Entries Tagged as ''

Running with healthcare scissors

Can you guarantee Americans access to affordable healthcare without admitting that Hillary Clinton was skewered for trying to do just that?

I think that’s the dime on which will turn Republicans’ - Bush’s in particular - ability to support a new recommendation by an advisory panel to the comptroller general.

Orrin Hatch goes out of his way in the NY Times report to distance this from Hillary, "This is a fresh approach."

I’m going to go out on a limb and place my bet that this recommendation will end up in a fiery grave in something like the eighth circle of Dante’s Hell.

[I haven't read Dante's Inferno...which you can't just call "Inferno", you know... but I'm just liking the idea of a special location for universal healthcare access proposals and the "eighth" sounds like as good a place as any]

whereIstand Tags

the Colombia you don’t know

Most people in America would be afraid to travel to Colombia. Like any destination, you have to be very careful; perhaps you have to be more careful in Colombia than in many other places.

Still, it’s a beautiful country that’s worth a trip. My wife and I recently returned from a month down there. I thought I’d share some of the pictures of things you don’t see every day.

This first picture is from a kite festival. It’s difficult to see in the small, Web version, but there are hundreds of kites in the sky.

kites

This is a church in a small square in the center of a small town on a hill.

This is a plaza in the old part of Bogota.

Guess….

This last one is my favorite. From the other side, the butterfly’s wings say "89" - which is how it’s known locally. Here it looks rather like "98". How did evolution ever get to a number in a circle???

Hope you liked!

whereIstand Tags

when knowing is dangerous

TPM is issuing a call for transparency that I think people of all political persuasions ought to support.

The word is out about a National Intelligence Estimate issued in April that concludes that the threat from terrorism has increased as a result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

TPM points out the pesky speculation that this is being withheld from the public for political purposes - a cover-up. Yippee!

They’re launching a grass-roots effort to pressure Congress into releasing the report. They’re warning that one party’s membership will argue that it’s classified and can’t be released.

This ought to be easy enough to settle. If you argue that it’s so classified that it can’t be released before the elections, you should be asked whether it’s too classified to be released at all. Certainly, there’s enough time to wordsmith a single document in six weeks… so releasing it subsequent to the election would tend to produce a certain…odor….

I proposed an issue for this (registration required) because I thought it would be interesting if we could see where the various ethicists in Congress stand on the publication of this document for voter consideration prior to the elections.

whereIstand Tags

Are the latest “gizmos” getting you down?

Normon Solomon writes on AlterNet about the down sides of technological advances. I tend to share some of his pessimism, but not all of it.

When I read this article, the single word "advances" caught my attention. I think that one way to qualify my position on this issue of the impact on human life is to distinguish between advances and the "settling down" of technologies that have been around some time.

Solomon is here pointing out that there are people "left behind" by computers. Maybe so, but there sure are a lot of poor people that have computers - or access to them.

I don’t think you have to be a "techno-scrooge" in these matters. I think you need to be skeptical. There’s a time when you need more technology. What’s unfortunate is when companies forget about "simplicity"… and that’s of course where the iPod created a revolution.

My biggest challenge in finding a new cell phone has to do with trying to pick one up that doesn’t have the things I don’t want!

But eventually, things become simpler by evolution and cheaper by economic laws. So while the rapidly advancing technologies tend to leave people behind and frustrate many, they eventually leave us with some pretty cool stuff…..

whereIstand Tags

Children today are tyrants…!

Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers.

Socrates

"The more things change the more they stay the same…"

"You know…when I was a boy…."

You get the idea, right? Man is forever ignorantly cognizant of the undeniable truth that whatever he’s talking about is far more [paste favorite adjective here] than things have ever been before!

Years ago I read a biography of Benedict Arnold - by W.S. Randall. To read of the sacrifices that Arnold made for his country - like selling off his own assets to build ships and pay soldiers when Congress balked - and then to read of the attacks on Arnold and the investigations launched against him for political reasons alone… is enough to make somebody painfully aware that politics have always been politics.

Since antiquity, democracy has been a beautiful and highly practical method of organizing people and resources in the aggregate, and a hideously ugly and barbaric accumulation of atrocities "on the ground".

And today - as always before - pundits still insist that things have become intolerably worse and that the end is just around the corner….Is the Internet Good for the Republic?

It’s not like Jesus was the first prophet of doom…. I could easily find you a dramatic quote from each and every decade of each and every century since moveable type that makes the exact same ridiculous and failed threat of impending breakdown or disaster.

And what will the dunces do when faced with the truth of that list? They’ll ignore it. If the fact that the same prediction has failed miserably a million times before could persuade a person that it’s unwise to make that same prediction again, all of these religious wars that have infected civilization would grind to a peaceful halt.

In the era before the Internet, you had gatekeepers who stood between you and any potential audience.

Really? What about all of those anonymous pamphlets and underground newspapers?

Bloggers of the world: RELAX!

What’s happening in politics today is really rather simple - and pretty much what has always happened in politics before.

On one side are the people that want heavy restrictions on the personal freedoms of others. They interpret any behavior that they don’t approve of as an attack against them; an attack against society; an attack against their deity(ies).

On the other side are people that want the freedom to behave as they choose and to engage in any behavior which does not impose anything on somebody that does not consent to it.

The plight of Adam is that his neighbor will not invest his civil participation with religious ideals; that his neighbor will have an abortion; that his neighbor’s kids will learn about sex;  that his neighbor will have a committed relationship with somebody of the same sex.

My plight is that my kids will be indoctrinated with religious beliefs in the public schools; that my wife will be prevented from have an abortion if she had decided upon one; that my son will be imprisoned for engaging in consensual sex; that my kids will have friends that don’t know why it’s a good idea to use condoms.

People like Adam will always find democracy and freedoms of the press to be stifling, harbingers of the end of the world, indicative of man’s descent into the abyss… and all of the other downers he’s been raised on in a lifetime of Sundays.

And we can always expect a person like Adam to resurrect these themes time and again - to return like the dog to his vomit.

whereIstand Tags

Fundies v. Society

I was recently taken to school regarding my Fundamental Misunderstanding of what it means to be a fundamentalist.

The question turns on whether my apprehensions about fundamentalists… or rather my ignorance of the movement. I do confess that I’m hardly an authority on the matter, but when I made my comments noting that I didn’t think Adam was a fundamentalist, I was doing so based on a recent article I read in Foreign Affairs by Walter Russel Mead.

I’ll copy here a few quotes from that article that I thought were informative and perhaps Adam and Oatney can clear up any differences… again, the following are excerpts from the article that I found interesting… with a few of my own comments sprinkled in between.

Where I have cropped out text from the article, it is only to not quote too much from it. I encourage everyone to read the full article as I thought that, while too optimistic, it was very good reading.

Like the Puritans, many fundamentalists hold the bleak view that there is an absolute gap between those few souls God has chosen to redeem and the many he has predestined to end up in hell.

If fundamentalists tend to be pessimistic about the prospects for social reform inside the United States, they are downright hostile to the idea of a world order based on secular morality and on global institutions such as the United Nations. [...] To institutions such as the UN…they apply the words of the prophet Isaiah: "We have made a covenant with death, and with hell we are at agreement."

I want a secular world order. I’m happy to live in a country that separates church from state - regardless of what the Constitution haters that want to integrate religion into government will say or do.

Fundamentalists [...] are committed to an apocalyptic vision of the end of the world and the Last Judgment. As biblical literalists, they believe that the dark prophecies in both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, notably those of the book of Revelation, foretell the great and terrible events that will ring down the curtain on human history. Satan and his human allies will stage a final revolt against God and the elect; believers will undergo terrible persecution, but Christ will put down his enemies and reign over a new heaven and a new earth. This vision is not particularly hospitable to the idea of gradual progress toward a secular utopia driven by technological advances and the cooperation of intelligent people of all religious traditions.

As an "enemy" of Christ, I’d say this idea to which fundamentalists are "committed" is rather aggressive.

Evangelicals [...] agree with fundamentalists that "natural" people — those who have not been "saved" — are unable to do any good works on their own.

Thanks a bunch guys!

…most (although not all) evangelicals share the fundamentalist approach to the end of the world. Virtually all evangelicals believe that the biblical prophecies will be fulfilled, and a majority agree with fundamentalists on the position known as premillennialism: the belief that Christ’s return will precede the establishment of the prophesied thousand-year reign of peace. Ultimately, all human efforts to build a peaceful world will fail.

The emphasis in that last one is mine. Why bother with a republican form of government guys? Sounds like a waste of time.

 U.S. public opinion has long rejected Darwinism, yet even in states such as Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, which have large actively Christian populations, state universities go on teaching astronomy, genetics, geology, and paleontology with no concern for religious cosmology, and the United States continues to support the world’s most successful scientific community. Most evangelicals find nothing odd about this seeming contradiction. Nor do they wish to change it — unlike the fundamentalists. [...] today evangelical America is largely content to let discrepancies between biblical chronology and the fossil record stand unresolved. What evangelicals do not like is what some call "scientism": the attempt to teach evolution or any other subject in such a way as to rule out the possibility of the existence and activity of God.

Emphasis again mine. I did not think of Adam or Oatney as having a particular problem with geology or paleontology and, hence, disassociated them from fundamentalists.

… religious politics in the United States remains a coalition sport — one that a fundamentalist theology, which continues to view Catholicism as an evil cult, is ill equipped to play. To make matters more complicated, fundamentalists themselves are torn between two incompatible political positions: a sullen withdrawal from a damned world and an ambitious attempt to build a new Puritan commonwealth.

I’m not a logician, but it would seem to me that Oatney saying he could qualify as a fundamentalist ignores that fundamentalists think he’s a member of an "evil cult"!!!!

Well… enough of this. I’d like to see our religion editors put up some issues on this site along the lines of "Do fundamentalist Christians believe that Catholicism is an evil cult?"

My intention here was to make the arguments that (1) fundamentalism is in fact dangerous to a secular world, and (2) it appears that basic foundational tenets of fundamentalism are not consistent with the beliefs of certain Christians on whereistand.com.

whereIstand Tags

a chicken in every pot and millions in every bank account

Sometimes it’s difficult to see through to the reality of a situation when too much smoke or dew clouds your vision. Let’s address a few misconceptions then:

1. Social Security is unlike other insurance because it’s mandatory.

Actually, there are many situations where the state has determined that its best interest is served by making insurance mandatory. Medicare is not Social Security and it is deducted, in most cases, by the same process. When you live in Florida, you’re required to buy flood and wind insurance if the state classifies your neighborhood or the height of your home above sea level in a particular manner. Many states also require that you obtain a minimum level of insurance before you can legally drive your car.

Did Oatney buy title insurance when he recently became a homeowner? He may not have been happy about it - though he would subsequently have become happy about it if the happens-to-everybody-but-me scenario where the title turned out to be bad actually were to occur to him….

2. I’m not yet 30, but I’ve decided to retire at 52 and live to be 79 years old.

This gem (a variation of it, anyway) was posted by Adam in comments to Oatney’s post. Adam didn’t say he’d live to be 79… he said he plans to live "a long time" after he turns 52 and retires.

What the "world-revolves-around-me" conservatives will never understand is that you cannot make policy for the masses on the basis of what each conservative thinks of himself. Every conservative in America is capable of taking care of his own. Every conservative in America will save enough on his own to not need Social Security. Every conservative in America will invest in such a way that he earns the average rate of return…sorry… BETTER than the average rate on his investments.

For every thousand Adams retiring at age 52, a number that can be extremely well predicted based on life expectancy rates will just not live to the age of 55 - regardless of what those individuals have written in their little notebook that say "Rush Limbaugh is my hero!" on the cover.

Does Adam know of an annuity that you can take out without specifying the term? There’s only one… it’s called Social Security.

3. People smoke because the government permits cigarettes to be sold. People fornicate because the government doesn’t crack down on it. People don’t invest their money wisely because they know that Uncle Sam is going to protect them.

This is my favorite conservative drivel. I could save a hundred times what Adam thinks will cover him for "a long time", and if my Multiple Sclerosis one day goes from "hardly there" to "wake somebody up to help you out of bed, big boy"… and the government still doesn’t provide healthcare coverage… my money will run out rather quickly. Well, that’ll just go to show that I planned badly. After all, I would have spent the money I intended to use to go to tractor pulls in my dotage on medicines and doctors.

But people have to take personal responsibility. And if you suffer a condition that depletes your savings… say an accident that leaves you unable to work long before you turn 52…. suck it up, Liberal!

If you’re a conservative and you live long enough…and you have ailments… you become a liberal.

4. Social Security should be optional.

People should have the choice to pay into the Social Security system, or pay the same amount into some sort of annuity, fund, or insurance that can grow in value and deal with their long-term needs. The reason that some people think this can never be allowed is that reasonable and responsible people would choose the second option, and we need the government to take care of us, as opposed to taking care of ourselves.

I’m just never going to understand how somebody can even read that back to himself without just looking up and saying, "this is a really stupid thing to say".

All reasonable and responsible people could choose the second option… and there would still be unreasonable and irresponsible people in America… and there would still be reasonable and responsible people that were overtaken by events beyond their control.

It is these people and not the others that REQUIRE a safety net program like Social Security. It’s unfortunate that the "reasonable and responsible" people in America (i.e,. conservatives ) are so unreasonable and irresponsible as to claim that there are no "unreasonable and responsible"…or "unfortunate in spite of their efforts"… people in America.

Once you accept that there are unreasonable and irresponsible people in America - and that you don’t want them to spend their old age begging for table scraps - you realize that America needs a social security program for them… not for you.

whereIstand Tags

…a struggle for freedom and liberty…

Our fearful leader has reminded us once again that the core values all Americans share are still under constant attack from our enemies:

Like the struggles of the last century, today’s war on terror is, above all, a struggle for freedom and liberty. The adversaries are different, but the stakes in this war are the same.

smokey the presidentI only mention this so we don’t forget to keep up our defenses.

Remember: Only you can prevent terrorist attacks on our nation… only you.

Now that you feel sufficiently afraid of the terrorists again, you should turn your attention to the multitudes of likely or future terrorists that are planning what is akin to an assault on our nation’s capital today.

These people are not Americans. They’re not like you or me. They don’t belong here. You don’t want them here. They’re trespassers! I’ll be that most of these people refuse to eat corn flakes at breakfast!

When our President takes time out to tell us that we’re not interpreting events in the way they should properly be interpreted, we should look to get our houses in order. Have you ever used the expression, "America is a nation of immigrants"? Well, those are the old talking points and maybe one day soon when you use that phrase your name will get put on a list somewhere. I’m not saying I know anything, mind you….

We’re not a nation of immigrants anymore. Immigrants are dangerous now. They aren’t here to help themselves - and help us in the process. They’re here to attack our values; they’re here to poison our wells and join terrorist sleeper cells.

It’s a brave new country.

whereIstand Tags