Hypocrisy and Corruption

 Posted by  2008 Election, U.S. Politics  No Responses »
May 232006
 

So now a Democrat has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar, and Republicans everywhere are pointing rejoicing at the new evidence of supposed liberal hypocrisy. Well, yes and no.

Yes, because it was a dumb political move for Pelosi and Reid to push so hard on the “Republican Culture of Corruption” when they knew that doing so would only shine the light more brightly on the legal and moral troubles of democrats. The Democratic leadership tried to paint all Republicans as being corrupt, or tolerating corruption, and now it turns out that, lo and behold, some Democrats are corrupt as well. This was predictable.

No, because there is a difference between William Jefferson, or Duke Cunningham, and Tom DeLay. Jefferson’s problems, specifically the allegations that he has accepted bribes, have been building for awhile, so what did the Democrats do? Pelosi reportedly has kept him off of several Democratic committees, and the Party has been marginalizing him. Similarly, Duke Cunningham, the San Diego Republican now serving 10 years in federal prison for accepting bribes, had done a lot of shady dealings, but they didn’t really affect anyone outside of Southern California. Tom DeLay, on the other hand, has always been known for pushing the boundaries of what is ethically, and legally, acceptable. This is, in fact, exactly what made him so powerful, and so popular among his Republican cohort. And the Republicans responded by repeatedly voting him into ever more powerful positions within both the party, and Congress. Tom DeLay used unethical and probably illegal behavior to the benefit of his party, and his party promoted him for it. And that’s a problem.

So whatever you want to say about liberal hypocrisy when it comes to the whole “Culture of Corruption” argument, go ahead and say it. But for the last decade a vote for any Congressional Republican has been a vote for Tom DeLay as a Congressional leader, and there are still an awful lot of conservatives who need to answer for that.

Why They’re Moving to Graceland

 Posted by  Fiscal Issues, U.S. Politics  4 Responses »
May 182006
 

Back in 2003, during the gubernatorial recall election in California, Arnold Schwarzenegger made repeated references to businesses leaving California because of the high taxes. He would cite various statistics that California was losing business, and people, to Nevada and Arizona, and then blame that on the high taxes in California. This certainly wasn’t the issue which got him elected; but it was a popular refrain that he used to convince fiscal conservatives that he really was one of their guys, and that he would take their concerns seriously once he got into office.

In an eerily similar replay of that claim, I read in this morning’s Boston Globe about the different proposals that the gubernatorial candidates here have to stem the tide of people moving away from the Bay State. The idea proposed by both of the front-runners (the current Republican Lt. Governor, and the Democratic Attorney General) was to encourage people to stay in Massachusetts by lowering the income tax rates, from 5.3% to 5.0%. Once again, the thinking is that people are leaving because taxes are too high, and that if you lower taxes you will encourage them to stay. Unfortunately, that logic is completely absurd.

People aren’t leaving California and Massachusetts because taxes are too high. They are leaving because property values are too high. Just take a look at the numbers.
Continue reading »

Ignore Thine Enemies

 Posted by  Movies, Religion, The Media  5 Responses »
May 172006
 

I’m fed up with the perpetual controversy over The DaVinci Code and all the other non-standard interpretations of Christianity floating around the media. But the fault doesn’t lie with any particular author, religious scholar, theologian, director, or actor. The fault lies with the Christians who let themselves get riled up about this kind of garbage.

According to New Testament teaching, Christians are supposed to stand up for the truth of Christ’s message, and we are supposed to do what we can to prevent false teachings from affecting young Christians. In other words, I would applaud church groups and religious scholars who take a look at these works of fiction, and intelligently compare them with what the Bible actually teaches. Of course you won’t convince everyone; but if someone is more willing to believe Dan Brown than the Apostle Paul, then they’ve got other problems.

But every time that a church group calls for the banning, boycotting, or picketing of one of these events, they are just making thing worse. The Catholic Church has done more to promote The DaVinci Code than its author, which is exactly what they should be trying to avoid. Moreover the church should welcome all opportunities to spread the gospel of Christ, and therefore they should take the opportunity presented by these controversies to compare the Truth with the fiction of Mr. Brown’s thriller. In other words, they ought to encourage debate about these things, and not try to stifle it by simply banning books or boycotting movies.

Besides, ultimately religion is about faith. Either you have faith that Christ is Lord and Savior, or you do not. Either you have faith that Jesus was divine, or you do not. Either you have faith in His resurrection and his act of atonement and salvation, or you do not. Real faith can stand up to inspection and to the presentation of alternative ideas and viewpoints. And if your faith, or the faith of your followers, cannot survive those conflicts, then it was never real to begin with. By that logic, The DaVinci Code isn’t a threat to true Christian faith; it is simply a work of fiction.

Border Security

 Posted by  Bush Administration, Immigration, Latin America, Terrorism, U.S. Politics  No Responses »
May 162006
 

President Bush says that we need to secure our borders. He has proposed added 6000 new border patrol agents (increasing the total border patrol force by 50%) and supplementing the border patrol with national guard units until the new agents can be fully trained. He wants to put cameras, fences, and unmanned vehicles on various parts of the border to catch people coming across. He wants to end “catch and release” programs, and make sure that illegal immigrants are actually sent home, to make it more difficult to simply try again. Of course, the President is not alone here; most of these ideas have appeared in either the Senate or House immigration bills over the last few weeks, and both parties commonly speak of the need to “secure our borders”. But what does that really mean, to secure our border?
Continue reading »

Protect the Constitution!

 Posted by  2008 Election, Bill of Rights, Homosexuality, U.S. Politics  6 Responses »
May 152006
 

In honor of Senator Majority Leader Frist’s decision that the Senate will soon debate the Federal Marriage Amendment, I have two other amendment proposals that they should consider post-haste:
Continue reading »

 Older Entries  Newer Entries
© 2012 leftfielder.org login Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha