that heroes exist in the City of New York because of her statements about small town patriotism and pro-American sentiment. He didn’t approach Governor Palin with a question, he simply sat down at his key board and wrote what he thought might be clever and critical of Governor Palin whom he obviously despises.
Based on Governor Palin’s comment “We believe the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all you hardworking, very patriotic, um, very pro-America areas of this great country … those who are protecting us in uniform. Those who are protecting the virtues of freedom.” Lupica asserts that Governor Palin somehow thinks that there aren’t any patriotic Americans in New York City. This implication is at best a stretch. One can believe those things about small town America and still believe that there are patriotic Americans in other areas of America both rural and metropolitan. She was simply speaking specifically to the sacrifices and patriotism of those small town people in a positive way and said nothing negative about New York or New Yorkers as one might infer from Lupica’s piece.
I must have missed Lupica’s criticism of Senator Obama when he said “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” when speaking of rural Pennsylvanians. Obama did say exactly that. Obama would later try to qualify these comments, perhaps because one of his handlers pointed out that he sounded like he was an elitist Liberal from Chicago. Perhaps the reason that I missed that criticism from Lupica is because it never happened.
Let me state for the record as a former police officer and United States Marine; I believe that heroes and patriots exist in every corner of America and I find it disgusting that a partisan filth mongers like Lupica used the death of Deon Taylor to try to make a political point!
Having written this, I suppose, according to the journalistic standards of New York Daily News I now qualify as journalist.
Mike Lupica, you and your “News” paper suck.
The Audacity of Stupidity!
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and eliminate any doubt.
These are words that Joe Biden ought to live by:
“Part of what a leader does is to instill confidence, is demonstrate that he or she knows what they’re talking about and communicates to people, “if you listen to me and follow what I’m suggesting, we can fix this.
When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”
Pathetic! Given that Herbert Hoover was president in 1929. Roosevelt was actually the Govenor of New York State the year the stock market crashed and wasn’t sworn in as President until 1933. Television wasn’t commercially available until around 1939 so it might have been difficult for Roosevelt to make the television speech Biden suggested.
By his own words Biden ought not expect to instill much confidence given that he has little idea what he’s talking about. This is the guy who just spent an hour attacking McCain and eluding to an audience that if McCain gets elected that terrorists will attack America! I resent the Democrats infringing on the Republican’s fear mongering. How can you accuse the oposition of playing the fear card and then play it yourself? I don’t know.
God Really Hates You
I have often heard the phrase “God (Jesus, etc.) loves you”. You have to ask yourself: If this is true why does humanity suffer? Each of us suffers at a different level but if you ask most of us will agree that suffer we do. For some the suffering is mild, like a long line at Starbucks or heavy traffic when we’re in a hurry, for others it’s the horrors of disease, famine and natural disaster. Suffering is personal and relative, hence all of the depression and anxiety rampant in our society. “Thank God” for Xanax and Zoloft; or is that: “Thank Pfizer”?
A friend of mine told me, and I’ve done nothing to confirm this, when something bad happens the Buddhists say “Buda looked away.” I like that. It seems to me that if there is a God that he spends most of his time looking away, or perhaps God just hates us!
People of faith, something I am admittedly not, might explain in various ways, that God does not meddle with the everyday dealing of man. I find this is in direct conflict with the idea that God loves us. A loving parent watches their children carefully and would never drop a building on, starve, or teach their children to kill each other, would they? This supports the idea that God hates man. Perhaps the reason that God hates man is that men are inherently bad. We do not listen or obey. Left to our own devices without fear of a fate worse than death, which is one thing that religion tells us awaits those who disobey God, we would be a bunch of lawless deviants having sex with anything we could hold down and killing anything that got in our way. I am not arguing that God doesn’t have reason to hate humans, But if God handles disobedience this harshly why does society get so whip up over corporal punishment of children? Ask yourself: What would God do? “Billy, you didn’t listen again, well this crippling disease will teach you a lesson!” I’ll bet Billy won’t do that again.
I have observed and found particularly annoying many sports figures thanking God for their victory. Maybe if God weren’t so concerned with who wins sporting events he could concentrate on more pressing issues like famine and disease. Oh that’s right God created famine and disease. It’s kind of like congress worrying about steroids in baseball while the economy of our country takes a nose dive. Why is that sports figures never blame God when they loose? If he’s responsible for your victory then why isn’t he responsible for your defeat? “We lost because God hates us!” Please just once? Let’s face it sports fans; if we’re pretty much on our own when it comes to disasters, famine and disease, I’m pretty sure God doesn’t give a crap about who wins the Super Bowl.
As kids my friends and I had a much better grasp on God’s frivolity. When one of us got hurt doing something stupid or bad we would say “See? God punished you!” We knew then that God was vengeful and prone to cause injury. I like that idea better than the idea of a nice and benevolent God. Naturally this idea was imparted to us by some adult who, after living a life of misery, had concluded, that God punished us all for the slightest infractions and sometimes for no good reason at all.
Now you might think that I come from a Godless atheist background and you would be wrong. I was baptized Catholic and although my father was a non practicing Catholic and my mother a non practicing Lutheran, as a youngster in Brooklyn I would go to church on Sunday with our neighbor who we referred lovingly to as Aunt Catherine. She was a sweet lady who was a school teacher and the only man in her life was her gray poodle Chipper. I remember she drank tea and occasionally would tip a Harvey’s Bristol Cream with my mom. At the age of eight we moved from Brooklyn to the Northern Catskills and I started going to Church at Sacred Heart. I made my First Communion and Confirmation and was an Altar Boy. I never had a bad experience with the priest although years later there was some talk that one of my friends had though I’ve never confirmed it with him. Why dig up bad memories? In my teens my father had friends who became Pentecostals and were “born again”. I attended the free form gathering and was amazed by the love and devotion of these folks and was taken with it for a time, but I discovered girls and sex and found that, much to my detriment, more interesting. There have been times when I wonder why I didn’t stick with religion. I later revisited my Christianity for a short time while serving in the Marine Corps. I have even been married in the Catholic Church. I’ve also been married in a bakery; I like cake better than God. People of faith have told me that I have lost my faith. Actually I didn’t loose my faith; I abandoned it to reason once I discovered the history of religion. I saw folly in having faith in some unseen entity that governed all existence. I know this flies in the face of the majority of people world wide who believe in God. I’m not saying that they’re wrong and I’m right. Actually there is no clear evidence either way; I simply choose not to believe in God. Guess I’ll find out when I die.
To be honest, I would rather live a fairly good life, die, meet God and say “Well isn’t my face red?” than live like most religious hypocrites, who don’t really believe yet are just going through the motions to hedge their bet. You people know who you are and if there is a hell for “sinners”, you phonies will probably be a level deeper than me.
I do believe in Religion. I know it exists and that it governs the behavior of men. Unfortunately men are given to interpreting religion to suit their own agenda, much the way politicians interpret politics. When you mix religion with politics you are just asking for trouble. As a youngster during the Great Depression my father asked a priest why he wasn’t using the money he collected to feed poor and hungry people in the neighborhood. The priest slapped him and promptly banned him from the church. My father did not turn the other cheek; he just never went back to the Catholic Church. My father later was kind to the Franciscan priests at Sacred Heart Church and would regularly invite them to dinner at our home. He only talked politics with them and never religion.
As I approach the middle of my uncertain life I find myself rejecting the idea of a benevolent God. I feel if God exists at all, it is indifferent at best; observing us much the way we might observe an ant colony; exhibiting many of the same qualities we humans do; curiosity, cruelty and indifference. In fact I think he occasionally sprinkles us with cosmic pesticide, collapses our burrows or pulls out the divine looking glass to roast a few of us. The ancient Greeks, Romans and Egyptians worshiped gods who possessed human qualities. Those gods acted out the same drama we humans experienced but on a cosmic scale. There was no defined set of religious laws; the actions of the gods were unpredictable, sometimes petty and often arbitrary. Occasionally the gods would turn a favorable eye on mankind, but often their actions were punishing and cruel. So enter monotheism. One God: omnipotent and all seeing. This deity doesn’t change much from the previous landlords. He kills us for sinning, casts us into hell, besets us with plague, famine, floods and wars without so much as a “This is going to hurt me more than it’s going to hurt you.” He does all of this in the name of righteousness, but where’s the love?
If you read the Old Testament you see that God is a vengeful and punishing deity. He gives Adam and Eve free choice and then gets pissed when Satan, another supernatural power, talks them into doing eating from the tree of life. What kind of a game is this? This is what you call love? God screws with us and must laugh like hell at the confusion and chaos he creates. One might argue that God inflicts the harshness of disaster upon us because this is when man exhibits his noblest virtues. It is in time of great distress that man comes to the aid of his fellow humans, right? Some do, some just seek to exploit the situation for personal, political or financial gain. Again, God screws with man!
One big contradiction to me is: Thou Shall Not Kill. Then the God of the Old Testament shows favor with David who slays Goliath with a stone. Maybe his commandment was: Thou Shall Not Kill any of your own tribe but everyone else is fair game. God, if you’re reading this could you clarify? You know it would make things much easier if God would speak directly to mankind in mass and clear up all the confusion. If he is all powerful, why does he send mixed messages through men; hasn’t he witnessed a game of telephone. Men just get the message all twisted.
NOTE 7/29/08: Further review on this topic indicates that a more accurate translation for the sixth commandment is: Thou shall not commit Murder. This allowed for accidental killing, war and the killing of animals (non humans) for food and clothing. The Old Testament God did however allow intentional killing other human beings in special circumstances, such as allowing the killing of murderers and adulterers. Kind of makes you long for the old days doesn’t it?
Somewhere along the line, according to Christians, the God of the Old Testament turns benign and sacrifices his only son for the sins of man and then butts out of the affairs of humanity. His M.O. doesn’t change though and actually the problems get worse. More religions spring up in his name and now man starts killing each other over who properly worships God. Excellent plan! Who’s right? Well that’s anybodies guess because god has stopped talking with us except, allegedly, through a few crazy religious fundamentalists and he’s apparently telling each of them something different just to keep spiritual existence interesting.
Every time I hear someone say that “God loves us (you)”, I want to punch them square in the mouth for saying something so stupid. Actually I hope God punishes them for presuming to know the mind of God. If God actually made man in his own image, then God must possess the same flaws as man and might be a petty self centered, depressed, mass murdering, egomaniacal deity! Or maybe someone just made up the part about man being made in God’s image; maybe man made God in his own image. Either way it really doesn’t matter.
From this essay, you might think that I have a bone to pick with religion, but that is the farthest thing from the truth. We need religion to control anti societal and aberrant behavior; its rules insure the continuation of the species and promote social order much the way secular law does. Religion and faith also keeps some folks very happy and can be therapeutic and comforting in many respects. Who wants to believe that we face a meaningless and solitary death? I mean aside from me. However religion can also be toxic and fuel intolerance and zealotry; but that is not the fault of religion; it is the fault of men. Ultimately the only thing we humans have control over, unless you are mentally ill, is our own behavior.
Personally I have no need for religion. I am satisfied believing that this tiny planet on the edge of a vast galaxy in an endless universe exists for reasons beyond my explanation. We live here on borrowed time for as long as conditions allow, and as long as our nearest star continues to burn and no longer than that. Life and existence are uncertain and we can blame God or just accept that it is as it is. A close friend once said to me: “We spend the coin of life from a purse which cannot be replenished.” To that I add that the quantity of coin in that purse unknown. I accept that if (and for me that’s a big IF) there is a God he hates me at worst, is indifferent to me at best, but most likely doesn’t exist. Regardless, I will take pleasure in spending whatever “coin of life” I have left and share as much of that pleasure with others as I can.
The politics of Hope – Who is really more of the same?
Joe Biden’s speech today reinforced my belief. The Obama/Biden ticket is more of the same. Biden’s speech is more of the typical, finger pointing, fear mongering, lying politics. Problems are pointed out, blame is placed, but no real solutions are offered other than “it’s the other guys fault!” Fear mongering has become the buzz of the Democrat party. The old and constant implication by Democrats that “Republicans will starve children and eat the old people!” has again reared its head; I nearly vomited. This is nothing less than a desperate attempt by the Democrats as they slip in the polls to inject fear and partisan politics into the mix. While Governor Palin speaks of reform and change in Washington, Senator Biden attacks McCain and speculates on how his administration would be the next George Bush administration.
Joe Biden gave a derisive speech that did nothing but attack and blame the Bush administration for the current financial crisis and attempt to say that McCain is the next George Bush. He outright implied that the mortgage collapse was the fault of George Bush, when the facts are that William Jefferson Clinton signed into law the bill that created this mortgage debacle. Granted, it was a Republican majority in the Senate that passed the bill and Biden did vote NAY, but it was the sweetheart of the Democrat party, Bill Clinton that failed to veto this bill, yet Biden fails to bring that up and only focuses on the proximity of the Bush administration to the collapse that bill created.
This is a stark contrast to the McCain speech which invites Obama to come and debate in Town Hall meetings. Why doesn’t Obama accept the opportunity? It’s because he is afraid to face the hard questions. While Obama/Biden cast blame on the Bush administration, McCain/Palin addressed the needed changes in banking regulations. Let’s also point out that for two years the Democrat majority Congress also failed to do anything about the problem; but of course it was all George Bush’s fault! Sigh.
So much for Democrat rising above the fray and addressing issues, it just never happened nor will it. As usual they are machine politicians and empty shirts. Hope and change indeed.
MY audacity of hope
America: a nation of ideals, a place where anyone willing to work can work and earn a living for their family; a place where those who strive for excellence are rewarded for their efforts; A place of laws that treat men and women equally regardless of race, color, creed or religion; A place where the is no free lunch and everyone is expected to pull their weight; A place where you get what you pay for; A place where government respects it’s citizens a lets them excel without being taxed for excellence; A nation that rewards companies that created and keep jobs in America and that make products for America and the rest of the world; A country that puts the interests of working Americans above greed and power; A country that taxes foreign imports and companies that export jobs outside America because of corporate greed; A country that protects it’s working citizens from corporate greed and abuse while still rewarding those corporations that “do the right thing.”; A country that is energy independent and strong because of that independence; A place where the rights granted by our constitution are respected and held to be truths and not just given lip service; A country that honors military service and those who sacrifice for the cause of freedom and democracy; A country that protects it’s citizens from the parasitic financial ravages of illegal foreign immigration and welfare fraud; A country where English is spoken; A country that provides education to those who deserve and want it and removes those that would disrupt and interfere with the process of learning; A country that rewards the service of excellent teachers, police, nurses and doctors above sports figures; A country where the legal system isn’t a lottery or financial benefactor to the detriment of our healthcare; A country where child molesters are punished by permanent imprisonment along with politicians who violate their office and public trust through criminal activity.
Yes America, this is my audacity of hope. This is my vision for America.
