http://www.tnr.com/article/101532/home-news-letter-tnr-readers-chris-hughes Very nice letter about high ideas, and higher ideals, and the rule of civility and the need for in-depth journalism and the like. Sadly, I then looked at the article about “Where are the Democrat Rush Limbaughs” http://www.tnr.com/blog/timothy-noah/101434/what-about-the-democrats-rush-limbaughs and immediately the phony claims of TNR were uncovered as the author excused all the Democrat people he listed, all of them saying much more offensive things than Limbaugh. The claim the TNR uses in his article is phony because the author uses a flimsy excuse that all his cited Democrats were essentially “good” people who said very nasty things to people but the cited Democrats were not haters. Moreover, the author makes the patently invalid claim that Rush Limbaugh and his followers are an army of hate mongers who are so filled with vitriolic hatred that they attack poor innocent and defenseless private citizen Fluke. Then I looked at the Democrat ads, and the overwhelmingly favorable pro Democrat content. My conclusion, TNR is just an old paper publication proclaiming the pro Democrat, so-called Progressive and so-called Liberal agenda which is pilloried by the Conservatives. Its scholarship is not better, its investigative reporting is not better, its in-depth pro and con analysis of issues facing the national society is not better, and its prejudices and stereotypical name calling are disappointing. When I read the letter of the new owner and I read the letter of the founders, I had hope that finally there would actually be a publication able to have an intellectual discussion according to the rules of civil discourse. Sadly, TNR is not this. All the writers should read The Rev. Father (deceased) Richard John Neuhaus, The Naked Public Square. Maybe, if TNR could be renewed in that image, then it might be worth reading. Until then, I will continue to keep searching for the real thing.
Tag: America
Are Gay Couples the Same as Hetero
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/9131683/Gay-actor-and-City-high-flier-fight-over-separation-payout.html This is a very interesting article out of United Kingdom (UK) about what happens when gay couples get divorced. It neatly presents a unique perspective that is one being debated in USA. Namely, are gay couples who get married the same as heterosexual couples who get married? Read the interesting arguments of both parties to this divorce suit. It is very informative to the continuing argument going on here in USA.
Advertisers Fail Their True Buyers Except Quicken Loans
Some companies indicate they’ll be sticking with Rush, though. “While we do not condone or agree with Limbaugh’s statements regarding Sandra Fluke, we respect his right to express his views, as well as those who disagree with him,” Quicken Loans spokeswoman Paula Silver said in an emailed statement. “As an advertiser, our goal is to reach a broad audience, which we accomplish by placing ads on a number of programs across the country representing diverse views.”
Congratulations to a true freedom loving, constitution respecting, American company and to spokes person Paula Silver for clearly stating what should be obvious to all namely “….we respect his right to express his views as well as those who disagree with him…As an Advertiser (see above)..”
Who are the callers to sleep Eze and the other advertisers who stopped advertisements or affiliation with the hugely popular Rush Limbaugh show. I very much doubt they are regular listeners to his three-hour program. I suggest instead that these are what are known today as “political drones” who are paid to complain or if not actually paid, they are people who sit before their computer screen eight or more hours a day in order to attack their political, social, or religious opponents.”
The existence of these kind of chronic E mail hacks, is known by just about everybody, except those advertisers who do not have the native intelligence nor the Internet savvy to understand that the so-called “firestorm” of protest about the Limbaugh comments was generated by people who never listen to his program and therefore would not buy their products anyway. The mere fact that the news reports indicate that all Limbaugh advertisers received the same deluge of E mail complaints and telephone protests tells us that this was merely a coordinated sociopolitical motivated attempt at intimidation. That even the Speaker of the House of Representative Mr. Boehner was subjected to this obviously organized barrage and that he responded to it tells this writer that the so-called outrage is phony. Also the idea that President Barrack Hussein Obama called her to thank her for standing up for women’s rights is a clear indication that this supposed spontaneous public outcry is a sham.
Why do I care? Actually, I do not know this woman. I do not care what she does with her life. I do not care if this makes her famous, like Joe the Plumber or not. However, I do care that major USA corporations are so ill-informed concerning the American principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and yes, freedom to have sex or not to have sex, that they easily fall victim and become accomplices to those who would change our social/religious/political values by Internet intimidation. That is worrisome.
Limbaugh Innocent But Are Jon Steward, Keith Obermann, David Letterman, and Rachel Maddox?
The uproar over this so-called outrage is a lot of wind about nothing. I listened to the Limbaugh show and although I found Mr. Limbaugh’s analogies a little surprising, he in no way called the person individually a slut. What he did is what a lot of social commentators do and that is to use satire for effect. He also used hyberole for effect as well. And although sometimes Rush Limbaugh’s hyperbolic satire is uncomfortable, it is not done as a personal attack, has no personal animosity to it, and often highlights the silliness of our society as the society deals with such concepts as birth control and abortion. What I heard Mr. Limbaugh say was that a student at Georgetown Roman Catholic Law School said that on a coed campus, students have such active sex lives that the cost of contraception can run over one thousand dollars a year. Then, Mr. Limbaugh stated that the student felt that it is the responsibility of society and health insurers to pay for such contraception. Then Mr. Limbaugh carried it further to wonder if under Obama Care therefore, it is the citizens who pick up the tab for the promiscuous students who have such active sex lives that contraception is so expensive. By extension therefore, he mused if a student who has regular sexual encounters with fellow college students could be called a slut? He then went forward to wonder if all the male counterparts are also, Johns. Then he extended it to the idea if the citizens pay for the contraception, then are the citizens the pimps. Indeed, Mr. Limbaugh did use the student’s name repeatedly and said he could do so because her statements was on the public record. I mentioned Jon Steward in the title because of his comments concerning President Bush during Mr. Bush’s Presidency. I could also refer to the highly personal and offensive remarks of Keith Obermann over Mr. Bush’s manhood and masculinity during the time Mr. Bush was President of the USA. I also recall highly personal and offensive remarks made against Mr. Bush by Rachel Maddox when she was on TV. Neither Jon Steward, Keith Obermann, nor Rachel Maddox intended their remarks to be hyperbole or satire. Rather, those remarks and the nightly crassness of David Letterman during the Bush Presidental terms were intended to be personally affronting and mean-spirited criticism of our elected President. This writer is sorry that Speaker Boehner felt it necessary to add his voice to this tempest in teapot high dungeon drama. It also amazes me that in a time when the word F–k is regularly used in music and when many Rap songs refer to women as whores, bitches and objects deserving of violent abusive rape it is obvious that the “slut” outrage is politically motivated and intended to portray as bigots those who do not want to pay for others people’s contraception
Southern Baptist Leader Right About No Religion Test for President
I found this article distressing and I disagree with the analysis that Mormon Christianity is not Christianity at all. And I disagree with the idea that the book of Mormon is the same as the Quran. However, I do agree that there is not a “religion” test for the Presidency of the USA. In fact a Hindu, Confucian, Shinto, Moslem, or “no religion at all” person could become President under the Constitution. The key word in the above sentence is “Constitution”. The USA is a constitutional Republic and not a Christian State. Essentially, the USA is a secular government under the prescription that it must respect the freedom of religion opinions of its citizens. There is also the proscription that the government cannot impose itself upon, regulate, or attempt to destroy the practice of religions by its citizens.
That being affirmed, the opinions of the leader of the Southern Baptist Convention are really the affairs of that denomination of Christianity. His viewpoint is allowed in USA. He is even allowed to make it public and to defend his position. That is our right under the first amendment regarding freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Unlike, the grossly stated falsehood that the Constitution protects the government from the influences of religiously informed opinions, the Bill of rights, which is the first ten amendments to the Constitution, protects people of religion from the power of the government and the prejudices of people opposed to religion. That is to say, that you are not required to agree with my religion nor my opinions as informed by my religion but the law guarantees me the liberty to hold and express such opinions. And while IRS regulations threaten to revoke a congregations 501.3C status if the leaders use the pulpit to preach for or against any political candidate, that is merely an IRS regulation and does not forbid preachers of any type from preaching politically motivated sermons. Admittedly, sermons such as those of Jeremiah Wright, Senator Obama’s Christian Pastor, in which he damned America and not blessed America, are repugnant to and repudiated by the 99.9 % of Christians, nonetheless, he is allowed to preach that. (Please, note that no one needs to listen to his rants, and that a Senator of the USA should belong to Rev. Wright’s congregation for ten or more years, is disturbing but not illegal.)
Finally, to the doctrinal theology that informs the SBC speaker. It is a judgement made because Mormonism supplements the 66 books of the historic Christian Bible with the book of Mormon. Some Christians regard this as an addition to the Holy Scriptures and therefore as antithetical to Christian teaching that the only authoritative scripture is the 66 book Bible. In this regard, some Christians would claim that Roman Catholic Christianity is also not true Christianity because they include the Apocryphal books to their publication of the Bible. And even though Roman Catholic Christians are informed that the Apocryphal books are not regarded as Holy Scripture, nonetheless, their detractors say that publishing them inside of the covers of a Bible is itself condemnatory.
Friends, these are matters of internal Christian denominational belief and although we can go on, this writer will again state, as he has repeatedly, that Mormonism is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and that its doctrines regarding the essentials of the Christian faith make it another, albeit disputed, Christian denomination.
Establishment Republicans? !
`What and who are the so called “establishment ” Republicans. This writer has no idea of what the likes of Santorum, Gingrich and Palin are talking about!
Letter to Tea Party Establsihment about Senator Santorum
I am actually surprised. The Tea Party movement has an organization and a structure very much like a political party. And the very next day after the Michigan and Arizona Primaries endorsed Romney, I get this paid political message from Rich Santorum. I did not ask to hear from him. I did not give you permission to share my email with him. I do not intend to vote for him. As far as a true Conservative I think Governor Romney is better credentialed than Senator Santorum. Both he and this tea party advertisement are undermining the Republican primary process and disclaimers to the contrary, this letter very much shows your political endorsement of Senator Santorum. Maybe if my friends at the “establishment” level of the tea party movement would get it straight, they would be more effective. Friends, the Tea party is a movement as you claim but do not honor. It is not a political party as you say but you act differently. It is not a conservative movement against so-called “establishment Republicans” but a rally of citizens against certain key ideas of governing and for other key ideas of governing. Sadly, I am beginning to think that the “establishment” level of the tea party movement is betraying the movement in favor of its own exclusive administrative and fund rasing club. Since I have a radio show and a blog and often am called upon to speak to clubs etc. I am considering analysis of the “establishment” level of the tea party movement in order to explore and reveal the fundamental betrayal that letters like this communicate to those who have attended Washington, as I did and who are now disillusioned with the Tea Party Movement administrative “establishment”. : Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:20 PM Subject: Rick Santorum: Fight of his life Below please find a special message from one of our sponsors, Rick Santorum. He has important information to share with you. Thank you. Please note that the following message reflects the opinions and representations of our sponsor alone, and not necessarily the opinion of TheTeaParty.net. I have not included the actual political fund raising letter from Senator Santorum because I will not give free publicity..I do not agree.
Republicans May be Best At Snatching Defeat from Jaws of Victory
This writer has Republican roots and generally is Republican. However, I am distressed at the persistence of the Republican electorate to seek defeat from the jaws of victory.
The continued debate within the Republican party over who should be the candidate to face President Obama may be healthy in a classroom environment but may be fatal in the election process.
This is my take:
Gingrich is a very powerful intellectual and his ideas and the uniqueness of his visions are often refreshing. However, he also displays fatal flaws. They are the following: that he does not have a broad-based, energetic, organized, election campaign organization. I appreciate Speaker Gingrich, and I hope that he will continue to wholeheartedly contribute to the process of political debate in the USA. However, the nation needs not only ideas, it needs a person who can energetically and enthusiastically makes the ideas into reality. And although when Mr. Gingrich was Speaker of the House of Representatives, and although he was able to make remarkable progress by working closely with President Clinton, he is not displaying the same gregarious ability in reaching out to fellow Republicans. Rather, he has conducted a partisan political rebellion within the Republican party which seeks to divide the party. Therefore, this writer believes Speaker Gingrich should be encouraged to end his campaign and instead throw his considerable intellectual and political acumen behind the main candidate.
Mr Santorum is the spoiler. Senator Santorum enters this race having been a Washington political insider, both as a Congressman and Senator. While I laud many of his strongly held Roman Catholic beliefs and I appreciate his working class roots, I find Senator Santorum’s claim that it is Romney who is the so-called “establishment” while Mr Santorum is the “working class alternative to ??” Personally, I have named Senator Santorum the “spoiler” because I am distressed at what I regard as his assertion that his position representatives the true “conservative” position within the Republican party. Frankly, I spotted Senator Santorum’s presidential aspirations several years ago when he was a frequent guest on the Greta Van Sustern, Fox News program. Yet, Mr. Santorum has a very small political organization and his organizational skills at establishing a viable political alternative to “?” are revealed as weak. For both Senator Santorum and Speaker Gingrich, I ask the simple question, “Why didn’t you expend the tremendous efforts, energy and enthusiasm shown By Governor Romney in building up and funding a viable political alternative?”
Why is the above question of tremendous importance? It is because both Speaker Gingrich and Senator Santorum both have displayed a lack of political entrepreneurship which is essential to a successful campaign and a successful Presidency. Rather, they have depended upon spontaneity and the mercurial nature of the news media. They are not positive candidates with viable individual political platforms. They are the “anti Romney” candidates. This is a weak and disingenuous position which seeks to spoil the other person’s success by playing the role of antagonist to Romneys Protagonist. And while I know that I am torturing the words, I prefer the Pro position to the negative Anti position.
Now, to the true alternative. Congressman Ron Paul. I believe that this Representative is truly what he intends to be , namely, a voice for the alternative position. And what this writer especially likes about this tried and true perennial Presidential candidate is that he conducts himself as a true believer in the power of the American political process and as a true proponent of the American political philosophy. Congressman Paul is someone who has a realistic and humble evaluation of himself and his cause. Yet, he pursues that cause with the vigor and the enthusiasm of an ardent believer in the rightness of his position. And he does all of this with a refreshing self-deprecation and winsome sense of grace that is indeed winning. Congressman Paul’s ideas may seem bizarre to some but he represents a core philosophy that acknowledges American exceptionalism while insisting that it be applied with great sensitivity to the rights and freedoms of other nations. He agrees that we are a great and mighty nation while insisting that our might and greatness necessitates humility not apology. Congressman Paul’s ideas deserve robust and vigorous discussion and sincere debate because they are well-considered and he himself deserves the respect. Why? Because he is a man of such obvious sincerity and integrity who has tirelessly served his nation and his ideas are viable while amendable.
Lastly, we come to my endorsement of Governor Romney. At this point I see a candidate who worked tireless over many years to do the following:
To compete in the harsh and combative arena of national politics as a candidate for President
To accept defeat not aa a cliff from which he must turn away but as a chasm over which he must build a bridge.
To foster, develop and organize a true national political organization that is a model of entrepreneurship and organizational skill worthy of a serious political candidate for the Presidency.
To research, a viable national program to reduce our debt, increase our national wealth and return America to the economic leadership of the world by creating jobs, increasing citizen business initiatives and cutting out the fat and flab of a government bureaucracy that stifles the achievement of success for America’s working class.
Romney can do all of this because as a citizen, a Governor and a very successful business leader, he created companies, improved failing industries, inspired creative leadership in job creation and held everyone accountable for careful spending.
Is Romney successful? Yes. We want a successful President.
Is Romney wealthy? Yes, he has proven his prodigious business skills by doing what every American wants to do. His experience with personal wealth creation means that he will not casually spend our money by higher taxes and carefree spending.
Is Romney part of the so-called “Republican Establishment.”? Yes. Let’s all be honest on this one. Not one of the candidates can place themselves outside of the respected, recognized and legal Republican party. After all, they are working very hard to get that so-called “establishment” to allow them to be its candidate this November! And that is what we need. A President Romney who loves America. Not another Barrack Hussein Obama who is a maverick malcontent who doesn’t like America, its guns, bibles or religion.
Many of the political experts feel that this prolonged primary battle is harmful to the Republican party. Maybe it is. However, these candidates, good people all of them, are good spirited, patriotic Americans who put themselves forward at great cost to themselves in time, talent and treasure in order to allow the American people to examine them and judge if they should be the candidate. I call that gutsy and I admire and respect all of them for their willingness to get out there in the public arena and fight for the right to lead.
This writer wants to thank them and tell them that they didn’t hurt the Republican party and they definitely helped America.
USA Intervention prolongs Tyrany and Prevents Democracy
It is this authors opinion that the progress of democracy is inevitable. I also believe that it is the best form of government for all people’s worldwide. Additionally, I wholeheartedly support efforts to educate, advocate and promote peaceful democracy worldwide. However, war is a terrible thing and as we learned in our own Revolution and Civil War a great many people die prematurely for something which is so inevitable that we do not need bloodshed for its achievement. And for those conservative pundits who argue with me on this, well! Have you been in the US military? Is your child in the US military? Have you been confronted with the agony of mobilization and deployment? Yes, I have and so have my children. So, before we go wrapping everything in the flag, let’s talk. Okay.
Democracy has many forms, including limited democracy such as a real monarchy, and on to parliamentary democracy and a Republic like the USA. However, there is not one form that fits all societies. A tribal system such as Libya and Iraq may not be historically, culturally or ethnically suited for USA style democracy. Rather, ethnic, cultural, religious and societal uniqueness may require that democracy be tailored to the local situation.
And I completely agree that many societies in the Middle East of our world are seeking a greater form of democratic society. However, in distinction from my colleagues, I suggest that democracy was and is inevitable in these societies and that the modern interconnected Internet world, would and will, sooner than later, achieve that democracy, worldwide. However, in many countries and societal situations the so-called “powerful” need to learn the new methods of power and government. It is my belief that they would have, and they will learn the modern way without violence, bloodshed and death. It is inevitable.
But, many object, that in the societies of the Middle East, it is taking too long. First, I ask you, if you are a citizen of the country you criticise? If not, shut up. It is none of your business and don’t spout the crap about “you are your brothers keeper”. When you leave your USA armchair and travel to the streets of the struggle and face the bullets, then maybe, and only maybe, then you will have a little right to speak. Hey, brother, please don’t tell me what I must die for. You die in my place, okay? And then, I will religiously lay a wreath at your grave. Deal?
It is this author’s opinion that much of the violence and the death happening worldwide and especially in the Mid East is caused by geopolitical aims and seeks to falsely use democracy as the excuse for the extension of a western economic imperial model that has nothing to do with the “quality of life” of the protagonists and a lot to do with the wealth and continued economic imperialism of western governments and corporations.
Rather, let’s not arm the rebels. Let’s educate them on civil organization and political reality. But, you say, that we tried that and it failed. Did it? In my opinion, it did not fail. It simply did not meet our expectations. We will need to extend our timelines and get real about what is possible now and what can only be achieved later.
Friends, I will not dictate that for which you must die. Rather, I will do everything I can to promote your freedom within the context, society and culture in which you live. In the end, the result will be the same because freedom and I believe, democracy, are inevitable.
Graham and Mc Cain War Oriented
It continues to disturb this writer that Senator Mc Cain is a very hostile person who wants war, armaments and interventionist policies to prevail. We intervened in Egypt with our President Obama saying that our long time friend Mubarak “Must go”. The result is chaos in Egypt and a military government trying to prevail against radical terrorist Muslims, and Islamic radical mobs burning Christian Churches, terrorising Christian business people and threatening to make Christianity illegal in Egypt. Then we supported the rag-tag rebellion against the sovereign government of Libya, which government was a UN member, forsworn against terrorism and nuclear armament in return for USA consideration. But our government changed from George W. Bush and Condie Rice to Barrack Hussein Obama and Hilary Rodman Clinton, both of whom reneged on USA promises, backed the UN resolution 1973 against Gaddafi, and supported the 2300 bombing raids, the 225 cruise missile attacks, and the use of the terrifying A 10 anti personnel aircraft against the legal, uniformed and legitimate military forces of the sovereign UN recognized Libyan government. The result is chaos, a weak central government and the fear that the approximately 10 to 20 thousand shoulder launched missiles of the Gaddafi government are now being funneled to A Qaeda. Hey, folks, the so-called terrorist Gaddafi and his military forces did not use those anti-aircraft, anti tank, anti naval missiles! Why not? Because they believed assurances that the UN resolution 1973 protected them against the murderous rebels. Instead, Gaddafi was brutalized and obscenely murdered, his son killed, and his supporters rounded up and quietly exterminated by the new “freedom loving??” Libyan government. The Syrian Government is also an independent sovereign State, member of United Nations and engaged in a brutal civil war. And yes, the legally constituted government and the legitimate uniformed military forces and police of that government have been brutal in suppression of the civil war. However, in the USA, it is illegal for anybody to advocate the violent overthrow of the USA Federal or State government. In fact, if such an armed conflict broke out in the USA, the penalty is death by firing squad or hanging. Such death by bullet or rope, could under a military emergency and martial law, be administered by the USA military forces in summary field executions. So, friends, before we fool-heartedly get involved in yet another illegal military adventure, let’s be honest with ourselves and tell the world, especially the Russians, that we intend to continue to foment revolution in their backyard and they had better get used to the idea. And then, when the Russians visit Mexico and try to overthrow that government, we too, had better get used to the idea. And by the way, why shouldn’t the Iranians stop selling oil to France and UK. It’s their oil from their land and if they don’t want to sell it to their enemies, France and UK, well, that’s their business. We don’t sell to the Iranians because we say that they are our enemies. So who is the hypocrite here?
Progressive Politics 