Conservatives, Please Stop Calling Yourselves "Constitutionalists"

At first, I hoped it was a fluke.  Maybe a few rogue conservatives that started calling themselves "constitutionalists."  Maybe Sarah Palin loyalists?  Unfortunately, I keep hearing this absurd claim from conservatives.  They really think that they are constitutional loyalists! 

It drives me crazy to hear this, and it doesn't even take a lot to discredit them.  A few simple questions will dispel this ridiculous attempt to make them feel that they are no longer a party of backwards, anti-equality, anti-progress religious fanatics. 

• Do you support the implied right to privacy in our Constitution that has been recognized by our Supreme Court...including the right to choose abortion?
• Do you support the equal protection (14th Amendment) of all people within the boundaries of a state?  Including illegal immigrants?  Including homosexuals who choose to enter into the contract of marriage?
• Do you believe in the freedom of, and from religion, that is provided in the First Amendment?  Including not allowing the government to write any laws respecting the establishment of religion?  (This means no anti-abortion laws.)

There are more questions that I could ask to disqualify any conservative as a "constitutionalist."  However, I've never had to ask more than this.  If they can truthfully answer yes to the above questions, you should probably follow up with something like, "are you aware that you are actually a liberal?"

I do understand that conservatives recognize that there is a bad connotation with the term "conservative."  It tells people that you are against progress.  That you want to go back to the way things used to be and don't want our society to progress...at least not at a reasonable rate.  Don't be mad, conservatives...you've done this to yourselves.  This makes them want to find a new term for themselves that sounds a little more positive.  Unfortunately, the closest term I could find for conservative ideology is "constitutionalists of convenience."  I use this term to mean that they passionately believe in the Constitution when it fits neatly into their ideology.  However, they believe that anything that falls outside of those ideals, like gay marriage and abortion, should not be protected by the Constitution because it offends their religious and moral beliefs.  This means they are willing to ignore the Constitution when it is not convenient for them.

Conservatives, whatever you choose to call yourselves...and I can think of a few more terms if you would like.  Please...I beg you...stop calling yourselves "constitutionalists."  You're just making yourselves look worse.

Fixing Our Broken Welfare System

One thing that drives me absolutely crazy is hearing people complain about the welfare system in our country.  It's not that I don't think the system needs repair.  I know it is greatly ineffective.  My problem is that almost all of the people like to complain about it without offering any idea of how they would fix it.  Making matters worse, many people complain about redistribution of wealth constantly.  Just yesterday, I got into a discussion about this subject based on a person's complaint about us handing out "cash, food stamps and housing allowances to people who chose the life they have."  The absurdity of this claim is only topped by the fact that the same people debating the issue with me wondered why I think many conservatives don't want to help those in poverty.  Maybe because all we hear is constant complaining about doing it?  We'll get back to that.

More importantly, I mentioned during that discussion that I learned a lesson years ago.  I was taught that you will never really be taken seriously if you bring someone a problem.  You should always bring a solution.  Even if its not the right one, or the one that ends up correcting the issue, you always want to give the person a way to fix the problem.  That's exactly what I feel should be done with the welfare discussion.  Here's my solution.  

The solution to our welfare problem begins with access to education.  Education in our country is a joke at all levels.  Particularly the educational system in poverty stricken areas.  It needs a complete overhaul.  I'm pretty sure that is a concept on which we all agree.  Our children should all have equal access to quality education at no additional cost.  Conservatives may want to sit down for this...it's going to cost a lot of money!  That money will have to come from somewhere.  Increased taxes.  Decreased spending in areas like defense.  I'm not really going to tackle the funding issue, but this will cost.  

Of course, even access to great education won't solve the poverty problem.  There will always be a need for assistance.  It's how we give people that assistance that is important.  Here are some aspects of our system that must be in place for this to work:

• Assistance must provide for the needs of the individuals, including the nutritional needs, without the ability to transfer the assistance to another party or use it for unnecessary items (things like take out pizza - I'm looking at you Papa Murphy's).  
• Contraception must be available at no cost to individuals on welfare.  
• People should be approved for an amount of assistance and it should remain at that level, regardless of whether or not they have any children after they are approved (women who are pregnant should be approved including the anticipated child).  
• Drug tests should be mandatory and each recipient should be tested every time they pick up their assistance.
• Vocational training or higher education (not beyond a bachelor's degree) should be mandatory and provided at no cost.  Missed training (excluding illness) should constitute reduced or denial of assistance.  (There's that spending again conservatives.  Try to stay calm.)
• Companies that don't pay a living wage and have employees working full time while collecting benefits should be charged a penalty.  We do not subsidize the workforce of private companies...I'm looking at you Wal-mart. 
• None of these reforms should reduce the amount of assistance provided.  If savings are realized from the reforms or additional revenue is brought in (thank you, Wal-mart), the money should be used to stabilize the assistance programs during periods of recession and/or expand coverage. 

Now I'm sure that there are plenty more specific changes that I would make if I knew the welfare program well enough.  The point is that I'm not going to sit here and complain about the government taking my money and helping people who need assistance.  I would much rather have my taxes pay for assistance to the impoverished than wars around the world in which we have no business being involved.  I would much rather have some people taking advantage of the welfare system than have rich defense contractors getting even richer lining the pockets of decision-makers to get million and billion dollar contracts.  We spend as much on our defense as the next 13 countries below us on the list of top spenders combined...with room to spare!  I'm pretty sure we can lower the budgets for defense and reallocate a large portion of that money to making sure that we can feed and shelter our people. 

The point is that we are all sick of hearing about it.  Conservatives are in the minority when it comes to what they try to condemn as "entitlement" programs.  The reason our country is seeing a fundamental shift in the way that people are voting is because we don't want to see the rich getting richer while complaining about assistance programs.  And don't tell me how generous conservatives really are.  Generous people don't complain about the fact that their money is being redistributed to the poor.  We want to help the people of the United States.  We see no reason that anyone should go hungry or homeless in the richest, most powerful nation in the world.  Do something about it or deal with it.  Just stop complaining.

A Liberal in Conservative Clothing

Be careful, conservatives.  You might actually be a liberal fighting to convince yourself that you are a conservative.  Oh, the horror!

I know this because I actually talked to one this weekend.  I was in a hotel having dinner, and I began a conversation with a conservative about some hot topics.  As I expected, we made absolutely no headway with the abortion (contraceptives) debate.  There is no winning in a debate about that.  The debates I really enjoyed were about "entitlement" programs and gay marriage.

In these discussions, I simply used a sequence of logical questions to get the poor closet liberal to admit that they didn't really align with conservatives in the way they thought.  We began discussing the law being free from religion.  This conservative played the "Constitution was written on Christian beliefs" card.  Well, that was an easy one.  I simply got the person's agreement that the Constitution was written to protect freedom of religion, and freedom from religion.  Once that was established, I asked if they believed that the government should be forcing some Christians' beliefs on others?  Of course, it was hard to admit, but I got the "no" I was looking for.

Then it was time for the self-proclaimed conservative to play the "but marriage is a gift from God" card.  Another simple one (that seems to be a trend with conservative arguments).  The easy argument here is that, while it is fine for a church to refuse to marry people because of their beliefs, marriage as far as the government is concerned, is purely secular.  It is a contract that has specific rights and responsibilities included.  If religion is taken out of the argument, then we're only left with a contract (called marriage) that the government has no reason to deny to a gay couple.

At this point, I got an agreement that, even though the conservative didn't agree with homosexuality, there was no reason that the government should be denying gay marriage.  This person did attempt to say that they would have to vote against approving gay marriage if it came up because they didn't agree with it personally.  Well, the discussion immediately became about forcing the person's beliefs on others versus allowing others to make decisions on their own.  No matter what logic was used, this was the last hiding place for this faux conservative.  There was not going to be an admission that, even though they said the government should not be writing any religion's beliefs into law and there was no reason that the government should be denying gay marriage, this person actually believed as many liberals do and would vote to see progress in freedom and civil rights.  I warned this person to be careful because they might actually be a liberal in conservative clothes.

At some point, we transitioned to a discussion about "entitlement" programs.  We agreed that Social Security, being a system that is paid into by workers, is not what many people refer to as an "entitlement" program.  (We had a discussion about the word "entitlement" before we started in which we decided that we would use the word to basically "charity" as many conservatives use the term.  We agreed that, by the true definition of the term "entitlement," social security was one.  I'm pretty sure the sentence, "I've paid into that my whole career, you're damn right I'm entitled to it" was uttered.)

Then we agreed that there should be some reform to the programs.  We agreed that people on welfare should be subjected to drug testing.  The surprising part was that, while the conservative thought Medicaid should be destroyed, we agreed that everyone in a country as rich as ours deserved to have basic necessities like food, shelter, and healthcare.  This conservative told me that they believed we should move to a single-payer healthcare system.  Stop.  Re-read that last sentence.  Now realize that this conservative works in the healthcare industry...and has for over 25 years.  At this point, there was no denying the obvious.  I had to tell this person who proclaims to be conservative that they are actually a liberal.  Yes.  This anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, self-proclaim Christian conservative is actually a liberal who is refusing to see the truth.  If you believe in the freedom to live one's life, if you believe that the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution apply to all of us, if you are a true Christian...then you should be very careful with whom you align yourself politically.  You may actually be a liberal in conservatives clothing.  

Jesus was a Socialist

Conservative Christians.  That's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one.  I know that conservatives like to think of themselves as the "Christian right," but they couldn't be further from the truth.  Aside from the fact that they like to focus on the condemnation of homosexuality in the Bible (while conveniently ignoring all of the accompanying verse), they seem to have no understanding of the instructions that Jesus left for Christians.  With that in mind, I thought I would point out a few of the verses that they have forgotten in their attempts to blend their religion into their politics. 

Let's start with the condemnation of taxes.  Many conservatives think that taxes are terrible.  What they fail to remember is that the Bible respects the collection of taxes:

Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. (Romans 13:7)

Jesus also instructs people to pay the taxes that the government has declared they owe:

¹⁵ Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. ¹⁶ They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. ¹⁷ Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?”
¹⁸ But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? ¹⁹ Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, ²⁰ and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
²¹ “Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” (Matthew 22:15-21)

All of the screaming that conservatives do about taxes being too high seems to go against the instructions that are laid out in the Bible.  Of course, their next argument is that they will pay the taxes, but the taxes shouldn't be so high.  They call the President socialist and talk about how he is "evil" and even the "anti-Christ."  Again, there are some verses that they seem to have forgotten about the people chosen to lead our country:

¹⁷ “The decision is announced by messengers, the holy ones declare the verdict, so that the living may know that the Most High is sovereign over all kingdoms on earth and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of people." (Daniel 4:17)

In the Lord’s hand the king’s heart is a stream of water that he channels toward all who please him.  (Proverbs 21:1)

⁶ This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. (Romans 13:6)

¹³ Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, ¹⁴ or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. ¹⁵ For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people.  (1 Peter 2:13-15)

Obviously the Bible is telling us that we need to respect our political leaders.  If this is true then I say that the disrespect that conservatives have been showing President Obama during his term and the election is contrary to the commands given to Christians in the Bible.

Now the part that you have all been waiting for...the constant complaints that President Obama is a socialist.  While I don't believe that, there is another famous leader who could be considered a socialist.  In fact, I believe with all of my heart that, if he had lived today, his words would be condemned by the very conservatives who claim to live by his teachings.  Yes...Jesus would be considered a socialist.

And the crowds asked him, “What then shall we do?” And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”  (Luke 3:10-11)

³⁴ Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. ³⁵ For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, ³⁶ I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ ³⁷ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? ³⁸ And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? ³⁹ And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ ⁴⁰ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ (Matthew 25:34-40)

⁴⁴ And all who believed were together and had all things in common. ⁴⁵ And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. ⁴⁶ And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts,  (Acts: 2:44-46)

³² Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common. ³³ And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. ³⁴ There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold ³⁵ and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 4:32-35)

When conservatives condemn "redistribution of wealth," they are actually condemning the teachings of the one man whom they pretend to revere among all men.  The one they say they are supporting when they throw the first stone at homosexuals and people of different faiths and backgrounds.  They forget that the teachings of Jesus were radical and progressive in his time. 

I am a liberal Christian.  There are many of us.  We do what we can to follow the teachings of Christ...all of them.  We don't pick a verse and use it to take away the rights and equality of a group that we fear and hate.  We don't teach our children that it's okay to submit to greed as long as you earned the money.  We believe in what the Bible tells us about loving our neighbors as we love ourselves.  We are here to give our neighbor, whether he is poor, of a different religion, of a different race, or of a different sexual orientation, a hand up in the world.  We are the Christian left and we will not stand for ignorance, hate, and greed being justified by our faith. 

Register and Vote!

November 6 is only 30 days away!  After the first debate, we've seen a conservative base that has been charged up and ready to vote.  Liberal and moderate voters should take their queue from the conservatives and make sure that they are ready to vote on election day.  If you support Obama, or even just recognize the fact that Romney can't tell the truth and is a terrible option for the presidency, get yourself registered and get to the polls.  Don't let Romney steal the election on lies and impossible math. 

Some people have already seen their voter registration deadline come and go.  Many people are only days away from the deadline.  Click here to check your state's deadline.  

Not sure if you're registered?  Not sure where to vote?  Click here to check your registration and find your polling location.  Finally, get out there and vote!  No matter what your viewpoint, you have no business complaining about the government if you refuse to exercise your power to make a change. 

The American Complaint Department

For any of you who do not follow my Facebook page, I recently announced that I have recently become a writer for the online newspaper The American Complaint Department.  Please check out the website and read my first article.  You will find it under the Liberal Complaint section.  Here is a brief preview of the article:

Out of Context

If this election were won by the people who can take the most innocent statements and turn them around to mean something completely different, President Obama would be in trouble.  There has always been a habit of taking a phrase or statement made by a politician out of context during elections.  However, the absurdity of the practice is so dramatic this year that even those on the side of the offending party are beginning to get annoyed. 

Click here to read the full article.

While you're there check out the articles from the other writers and keep coming back! 

You can also tune in to the online radio program on Tuesday evenings on blogtalkradio.  I may even occasionally make an appearance! 

The Pot and the Kettle

It’s kind of funny.  As I’m writing this, I realize that, this blog didn’t start out as a conservative-bashing forum.  I also didn’t previously identify myself as a Democrat or liberal.  While I still won’t declare myself as a Democrat, I do now proudly proclaim myself liberal.  I have backed into this position over the last few years of listening to Republicans and conservatives spout nonsense that they say is in my best interest.  The scary thing is that I live in the “heartland of America.”  This is code for conservative hell.  I am basically behind enemy lines.  Maybe I should change the name of this blog…just a thought.  This post is a discussion of some of the hypocrisies that have driven me to this point.

I’ll start with the thing we are all so very sick of hearing about:  healthcare reform.  I’m not talking about whether it’s good or not, I’m more concerned with the outrage that all of the conservatives have about it.  You may have heard in passing that Republicans were the first group to suggest many of the reforms that the current law has implemented.  This is a fact that conservatives have glossed over every time I have heard it mentioned.  What everyone is talking about is the Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993 (HEART Act).  This bill looks very similar to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).  In fact, a look at the areas covered in the two bills leave only a handful of differences.  The most notable differences include the fact that the PPACA included the expansion of Medicaid, eliminated lifetime limits on coverage, and extended coverage for children up to the age of 26.  What is did include was an individual mandate.  What I find most interesting is that the HEART Act was sponsored by a Republican, Senator John H. Chafee.  I’ll go one step further – it had 20 co-sponsors.  Of those 20, 18 were Republicans!  Notable names on the list include Arlen Specter (when he was Republican), Orrin Hatch, Dick Lugar, and Bob Dole.  So this party, which is screaming that the United States as we know it has ended because of the PPACA, is actually responsible for the first proposal of the majority of the PPACA’s provisions.  Did you know this?  I mean really understand.  Think about it before you cast that vote in November.  The same people telling you that they will “protect your freedoms” are actually the ones to originally propose the very legislation about which you are complaining.

So we move on the economy.  If I never hear the words spending or deficit again I could die a happy man.  I keep hearing conservatives (which I use interchangeably with Republicans for the purpose of this post) talk about how spending is out of control and we can’t keep running these kinds of deficits.  My response is usually related to the fact that our country runs on Keynesian economics.  For those of you who don’t know what this means, here is an overly basic run-down:  run deficits during a recession and surpluses during a boom.  What I don’t usually get into is the hypocrisy that exists when Republicans are in power versus the times that they are not in power.  While I’m sure I can go into multiple examples of this…I’ll stick with words from the elephant’s mouth.  In a meeting with the Secretary of the Treasury in 2002, Vice President Dick Cheney was warned that the extreme budget deficits of that time were threatening the economy.  According to former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, Cheney told him that “Reagan proved deficits don't matter.”  He continued by saying, “We won the midterms [congressional elections]. This is our due.”  Sooooo, they matter now?  Just not during the Reagan and Bush administrations?  Oh, I forgot, they earned that right by convincing the voters that they would actually work to improve their lives.  It’s their “due.”  

The last issue is the one something I have been hearing constantly since the Ron Paul bandwagon started to roll - The Constitution.  According to most of the conservatives I know, everything Obama has done since he took office has been unconstitutional…including the fact that he took office!  Try getting into a debate with a conservative about the merits of Obama’s term without his ethnic background or religion being questioned.  But, I digress…we will talk about the Constitutionality of Obama’s actions.  The healthcare debate doesn’t take much discussion.  It’s been before the Supreme Court, and the PPACA has been found Constitutional.  Unless anyone has the training and experience to refute the opinions of the five justices who determined that this was Constitutional (Including Justice Roberts – shocking), then all of your arguments are immediately moot. 

So let’s look at some other issues.  We’ll start with the mild uproar over the action in Libya.  People claimed that Obama’s decision to strike Libya without Congressional approval was unconstitutional.   This is a slightly more complicated matter.  First, the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the military.  Congress is granted sole authority to declare war.  How many conflicts have we been in that weren’t actually declared a war?  So they were pissed because he did it without their permission.  Get over it.  Complicating this further is the fact that we never sent troops into Libya.  The surgical strikes used in the action managed to rid the world of a tyrant without the cost of American soldiers.  Dare I mention – John McCain is even quoted as saying, “I think the administration deserves great credit…Obviously, I had different ideas on the tactical side, but the world is a better place.”

On the other side of the coin, we have the Patriot Act.  This legislation was passed in 2001 and signed into law by President Bush a month and a half after the 9/11 attacks.  Basically, it reduces the requirements necessary for law enforcement to gather intelligence on people in the United States.  Here are some scary provisions:

Ø  A search can be executed without a warrant if an FBI agent provides a National Security Letter – and a gag order is instituted on the ISP’s, banks, credit card companies, and phone companies who must turn over the information!

Ø  Section 215 of the act allows the government to obtain records by simply showing “relevance” to a terrorism of espionage investigation.  Notice that I didn’t say “probable cause” as is defined in the Fourth Amendment.

Ø  “John Doe” roving wiretaps can be issued which do not name a target, place, or facility to be monitored.  (Senator Rand Paul’s Letter of Opposition to the Patriot Act)

So do the people that are so worried about the constitutionality of the PPACA have anything to say?  I see days of uproar over a tax and healthcare issue, but the government can get a blank ticket to spy on anyone they want without a warrant?  However, we’re not hearing about this right now because it was championed by a conservative.  You had better believe that, if Obama had introduced this legislation, we would be hearing about how he was turning the U.S. into a police state where no one would have any freedom. 

This list could go on forever…conservatives want a smaller government, but they want to enforce their religious beliefs on the rest of us, etc.  But I’d like to get this posted so I’ll end with a thought.  One of our greatest founding fathers, George Washington, warned us to “guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism,” in his farewell address.  What would you consider an imposture?  A group pretending to be morally outraged by legislation that they proposed themselves originally?  The same group crying out that we can’t handle the deficits that two of their own administrations ran?  The very same group that claims that the President has been acting unconstitutionally while they have passed a law that defies the people their constitutional rights?  All of this is being done in an effort to convince the people that they are the true patriots of our country.  While we seem to have forgotten most of what Washington warned us about, I implore you to heed his advice. 

Ignorance is Bliss...

Since the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act, I have spent a lot of time debating the issue with some conservatives.  This isn’t another attempt to do that.  This is a discussion of the problems I have with debating these people. 

I have a fairly simple request when I debate people…support your arguments.  It’s not a difficult thing to do if you are using sound, reasoned arguments.  That’s the problem.  While I did have a couple of people actually use sources, the majority of these people just posted the same recycled arguments that they have heard on television, radio, or read on their conservative websites.  After using articles from peer-reviewed journals and trusted sources that included facts and figures, I was met with people who just chose to turn a blind eye.  First, they would try to dispute the validity of the facts and figures.  Unless there is a valid reason to dispute them, such as them coming from an untrustworthy source, they are valid.  For statistics like the population of the United States, the commonly accepted trusted source is the Census Department.  (Yes, I used this and it was questioned.)  Then they would attack the journal articles.  Now, I’m not saying everyone has to agree, but don’t tell me an article from a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal is invalid if you haven’t even read the research and have a real point of opposition.  Because you don’t like the fact that it totally invalidates most of your argument is not justification for the conclusions being valid.  These kinds of articles are the standard for academic discussion.  Finally, in a last, desperate attempt to have an argument, my citations were completely ignored.  I was first told that I didn’t use any, and when I proved it, I was told all of my information was refuted.  Well, that’s pretty impossible since I know that not one person I was debating can refute the Census Department or a journal article for which they only have access to read the abstract. 

Retrieved from http://www.politicalruminations.com/2010/09/cartoon-of-the-week.html

Now, I have some friends who might read this and say, “Wait a minute!  I don’t do that.”  I do have some conservative friends who can give me a very challenging and worthy debate.  I have even lost debates with a couple of them (I’m looking at you, Josh.)  Not because I think my position was wrong, just because I wasn’t prepared enough to provide reasonable responses.  Obviously, this is not directed at those people.  In fact, none of those people even attempted to debate the issue.  (I wonder why?) 

After two days of repeating myself over and over for two days and having people stare at the face of my arguments and ignore reason, I have grown tired.  I usually enjoy these kinds of debates.  I like proving people wrong.  It’s even easy in most cases.  But, when the only response you get is nonsense, it stops being fun.  I have fully embraced the fact that I am truly a full-blooded liberal at heart.  I don’t apologize for it, and I don’t apologize for the fact that I think conservative philosophy is nonsense founded in stupidity.  All I’m asking is, please, for the love of Pete, have at least some standards when you debate me.  While I love stomping on conservative ideas, it’s becoming too easy.  It’s almost not even fun anymore.  Almost.

© Keith Tucker

 

 

 

Healthcare Reform Defined for the Conservative Mind

For all of my conservative friends – here’s a way for you to think about the health care reform without being too upset.



First, just assume that the government just levied a 1% tax on everyone. That’s obviously within their power. Now, you don’t have to like it, but there’s nothing unconstitutional about it.


Next, in an effort to help out Americans, they have given us a way to exempt ourselves from the tax. All you have to do it carry health insurance. Since the majority of Americans either already have insurance, are on Medicare or Medicaid, or are under economic hardship and income thresholds that exempt them, they will be exempt from the tax.


With all of this…we get to insure that healthcare costs remain reasonable for the foreseeable future! It doesn’t look so bad when you see it from this perspective does it? I know…you conservatives can’t approve of anything sensible if it is passed by a liberal. Oh well. You can lead a conservative to affordable healthcare, but you can’t make him think.

Copyright © 2009 Universal Press Syndicate
Retrieved from http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/politicalcartoons/ig/Healthcare-Cartoons/GOP-Hearing-Problem.0_aG.htm

Buzzwords

Earmarks! Conservative! Liberal! Amnesty! Illegals! Taxes! Spending! Obamacare! Jobs! Debt! Job Creators!

Heard enough? Are you ready to walk into the polls and cast your vote for me? No? Why not? Most likely, you will walk into the polls and vote for a candidate this November with little more than a list of buzzwords you heard from their commercials or from some political analyst. I’ve seen a trend in the recent elections that has been disturbing me. Many political ads and commercials have been using buzzwords to entice voters lately. Now I have no problem with the use of buzzwords. I know a little bit about marketing and I know that buzzwords are a part of marketing that is used every day in advertising. This isn’t about the use of buzzwords along with clever marketing…it’s about people voting simply on buzzwords.

Oh, you don’t do that? Well, let’s test that statement. Have you said, “The government can’t just keep spending” anytime recently? Or maybe you’ve talked about how the country is going so far into debt? I doubt that very many can honestly say that they haven’t uttered something along these lines in the last few years. So the next question is, what do you really know about these topics? What is the country’s debt? What was it before the incumbents took office? How does the government spend money? What is the debt ceiling? What does Keynesian economics mean? Does our government practice this? If you can answer these questions accurately, then this post doesn’t apply to you. If not, you may have fallen into the buzzwords trap along with the majority of the country.

Seriously, what do they really tell you when you listen to an analyst or watch a commercial? Let’s take a look at a typical commercial from the recent primaries. This commercial was for Richard Mourdock, a candidate running against 35 year Senator Dick Lugar. This commercial has absolutely nothing to say. There are some checklists though…they have Dick Lugar with the words “Bailouts,” “Tax Hikes,” and “Obama Justices.” Then they have one with Mourdock with the words “Opposes Bailouts,” “Fights Obamacare,” “Balanced Budget,” and “Less Debt.” There is literally no substantial information or justification for voting for this guy except for the fact that he knows how to use buzzwords. Ask yourself…what is his record? What are his qualifications? Don’t know? Maybe because they don’t want to tell you anything if they know they can get the votes by using a few key terms with no real meaning. Here’s the scary thing…he won the primary. A 35-year incumbent lost his seat to buzz words. Now, I’m not saying that I would want Lugar in office. I had a problem with him that had nothing to do with any of the buzzwords. I think that some people had the same problem concerning his residency, which cost him dearly. Regardless…he still lost to a man who campaigned with buzzwords.

This brings me to the use of social hot topics to scare people into voting. While I’m vehemently against political parties (a topic for a later blog), I do recognize that the chances of them going away any time soon is insanely slim to none. Unfortunately, what I have seen many politicians doing lately is using social issues as selling points to scare people away from voting for the other party. Both sides use gay marriage to scare people – immigration has become an issue – and if I hear one more thing about the President’s nationality or religion, I might just snap. First, unless you are gay, why in the hell does it matter to you if marriage between two homosexuals is legally recognized in the U.S.? If you believe marriage is a legal contract, then the government has no right to refuse marriage based on a religious belief. If you believe that it is a religious institution then THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO REGULATE IT BASED ON A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. Here’s the bottom line…it comes up before elections because one side says that if you vote for the other party gays will be able to marry and we’ll all go to hell, turn gay ourselves, or your marriage will mean nothing and your spouse will leave you. This is to scare you into voting how they want you to vote. The other side presents the issue hoping to look like the defenders of the weak riding in on their stallions to defeat the evil oppressors. While I must say that I do support gay marriage, I would really love to see something actually done about the issue so that the political pandering would all just go away.

Immigration – good grief. Everyone is blaming everyone else for the immigration problem. Here’s the fix…build a big ass wall. It will put a crap load of people to work and reduce the amount of illegal immigration. But, wait! Don’t forget that it has to be paid for…so your taxes will have to go up. You can’t have everything you want. To fix this immigration problem the government will have to spend money. Deal with it and stop letting the politicians scare you into thinking that we will lose our sovereignty and become Mexico, Jr. if you don’t vote for them.

The last one that I will briefly address is the nationality and religion of the President. Here’s the thing…stop questioning it. It’s old and boring. The man will not be removed from office. His credentials have been checked, verified, and re-verified so many times that he is probably the most confirmed citizen in United States history. Every court case that has been lost trying to prove he’s not is just adding to the mountain of evidence that there is no justification for this garbage. Oh, and I do believe that this has everything to do with the man’s race. Don’t like being called a racist? Deal with it. If you are still questioning this after this amount of time and all of the evidence that has been put forth, you are doing it for reasons of race. If you say otherwise, you are a liar, sir.

Now his religion. Oh my gosh…he’s a MUSLIM! Well, he’s not…but that’s a great way to scare the hell out of the ignorant rednecks in the U.S. After 9/11, the words Muslim and Islam have almost become profanity. Who gives a crap if the man is a Muslim? Since when did that have any bearing on his Presidency? Oh, I forgot…it’s because bigotry against Muslims is accepted now that a few extremists who called themselves Muslims (which I take issue with) attacked and killed a bunch of Americans. As I have written before…these kinds of views are the most unpatriotic and offensive views that I can imagine coming from citizens of this great country. A few weeks ago, my cousin was interred in Arlington National Cemetery after he was killed in action serving as a Marine. Do me a favor and don’t spit on his grave, the graves of those like him, and the face of those who have served and still serve to protect our freedoms by spreading your hate and fear. This is a nation of acceptance and tolerance. If you are afraid of a Muslim in office then you belong elsewhere. And if you allow this kind of garbage to sway your vote, then you are as bad as those who spew this filth in the first place.

These people think that you are dumb. They think that they can throw a bunch of words with no substance at you and you will run right out and cast your vote for them. The question is: are you going to prove them right? Are you going to vote for buzzwords, or for a representative?