Dear President Obama,
I am writing to ask you specifically to keep your promise. I wholeheartedly agree that a transparent and open government leads to a better society, and that citizens can (and should) contribute to our legislative process.
The issue of our day appears to be health care, and how health care reform should look. A bill will soon come out of the Senate Finance Committee that would appear to save citizens money and reduce the deficit. While I don't like the idea of being forced to have health insurance, and I don't see that the Constitution grants either Congress or the President power over health care, I do believe that additional input and debate would be very helpful to the process.
Let us be candid: those who differ with Democrats - Republicans, some Independents, and other Conservatives - cannot stop the passage of the bill. The Democratic Party at this point in American history can do what it chooses to do because they hold the majority of seats in our elected government. All I can do is ask that you do what you said you would do: maintain that government in an open and transparent manner.
My concern is that the bill out of committee, nicknamed the Baucus Bill, will be heavily amended after committee approval - to the point where what was approved, versus what actually gets voted on in the Senate, are two completely different things. My concern arises from the treatment given to the Stimulus Bill; namely, that an enormous bill which no one could have possibly read before voting on it was passed quickly into law.
Again, I fully acknowledge that you have the power to do what you want to do, and you have been given that power - along with your political party - by the American people, according to proper Constitutional process. To be clear then, here is my request: that the final version of the bill be posted online for a period of at least three (3) weeks prior to a final vote by the House and Senate. I request that any changes from the current draft, which the CBO reviewed, be clearly identified as such in the interest of constructive public dialogue.
Health Care is an enormous and extremely difficult issue that affects every American. I ask simply that this issue be given the careful consideration that it deserves, with proper weight and respect given to the viewpoints of all Americans, regardless of their political or ideological positions.
In addition to voicing my concerns here, I will continue to pray for both you and our lawmakers, as you discuss this important issue. May God grant to each of you His wisdom.
Sincerely,
Charles Baldon, Concerned Citizen
Showing posts with label President Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label President Obama. Show all posts
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
"You Lie!"
I don't consider Joe Wilson a hero, and his comment (yelled during President Obama's speech) was inappropriate. While conservatives might agree with Mr. Wilson and say that Obama was indeed lying, the accuracy of the statement is beside the point. Wilson's behavior was wrong in the timing of his comment, for which he apologized, as he should have done - an apology that the White House accepted.That being said, this report is much more disturbing. The implication here is that any criticism of a Black President made by anything other than a Black citizen or Congressman is racist. Joe Wilson is White, President Obama is Black, and so Joe Wilson must be either racist himself, or he is assisting racists in their cause. It puts any of us who are not Black in the impossible situation of having to prove a negative; that is, that we are not racist when we criticize President Obama's policies.
Questions to consider: what about when Black people criticize a White President? Or a Chinese person criticizing a Black? What about a Black from one country criticizing someone who is Black but from a different country? Am I racist for saying 'Black' instead of 'African American?' Why is someone not racist for calling me 'White' instead of Scottish American?
There are no end to the questions, and really no answers to be had either, outside of Christ. We (as Christians) can say that judgment on the basis of color is wrong, because we are all of us created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27). We can further warn those who would judge the heart that this is not the realm of mankind (1 Samuel 16:7, Revelation 2:23). In other words, we can say that Joe Wilson is wrong, because he broke the rules of Congress. We cannot call Joe Wilson racist because we don't know the workings of his heart. Were we to witness a series of events in addition to this one, then we could begin to see a pattern of behavior that could be accurately labeled (James 2). But instead we see proponents of an ideology - in this specific case, liberals - painting both Joe Wilson and many of the protesters that were in Washington over the holiday weekend with the same broad brush of 'racist.' They are acting in the exact way they accuse Joe Wilson and others of acting, which is a sin (again, James 2).
Let none of us do this ourselves - either in response to this story, or in life. Loving our neighbors and teaching them Truth in gentleness and patience will lead them to Christ (2 Timothy 2:24-26). Hurling insults and labels back and forth - however accurate we think they are - does nothing to advance His Kingdom.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Let the Little Children Come Unto Me
Here is the text of President Obama's speech today, as released beforehand to the AP. This was broadcast in many public schools directly to the students: (makes for a long post, my comments at the end)Hello, everyone — how's everybody doing today? I'm here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we've got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through 12th grade. I'm glad you all could join us today.
I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it's your first day in a new school, so it's understandable if you're a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you're in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could've stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.
I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn't have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday — at 4:30 in the morning.
Now I wasn't too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I'd fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I'd complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, "This is no picnic for me either, buster."
So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I'm here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I'm here because I want to talk with you about your education and what's expected of all of you in this new school year.
Now I've given a lot of speeches about education. And I've talked a lot about responsibility.
I've talked about your teachers' responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.
I've talked about your parents' responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don't spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.
I've talked a lot about your government's responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren't working where students aren't getting the opportunities they deserve.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that's what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you're good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That's the opportunity an education can provide.
Maybe you could be a good writer — maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper — but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor — maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine — but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a senator or a Supreme Court justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.
And no matter what you want to do with your life — I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You're going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can't drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You've got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.
And this isn't just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you're learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.
You'll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You'll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You'll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.
We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don't do that — if you quit on school — you're not just quitting on yourself, you're quitting on your country.
Now I know it's not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.
I get it. I know what that's like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn't always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn't fit in.
So I wasn't always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I'm not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.
But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our first lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn't have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.
Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don't have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there's not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don't feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren't right.
But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life — what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home — that's no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That's no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That's no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn't have to determine where you'll end up. No one's written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
That's what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.
Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn't speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.
I'm thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who's fought brain cancer since he was three. He's endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer — hundreds of extra hours — to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he's headed to college this fall.
And then there's Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she's on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.
Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren't any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same. That's why today, I'm calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education — and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you'll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you'll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you'll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you'll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don't feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.
Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work — that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you're not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won't love every subject you study. You won't click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won't necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That's OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who've had the most failures. J.K. Rowling's first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
These people succeeded because they understand that you can't let your failures define you — you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn't mean you're a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn't mean you're stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
No one's born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You're not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don't hit every note the first time you sing a song. You've got to practice. It's the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it's good enough to hand in.
Don't be afraid to ask questions. Don't be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don't know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust — a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor — and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.
And even when you're struggling, even when you're discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you — don't ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.
The story of America isn't about people who quit when things got tough. It's about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best. It's the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.
So today, I want to ask you, what's your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?
Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I'm working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you've got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don't let us down — don't let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it's your first day in a new school, so it's understandable if you're a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you're in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could've stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.
I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn't have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday — at 4:30 in the morning.
Now I wasn't too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I'd fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I'd complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, "This is no picnic for me either, buster."
So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I'm here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I'm here because I want to talk with you about your education and what's expected of all of you in this new school year.
Now I've given a lot of speeches about education. And I've talked a lot about responsibility.
I've talked about your teachers' responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.
I've talked about your parents' responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don't spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.
I've talked a lot about your government's responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren't working where students aren't getting the opportunities they deserve.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that's what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you're good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That's the opportunity an education can provide.
Maybe you could be a good writer — maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper — but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor — maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine — but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a senator or a Supreme Court justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.
And no matter what you want to do with your life — I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You're going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can't drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You've got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.
And this isn't just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you're learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.
You'll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You'll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You'll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.
We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don't do that — if you quit on school — you're not just quitting on yourself, you're quitting on your country.
Now I know it's not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.
I get it. I know what that's like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn't always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn't fit in.
So I wasn't always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I'm not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.
But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our first lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn't have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.
Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don't have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there's not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don't feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren't right.
But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life — what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home — that's no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That's no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That's no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn't have to determine where you'll end up. No one's written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
That's what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.
Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn't speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.
I'm thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who's fought brain cancer since he was three. He's endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer — hundreds of extra hours — to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he's headed to college this fall.
And then there's Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she's on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.
Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren't any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same. That's why today, I'm calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education — and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you'll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you'll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you'll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you'll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don't feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.
Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work — that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you're not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won't love every subject you study. You won't click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won't necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That's OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who've had the most failures. J.K. Rowling's first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
These people succeeded because they understand that you can't let your failures define you — you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn't mean you're a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn't mean you're stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
No one's born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You're not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don't hit every note the first time you sing a song. You've got to practice. It's the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it's good enough to hand in.
Don't be afraid to ask questions. Don't be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn't a sign of weakness, it's a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don't know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust — a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor — and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.
And even when you're struggling, even when you're discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you — don't ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.
The story of America isn't about people who quit when things got tough. It's about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best. It's the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.
So today, I want to ask you, what's your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?
Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I'm working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you've got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don't let us down — don't let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
Having read the speech, I like the text. Hear me clearly: I see a problem with the government educating all our children, but I don't see an enormous difference between our government's philosophy taught on a daily basis, and having the actual President come and speak to children.
The issue here is greater than the content of one speech, and it speaks to the heart of education: whose responsibility is it to educate your children? And many of us, having turned that responsibility over to our government on a daily basis, are now upset over the direction of that education (at least in this one instance). I would encourage Christians to research what your kids are being taught everyday, not just during one speech.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Of Presidents and Paperwork
President Obama has been in office since January 20, when he was sworn in. Today being August 25, he has been in office for 217 days, or about 7 months. In that time we have seen a Stimulus Bill (1100 pages), Cap and Trade (1200 pages) and Health Care Reform (1000 pages). Notwithstanding the billions of dollars being spent in these programs, who has the time to write all this out? Where are all of these coming from?3300 pages means that we have 15 pages of proposed legislation from this administration per day in office (assuming no vacations or weekends were taken off). Per business day in office, it jumps up to 22 pages/day. Pick your favorite author - who would be able to churn out the equivalent of 2 Bibles worth of text in 7 months?
This gives me pause. Where is all this truly coming from?
Monday, August 10, 2009
Health Care and... Philosophy?
In an earlier post I discussed how "political" discussions are rarely truly political anymore, but instead are often a question of worldview. A good discussion on health care reform in America really needs to begin with the philosophy behind the health care. When we say "affordable health care for everyone" or that "no one should be denied coverage," what do we really mean?
As Christians we need to start these conversations at the beginning. Any good dialogue on health care needs to include a talk about the philosophy of those in charge of the decision-making process. Our government (Republican and Democrat alike) has bought the theory of Darwinian Evolution as fact; even President Bush, in an interview just before leaving office, scoffed at the notion of the Bible as literal Truth. Having accepted Evolution, Deism (belief in an uninvolved, irrelevant God) gave way to widespread Scientific Materialism (belief that this physical, material world is all there is, and it exists as the result of random processes over billions of years) and Postmodernism (Truth does not exist, and all philosophies are equally worthy or worthless).
But accepting this theory has significant consequences for us, the governed, as we will soon find out under President Obama's proposed health care plan. Consider the points of this philosophy:
There is no God, no Creator.
There is nothing beyond death - we cease to exist; no Heaven, no Hell.
There is no ultimate purpose or meaning to life, we are free to do whatever we'd like.
There is no absolute, objective basis for morality or ethics - whatever we choose to do, it must be considered as "natural" because the natural world is all that exists.
What would a society look like, operating according to this worldview? There being no God, I would not expect any mention of Him from our government, and government schools would not teach anything about Him to children.
There being no Heaven and no Hell, we would have to do our best to have a great time before we die, so our entire focus should be devoted to our happiness. I would consider myself entitled to the best life has to offer; I only get one trip through this buffet line, so why should I care about anyone else's experience?
With no higher purpose beyond my own happiness, I would do what I want to do. Sex? Drugs? Stealing? Adultery? What good is virtue that won't add one moment to my existence, since my existence is only guaranteed in the here and now?
Since nothing absolute exists (note the irony), I have no basis for telling anyone that anything is wrong. Might then makes right, be that 50% + 1 vote or a dictatorship. Those in charge are free to make the rules, because they are not accountable to any standard other than ones they create and agree to. And if they don't like the standards they create, why not make more?
Bringing the question back to health care:
Even if abortion kills a human being, why does that matter? That baby would have stopped me from having my best life now. If we know the baby is going to have a birth defect, why not kill it and be done, instead of spending a lot of money keeping an unproductive citizen alive? Why would we continue medical treatment for the elderly, or the terminall ill? These have nothing left to offer the rest of us. They are just sucking up resources that could be better spent helping younger people with a higher "quality of life." And who gets to draw the line in the sand, and decide who lives and who dies?
This is the terrifying road that the worldview of our government is leading us down. If there is nothing beyond the material world, there is no accountability for a government other than to its citizens. And they can be bribed, intimidated or coerced into accepting almost anything - human history is clear on this.
Our Founding Fathers wanted a limited government, with the bare minimum of centralized power possible to have the country function. The Bill of Rights itself protects the average citizen from the intrusions of government into civil life. They were wise to do this, for they recognized the tendencies of government since the beginning of time. Philosophy does matter, and not just to old men on university campuses. We are all about to get an enormous lesson in why it truly matters, and that lesson may just be the very literal death of some of us.
As Christians we need to start these conversations at the beginning. Any good dialogue on health care needs to include a talk about the philosophy of those in charge of the decision-making process. Our government (Republican and Democrat alike) has bought the theory of Darwinian Evolution as fact; even President Bush, in an interview just before leaving office, scoffed at the notion of the Bible as literal Truth. Having accepted Evolution, Deism (belief in an uninvolved, irrelevant God) gave way to widespread Scientific Materialism (belief that this physical, material world is all there is, and it exists as the result of random processes over billions of years) and Postmodernism (Truth does not exist, and all philosophies are equally worthy or worthless).
But accepting this theory has significant consequences for us, the governed, as we will soon find out under President Obama's proposed health care plan. Consider the points of this philosophy:
There is no God, no Creator.
There is nothing beyond death - we cease to exist; no Heaven, no Hell.
There is no ultimate purpose or meaning to life, we are free to do whatever we'd like.
There is no absolute, objective basis for morality or ethics - whatever we choose to do, it must be considered as "natural" because the natural world is all that exists.
What would a society look like, operating according to this worldview? There being no God, I would not expect any mention of Him from our government, and government schools would not teach anything about Him to children.
There being no Heaven and no Hell, we would have to do our best to have a great time before we die, so our entire focus should be devoted to our happiness. I would consider myself entitled to the best life has to offer; I only get one trip through this buffet line, so why should I care about anyone else's experience?
With no higher purpose beyond my own happiness, I would do what I want to do. Sex? Drugs? Stealing? Adultery? What good is virtue that won't add one moment to my existence, since my existence is only guaranteed in the here and now?
Since nothing absolute exists (note the irony), I have no basis for telling anyone that anything is wrong. Might then makes right, be that 50% + 1 vote or a dictatorship. Those in charge are free to make the rules, because they are not accountable to any standard other than ones they create and agree to. And if they don't like the standards they create, why not make more?
Bringing the question back to health care:
Even if abortion kills a human being, why does that matter? That baby would have stopped me from having my best life now. If we know the baby is going to have a birth defect, why not kill it and be done, instead of spending a lot of money keeping an unproductive citizen alive? Why would we continue medical treatment for the elderly, or the terminall ill? These have nothing left to offer the rest of us. They are just sucking up resources that could be better spent helping younger people with a higher "quality of life." And who gets to draw the line in the sand, and decide who lives and who dies?
This is the terrifying road that the worldview of our government is leading us down. If there is nothing beyond the material world, there is no accountability for a government other than to its citizens. And they can be bribed, intimidated or coerced into accepting almost anything - human history is clear on this.
Our Founding Fathers wanted a limited government, with the bare minimum of centralized power possible to have the country function. The Bill of Rights itself protects the average citizen from the intrusions of government into civil life. They were wise to do this, for they recognized the tendencies of government since the beginning of time. Philosophy does matter, and not just to old men on university campuses. We are all about to get an enormous lesson in why it truly matters, and that lesson may just be the very literal death of some of us.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
The White House Wants YOU!
Or at least, they want to know about you. Are you daring to exercise your right to free speech, and have you been criticizing the health care bill proposed by President Obama?
How dare you, sir! The White House wants your fellow citizens to report you to them, so they'll be able to take care of the "misinformation" you are spreading. Does this sound too 1984 for you?
Check out this link to the White House's official blog:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/
We have discussed many of the problems with government run health care right here on this blog. Feel free to call the White House, I'm right here and I'm not hiding. First they called me a domestic terrorist for being pro-life and for actually reading the Constitution. Now they want to stop me from telling the truth about the health care bill.
I encouraged you to read the bill for yourself, and make up your own mind! (<- dangerous misinformation)
I pointed out in the past that the government has a less-than-stellar record of running businesses successfully! (<- dangerous misinformation)
You probably thought it was extreme to compare modern day America to 1930s Germany. Now do you begin to see it? But I'm sure they mean no harm, they probably just want to re-educate me...
How dare you, sir! The White House wants your fellow citizens to report you to them, so they'll be able to take care of the "misinformation" you are spreading. Does this sound too 1984 for you?
Check out this link to the White House's official blog:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/
We have discussed many of the problems with government run health care right here on this blog. Feel free to call the White House, I'm right here and I'm not hiding. First they called me a domestic terrorist for being pro-life and for actually reading the Constitution. Now they want to stop me from telling the truth about the health care bill.
I encouraged you to read the bill for yourself, and make up your own mind! (<- dangerous misinformation)
I pointed out in the past that the government has a less-than-stellar record of running businesses successfully! (<- dangerous misinformation)
You probably thought it was extreme to compare modern day America to 1930s Germany. Now do you begin to see it? But I'm sure they mean no harm, they probably just want to re-educate me...
Thursday, July 30, 2009
When Republicans Accept the Lie (Letter from John McCain)
Below you'll read the form letter that my wife received from John McCain's office, after she emailed him about health care reform. Senator McCain has bought the first lie, which is that something has to be done. This has been President Obama's success, even if this current health care bill fails; he has changed the conversation fundamentally. "Fixing" health care is not what our government was designed to do. This is something best left to consumers and the free market, not government. On top of this principle, we have the evidence - look anywhere in the world, and you won't find this idea (government run health care) succeeding anywhere. Australia, France, Britain, Canada... it never works.
But now even the Republicans believe that something has to be done, that there has to be a government solution. And that is the most dangerous thing here; once you've accepted the general principle that government is the solution to the problem, we (conservatives) have lost. Once the government is in charge of health care, it will be a runaway train as government programs always are; lack of accountability goes hand in hand with corruption and waste. This should not surprise us, it is a truth as old as government itself. Have you stopped recently to consider the Bill of Rights? Interesting, isn't it, that the Founding Fathers saw fit to pass 10 amendments that effectively limit what government can do both to and for you. There is deep truth here, if we can but see it.
My questions for Christians are these: can God not care for you? How did Christians cope with illness and death for nearly 2000 years before our current health care system? At what point do insurance and government become the gods we truly serve?
July 30, 2009
Dear Mrs. Baldon:
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts and concerns regarding health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Our nation's health care system affects every aspect of American life and every component of our nation's economy, accounting for approximately a sixth of our nation's Gross Domestic Product. Also, as you are likely aware, health care spending has risen dramatically in recent years, far outpacing inflation, leaving countless families with difficult decisions about providing care for loved ones. Even Medicare, the vital safety net program for 45 million seniors and disabled individuals, is facing fiscal insolvency and higher out of pocket costs for beneficiaries.
This is simply unsustainable. Health care costs are rising and, if left unaddressed, will undermine Medicare and private insurance. Private insurance currently covers about two-thirds of all Americans and if these programs are undermined or eliminated, it could potentially add to the 48 million Americans currently without any form of health insurance. While the prospects of health care reform are daunting, it must be done, but done right, and in a truly bipartisan fashion.
I believe that there are four pillars that should help guide reform: affordability, portability, access, and quality. No one piece is more important than another, but taken together, I believe that we can create a health care system that can provide affordable, quality health care coverage for all Americans.
Our reform efforts should create a system that enables people to access affordable health coverage that includes high quality health care. Americans want to be able to choose their doctors, coverage, and care, and to have the freedom to seek employment that is not dependent on whether or not insurance coverage is provided. I believe that we can reform the current system to achieve this goal without turning to a government-run plan which would lead to rationed care, creating delays in treatment and eliminating consumer choice.
An increasing amount of our health care dollars and resources are directed towards treating chronic conditions such as heart disease and obesity. Therefore, any new reform must also encourage prevention initiatives that work. Medicare and Medicaid payment systems must also be reformed to promote prevention.
In addition to improving medical care and reducing costs, I believe our health care system should use health information technology to improve efficiency and quality in health care, and that we should find ways to reduce the number of medical malpractice lawsuits, which drive up the cost of health care and make coverage more expensive.
During the recent mark-up of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee's health reform bill, I supported an amendment which would prevent health care providers from being required to participate in abortions if doing so would violate their personal moral and ethical convictions. As you may know, I have consistently opposed measures which encourage or lead to more abortions, including the use of any federal funding for abortions.
I was also a strong proponent of an amendment that would have required Members of Congress to participate in the proposed public health plan if one is enacted into law. If the health care reform legislation that is being considered becomes law, it would force millions of people to give up their current forms of health care coverage and participate in the government run program. I believe that Members of Congress cannot expect these individuals to participate in this new public program if they are not willing to enroll themselves and their families in the same program.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2009, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved the Affordable Health Choices Act on a party line vote of 13-10. I voted against the legislation because it does little to actually lower health care costs and still leaves 34 million people uninsured. The actual final cost of this legislation to our country and its taxpayers is still undetermined, but the Congressional Budget Office has stated that the bill substantially expands federal responsibility for health care costs without addressing the critical changes necessary to reduce the anticipated federal health spending. While I understand the need for reform and will continue to support meaningful measures that will lower costs, improve access to quality health care and expand coverage, I cannot support this bill in its current form because it spends too much, taxes too much, leaves too many people uninsured and does nothing to drive down health care costs.
Again, thank you for sharing your views on this important issue. Please be assured that I will continue to keep them in mind as Congress considers legislation to reform our nation's health care system. Feel free to contact me on this or any other matter.
Sincerely,
John McCain
United States Senator
JM/dmm
But now even the Republicans believe that something has to be done, that there has to be a government solution. And that is the most dangerous thing here; once you've accepted the general principle that government is the solution to the problem, we (conservatives) have lost. Once the government is in charge of health care, it will be a runaway train as government programs always are; lack of accountability goes hand in hand with corruption and waste. This should not surprise us, it is a truth as old as government itself. Have you stopped recently to consider the Bill of Rights? Interesting, isn't it, that the Founding Fathers saw fit to pass 10 amendments that effectively limit what government can do both to and for you. There is deep truth here, if we can but see it.
My questions for Christians are these: can God not care for you? How did Christians cope with illness and death for nearly 2000 years before our current health care system? At what point do insurance and government become the gods we truly serve?
July 30, 2009
Dear Mrs. Baldon:
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts and concerns regarding health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Our nation's health care system affects every aspect of American life and every component of our nation's economy, accounting for approximately a sixth of our nation's Gross Domestic Product. Also, as you are likely aware, health care spending has risen dramatically in recent years, far outpacing inflation, leaving countless families with difficult decisions about providing care for loved ones. Even Medicare, the vital safety net program for 45 million seniors and disabled individuals, is facing fiscal insolvency and higher out of pocket costs for beneficiaries.
This is simply unsustainable. Health care costs are rising and, if left unaddressed, will undermine Medicare and private insurance. Private insurance currently covers about two-thirds of all Americans and if these programs are undermined or eliminated, it could potentially add to the 48 million Americans currently without any form of health insurance. While the prospects of health care reform are daunting, it must be done, but done right, and in a truly bipartisan fashion.
I believe that there are four pillars that should help guide reform: affordability, portability, access, and quality. No one piece is more important than another, but taken together, I believe that we can create a health care system that can provide affordable, quality health care coverage for all Americans.
Our reform efforts should create a system that enables people to access affordable health coverage that includes high quality health care. Americans want to be able to choose their doctors, coverage, and care, and to have the freedom to seek employment that is not dependent on whether or not insurance coverage is provided. I believe that we can reform the current system to achieve this goal without turning to a government-run plan which would lead to rationed care, creating delays in treatment and eliminating consumer choice.
An increasing amount of our health care dollars and resources are directed towards treating chronic conditions such as heart disease and obesity. Therefore, any new reform must also encourage prevention initiatives that work. Medicare and Medicaid payment systems must also be reformed to promote prevention.
In addition to improving medical care and reducing costs, I believe our health care system should use health information technology to improve efficiency and quality in health care, and that we should find ways to reduce the number of medical malpractice lawsuits, which drive up the cost of health care and make coverage more expensive.
During the recent mark-up of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee's health reform bill, I supported an amendment which would prevent health care providers from being required to participate in abortions if doing so would violate their personal moral and ethical convictions. As you may know, I have consistently opposed measures which encourage or lead to more abortions, including the use of any federal funding for abortions.
I was also a strong proponent of an amendment that would have required Members of Congress to participate in the proposed public health plan if one is enacted into law. If the health care reform legislation that is being considered becomes law, it would force millions of people to give up their current forms of health care coverage and participate in the government run program. I believe that Members of Congress cannot expect these individuals to participate in this new public program if they are not willing to enroll themselves and their families in the same program.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2009, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved the Affordable Health Choices Act on a party line vote of 13-10. I voted against the legislation because it does little to actually lower health care costs and still leaves 34 million people uninsured. The actual final cost of this legislation to our country and its taxpayers is still undetermined, but the Congressional Budget Office has stated that the bill substantially expands federal responsibility for health care costs without addressing the critical changes necessary to reduce the anticipated federal health spending. While I understand the need for reform and will continue to support meaningful measures that will lower costs, improve access to quality health care and expand coverage, I cannot support this bill in its current form because it spends too much, taxes too much, leaves too many people uninsured and does nothing to drive down health care costs.
Again, thank you for sharing your views on this important issue. Please be assured that I will continue to keep them in mind as Congress considers legislation to reform our nation's health care system. Feel free to contact me on this or any other matter.
Sincerely,
John McCain
United States Senator
JM/dmm
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
The War for the Unborn: International Update
Austin Ruse from C-Fam's Friday Fax shared a great interview about the international abortion fight, which you can read here (5 minutes or so):
http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1328/pub_detail.asp
Coerced abortions, like those described in the interview, are government mandated in China and mandated via blackmail in other places from the UN, itself. President Obama did commit to reducing the number of abortions, while keeping them legal. So far his policies have expanded abortion availability and international funding; as Rocco Buttiglione says, I hope the President does what he committed to doing.
In the links section of my blog, you'll find the "Friday Fax" link - this will get you signed up for the weekly email and you can stay up-to-date on international abortion developments.
http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1328/pub_detail.asp
Coerced abortions, like those described in the interview, are government mandated in China and mandated via blackmail in other places from the UN, itself. President Obama did commit to reducing the number of abortions, while keeping them legal. So far his policies have expanded abortion availability and international funding; as Rocco Buttiglione says, I hope the President does what he committed to doing.
In the links section of my blog, you'll find the "Friday Fax" link - this will get you signed up for the weekly email and you can stay up-to-date on international abortion developments.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Sotomayor Confirmed in Committee, 13-6
Judge Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court was voted on by committee today, with the vote being 13-6 in favor of sending her nomination to the Senate floor. She is expected to be easily confirmed, due to the Democratic majority of 60 seats. The vote was along party lines, except that Graham (R-SC) sided with the Democrats and voted in favor of Sotomayor's nomination.
Any strict Constitutionalist has major problems with Sotomayor, outside of her comments about race and policy-making from the judical bench. She has had 10 cases be reviewed by the Supreme Court, 8 of which have been overturned - including the recent, famous "firefighter case" where she ruled that a city is justified to throw out test results for promotions if too few minorities pass the test. She believes that being a Hispanic woman with a rich life experience makes her a good judge; I believe a wise person with a Biblical worldview and a humble heart makes a wise judge.
I would prefer a judge who strictly upheld the law and the Constitution, according to the intents and thoughts of the Framers, which is why I am opposed to her nomination. This is yet another reason that Presidential elections are so critical; Supreme Court Justices are appointed, not elected, and they serve for life (or until they choose to retire). This decision will affect laws in our country for decades to come.
Any strict Constitutionalist has major problems with Sotomayor, outside of her comments about race and policy-making from the judical bench. She has had 10 cases be reviewed by the Supreme Court, 8 of which have been overturned - including the recent, famous "firefighter case" where she ruled that a city is justified to throw out test results for promotions if too few minorities pass the test. She believes that being a Hispanic woman with a rich life experience makes her a good judge; I believe a wise person with a Biblical worldview and a humble heart makes a wise judge.
I would prefer a judge who strictly upheld the law and the Constitution, according to the intents and thoughts of the Framers, which is why I am opposed to her nomination. This is yet another reason that Presidential elections are so critical; Supreme Court Justices are appointed, not elected, and they serve for life (or until they choose to retire). This decision will affect laws in our country for decades to come.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Health Care Bill Criticized... by CNN?
I almost fell out of my chair this morning; the unthinkable happened. A liberal media outlet let loose on President Obama's health care proposal with both barrels, asking some very good questions and pointing out just what we all stand to lose if this bill passes.
Take a look at the article:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/health_care_reform_obama.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009072410
This type of thinking showing up here, combined with President Obama's falling poll numbers (he is less popular at this point of his Presidency than George W. Bush was; that has to sting) leads me to believe there is hope to stop this. Again, I urge you to make sure your representatives are representing you - find the link on the left and call their offices to see where they stand and give them your opinion. They do work for you, after all.
Take a look at the article:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/health_care_reform_obama.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009072410
This type of thinking showing up here, combined with President Obama's falling poll numbers (he is less popular at this point of his Presidency than George W. Bush was; that has to sting) leads me to believe there is hope to stop this. Again, I urge you to make sure your representatives are representing you - find the link on the left and call their offices to see where they stand and give them your opinion. They do work for you, after all.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Free Our Healthcare Now
Please click on the title link and sign the petition - it will take about 2 minutes of your time, and we need the weight of many, many signatures. It is looking more and more like some version of "health care reform" is going to be passed; the Democrats have the votes and this is the President's defining moment.
Please consider the implications for yourself, your family, and your country; take 2 minutes and sign today.
Please consider the implications for yourself, your family, and your country; take 2 minutes and sign today.
Monday, July 20, 2009
2 Thoughts Today...
President Obama, champion of public schools and the NEA, who has sworn to make strong public schools a priority... sends his kids to private school.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/21/AR2008112103248.html)
President Obama, along with every member of the House and Senate, will soon be considering how to overhaul health care in America. Unfortunately, even the conservatives believe that something has to be done (read: government money needs to be spent). But... all government officials have their own separate plan, which will remain separate under every single one of the programs being advanced by either side, so the plans they think "will be perfect for the nation!" are not good enough for they themselves to use.
(http://www.opm.gov/insure/index.aspx)
I believe a wise man once said that actions speak louder than words?
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/21/AR2008112103248.html)
President Obama, along with every member of the House and Senate, will soon be considering how to overhaul health care in America. Unfortunately, even the conservatives believe that something has to be done (read: government money needs to be spent). But... all government officials have their own separate plan, which will remain separate under every single one of the programs being advanced by either side, so the plans they think "will be perfect for the nation!" are not good enough for they themselves to use.
(http://www.opm.gov/insure/index.aspx)
I believe a wise man once said that actions speak louder than words?
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Healthcare, President Obama & ABC
This story is a big deal to me on 2 levels, and I'll try to be brief in discussing both.
First, the obvious: I don't want the government running health care. Here is my argument:
1) The government has no experience running a successful business - in fact, their record runs in quite the opposite direction. In our current 'economic crisis' they have managed to lose billions of dollars from the stimulus bills and TARP money. Yes, you read that right. They can't account for billions of dollars. But take any government program - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, Chrysler, the USPS... show me a single profitable entity, or even costs being controlled to the 'break even' point, or even just money not being mishandled and wasted... this is me, not holding my breath.
2) President Obama will come out Wednesday night and say some variation of "Hey, if you like your health care, keep it! We just want something for the little guy, something for the guy who can't afford the stuff you have." And that sounds wonderful, but someone has to pay for it. And someone has to administer it. And consider the effect on the free market, once the government jumps in with a subsidized cheaper alternative which has the perception of being free. Any sane employer will drop or reduce their coverages, knowing that their employees can go this other route. I don't blame the employers one bit for doing this, as they are trying to make a living themselves, and turn a profit (which, by the way, is not a moral evil). But where, then, does the average American end up? With a socialist health care system that does not work (see Canada, the UK, etc). Are we willing to gamble trillions of our collective tax dollars that the government here can succeed where others failed, when the people running the program will have no financial interest in whether or not it is run effectively (i.e., profitably)?
3) You don't have to be trapped in this current system. There is a better way, but it requires a change in your mindset. In the history of the world, health care has never been like it has been over the last 50-60 years. Consider this alternative: charlesfreedom.blogspot.com/2009/05/health-care-reform-as-god-intended.html
On the 2nd level is ABC bending over backward to further the aims of the President with his domestic policy. Here is the danger:
1) The media has striven to set themselves up as the source of objectivity within American culture. Constantly and subtly they remind us that they report the news, somehow placing themselves above questions of worldview, politics and religion. They are gatekeepers of information, they believe, and they further believe they present this information in an unbiased fashion. Sadly, many Americans have bought this lie completely, but that does give the media a certain power - and with that power, a responsibility to use it wisely.
2) When the media (in this case, ABC) does the type of programming that is happening Wednesday night, they are using their alleged objectivity to fundamentally alter the argument. From Wednesday forward, the argument will become not "should the government be involved in health care?" but instead "what should the government do about health care?" As in the 'economic crisis' of the last few months, inaction will no longer be an option, with any action - however ill-conceived - being preferable to the people.
3) ABC is also holding up President Obama in such a way as to transfer their 'objectivity' to him, in the minds of the people. President Obama then goes from one side of the argument, to the referee of the entire argument. He no longer represents just one viewpoint among many, but strength is lent to his words by association.
4) ABC was approached about commercial time by those who disagree with President Obama's plan. Their offers to buy ad time were rejected, due to the content of their ad (which would have been critical to the Obama plan). Read the story yourself, here: www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49720 What is funny to me is that they "have never allowed advocacy advertising" but here they are, giving an entire program over to advocacy.
And so you may well disagree with me on President Obama's plan, you may think that it is a great idea. I would encourage you to research it for yourself, and look at the results of similar plans in other countries. Like I stated above, the government running a business = disaster. The government running a business + making life & death decisions for its citizens = disaster, squared.
First, the obvious: I don't want the government running health care. Here is my argument:
1) The government has no experience running a successful business - in fact, their record runs in quite the opposite direction. In our current 'economic crisis' they have managed to lose billions of dollars from the stimulus bills and TARP money. Yes, you read that right. They can't account for billions of dollars. But take any government program - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM, Chrysler, the USPS... show me a single profitable entity, or even costs being controlled to the 'break even' point, or even just money not being mishandled and wasted... this is me, not holding my breath.
2) President Obama will come out Wednesday night and say some variation of "Hey, if you like your health care, keep it! We just want something for the little guy, something for the guy who can't afford the stuff you have." And that sounds wonderful, but someone has to pay for it. And someone has to administer it. And consider the effect on the free market, once the government jumps in with a subsidized cheaper alternative which has the perception of being free. Any sane employer will drop or reduce their coverages, knowing that their employees can go this other route. I don't blame the employers one bit for doing this, as they are trying to make a living themselves, and turn a profit (which, by the way, is not a moral evil). But where, then, does the average American end up? With a socialist health care system that does not work (see Canada, the UK, etc). Are we willing to gamble trillions of our collective tax dollars that the government here can succeed where others failed, when the people running the program will have no financial interest in whether or not it is run effectively (i.e., profitably)?
3) You don't have to be trapped in this current system. There is a better way, but it requires a change in your mindset. In the history of the world, health care has never been like it has been over the last 50-60 years. Consider this alternative: charlesfreedom.blogspot.com/2009/05/health-care-reform-as-god-intended.html
On the 2nd level is ABC bending over backward to further the aims of the President with his domestic policy. Here is the danger:
1) The media has striven to set themselves up as the source of objectivity within American culture. Constantly and subtly they remind us that they report the news, somehow placing themselves above questions of worldview, politics and religion. They are gatekeepers of information, they believe, and they further believe they present this information in an unbiased fashion. Sadly, many Americans have bought this lie completely, but that does give the media a certain power - and with that power, a responsibility to use it wisely.
2) When the media (in this case, ABC) does the type of programming that is happening Wednesday night, they are using their alleged objectivity to fundamentally alter the argument. From Wednesday forward, the argument will become not "should the government be involved in health care?" but instead "what should the government do about health care?" As in the 'economic crisis' of the last few months, inaction will no longer be an option, with any action - however ill-conceived - being preferable to the people.
3) ABC is also holding up President Obama in such a way as to transfer their 'objectivity' to him, in the minds of the people. President Obama then goes from one side of the argument, to the referee of the entire argument. He no longer represents just one viewpoint among many, but strength is lent to his words by association.
4) ABC was approached about commercial time by those who disagree with President Obama's plan. Their offers to buy ad time were rejected, due to the content of their ad (which would have been critical to the Obama plan). Read the story yourself, here: www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49720 What is funny to me is that they "have never allowed advocacy advertising" but here they are, giving an entire program over to advocacy.
And so you may well disagree with me on President Obama's plan, you may think that it is a great idea. I would encourage you to research it for yourself, and look at the results of similar plans in other countries. Like I stated above, the government running a business = disaster. The government running a business + making life & death decisions for its citizens = disaster, squared.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
The End of an Age
The Change has begun to happen so fast, it's hard for a part-time blogger to keep up with. Everyday brings news of changes, and not just superficial changes in policy. These are deep-rooted changes in governing philosophy, designed with permanence in mind. Huge spending bills, government take over of banks, financial institution compensation restrictions, increased worldwide funding for abortion through the UN, embryonic stem cell research, the world tour of apologies by our President, staggering fiscal debts, government and union take over of car makers, cap and trade energy policy, universal health care, tougher fuel economy standards, expanding homosexual marriage, rampant illegal immigration, cracking down on CIA's "illegal" treatment of captured terrorists... forgive me if I have missed something.
It has been 120 days of this Presidency.
1340 days remain in President Obama's first term.
We have 610 days until a more conservative Congress - potentially - could be seated, if the people so choose.
I recently finished re-reading a series on the Fall of Troy, and it led to some reflection on my part. The sack of that city was first described in The Iliad, which has been long debated as being fact or fiction. Either way, we have many other examples of the end of great civilizations in the short history of man upon the Earth. Many a city or state has fallen quickly to the sword through war; but for many of the greatest civilizations, a slow decline marks the end of their culture's Golden Age. Eventually some outside force comes along, and a slight nudge is all that is needed to break the gilded shell of a once-great nation. The shell cracks and the core, being rotten, collapses into dust. The sack of Troy ended the Age of Heroes, and a new age began, for better or for worse.
America has stood for some 233 years as of this writing. Historically, this is a short period of time. But the last 60 years have seen more changes than in the 1000 years before, so given context America has stood through several Ages of this world. We emerged 64 years ago, from the last, terrible World War, as indisputably the most powerful nation on Earth.
But what is the nature of our Power? From what, or where, does it come? Strength of arms? Courage of conviction? A sense of moral superiority? Great wealth? Years of peace and prosperity? Almighty God? Some mix of these factors? These are the questions I devoutly wish every American would seriously consider. Just what is America?
To say "We are America! We have always been great, and we always will be!" is sadly lacking. At some point just 233 years ago, there was no America. It is the height of foolishness to think that we will always be because we are, and yet this is how we now live as a nation. And at some point amidst all this Change, we will no longer be what we once were. What then is our legacy to our children?
The glory of America was once this: that no man is limited by who his father was. The hope we offered the world was a chance to succeed, that hard work could lead to a better life. A better life was never guaranteed, and many died without seeing it, but they died working so that their children could have the chance. And their children saw that same calling as their own, and worked hard themselves.
But we have forgotten our fathers. Freed from the limitations of our family name, we have tragically forgotten our history altogether. Our memories are conveniently limited, for we often remember our rights and often forget our responsibilities. As Americans, we are not free to redefine our country in each new generation, and it is that very fact that grants us liberty. We must remember who we were called to be. Citizens by birth, we must become Americans by choice, and remember what that means. In the issues I mentioned at the beginning of this post, the common thread is the expansion of government into every aspect of life: to nurture us, to educate us, to clothe us, to keep us healthy, to keep us safe.
Is government in America now no more than a surrogate parent, to coddle us in every aspect of our lives?
Perhaps the dream has ended. Perhaps our Age also has scattered in the morning mist, like so many before it. But I am not giving up.
We must teach our children what our nation should be. If you home school, that makes it easier, as you have control over the lessons. In the government (public) schools, the 'education' your child is receiving probably does not conform to your values, if you are reading this. It's an uphill battle there but not impossible. Christian schools can go either way, but even then we cannot allow this responsibility to fall to another. We have to teach our children. We have to teach our friends. We have to ask our families, our communities, the tough questions. We have to talk until our voices are gone, and then speak even louder. It will not be comfortable or convenient. It will not be fun, and at times it will require more than we believe we have in us. But if our legacy to our children is to be more than debt and greed, if we would see this Age continue, if we would see America be the nation God called it to be - it must be done.
It has been 120 days of this Presidency.
1340 days remain in President Obama's first term.
We have 610 days until a more conservative Congress - potentially - could be seated, if the people so choose.
I recently finished re-reading a series on the Fall of Troy, and it led to some reflection on my part. The sack of that city was first described in The Iliad, which has been long debated as being fact or fiction. Either way, we have many other examples of the end of great civilizations in the short history of man upon the Earth. Many a city or state has fallen quickly to the sword through war; but for many of the greatest civilizations, a slow decline marks the end of their culture's Golden Age. Eventually some outside force comes along, and a slight nudge is all that is needed to break the gilded shell of a once-great nation. The shell cracks and the core, being rotten, collapses into dust. The sack of Troy ended the Age of Heroes, and a new age began, for better or for worse.
America has stood for some 233 years as of this writing. Historically, this is a short period of time. But the last 60 years have seen more changes than in the 1000 years before, so given context America has stood through several Ages of this world. We emerged 64 years ago, from the last, terrible World War, as indisputably the most powerful nation on Earth.
But what is the nature of our Power? From what, or where, does it come? Strength of arms? Courage of conviction? A sense of moral superiority? Great wealth? Years of peace and prosperity? Almighty God? Some mix of these factors? These are the questions I devoutly wish every American would seriously consider. Just what is America?
To say "We are America! We have always been great, and we always will be!" is sadly lacking. At some point just 233 years ago, there was no America. It is the height of foolishness to think that we will always be because we are, and yet this is how we now live as a nation. And at some point amidst all this Change, we will no longer be what we once were. What then is our legacy to our children?
The glory of America was once this: that no man is limited by who his father was. The hope we offered the world was a chance to succeed, that hard work could lead to a better life. A better life was never guaranteed, and many died without seeing it, but they died working so that their children could have the chance. And their children saw that same calling as their own, and worked hard themselves.
But we have forgotten our fathers. Freed from the limitations of our family name, we have tragically forgotten our history altogether. Our memories are conveniently limited, for we often remember our rights and often forget our responsibilities. As Americans, we are not free to redefine our country in each new generation, and it is that very fact that grants us liberty. We must remember who we were called to be. Citizens by birth, we must become Americans by choice, and remember what that means. In the issues I mentioned at the beginning of this post, the common thread is the expansion of government into every aspect of life: to nurture us, to educate us, to clothe us, to keep us healthy, to keep us safe.
Is government in America now no more than a surrogate parent, to coddle us in every aspect of our lives?
Perhaps the dream has ended. Perhaps our Age also has scattered in the morning mist, like so many before it. But I am not giving up.
We must teach our children what our nation should be. If you home school, that makes it easier, as you have control over the lessons. In the government (public) schools, the 'education' your child is receiving probably does not conform to your values, if you are reading this. It's an uphill battle there but not impossible. Christian schools can go either way, but even then we cannot allow this responsibility to fall to another. We have to teach our children. We have to teach our friends. We have to ask our families, our communities, the tough questions. We have to talk until our voices are gone, and then speak even louder. It will not be comfortable or convenient. It will not be fun, and at times it will require more than we believe we have in us. But if our legacy to our children is to be more than debt and greed, if we would see this Age continue, if we would see America be the nation God called it to be - it must be done.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
President Obama's thoughts on the Constitution
I picked up a copy of The Audacity of Hope from the local library (this is President Obama's book, written back in 2006). In it there is quite a bit of good information that shows exactly what he thinks about certain issues. Here is a direct quote from page 90, in the chapter titled "Our Constitution:"
Ultimately, though, I have to side with [Supreme Court] Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution - that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.
And a far more telling quote from page 93:
It's not just absolute power that the Founders sought to prevent. Implicit in its structure, in the very idea of ordered liberty, was a rejection of absolute truth, the infallibility of any idea or ideology or theology or "ism," any tyrannical consistency that might lock future generations into a single, unalterable course, or drive both majorities and minorities into the cruelties of the Inquisition, the pogrom, the gulag, or the jihad. They were suspicious of abstraction and liked asking questions, which is why at every turn in our early history theory yielded to fact and necessity.
This is at the core of the Conservative's disagreement with President Obama; the above quotes could not be more wrong, however well intentioned. The Constitution does not reject absolute Truth, it appeals to it. The Founders appeal for our "unalienable rights" was to the absolute power of Nature's God; if there is no higher, absolute truth than our civil government, then we had no right to rebel in the first place. The struggle of reflecting God's higher, moral law into the laws that govern civil society should not be mistaken for compromise. The Founder's struggles were for principle, namely which principles to strive for when building this Republic. It was not about theory versus necessity, it was about the fundamental rights and responsibilities of men and governments.
We are living now in a country with a foundation of sand; to say that the Constitution is subject to interpretation by each successive generation is to rob it of its very meaning in the first place. If our Constitution is merely a social contract, arbitrary laws subject to the whims of men, then we have no foundation to stand upon when the storms of adversity come.
I hold our Constitution to be a standard for behavior, a standard for law. Far from being subject to our whims, we must hold firm to what it teaches, and go where it leads. The President swears to uphold the Constitution, to protect the standard so that it remains for all time; he does not swear to recast the meaning of the document to fit the circumstances of our time. The difference in philosophies between the Conservative and President Obama (as Mark Levin would call him, the Statist) is one of perspective. I start at the Constitution and argue how best I can live within its tenants; the Statist starts with himself, or the individual Citizen, and seeks how best the Constitution can serve his needs.
The danger for our nation is that tyranny often flows from "necessity;" that our only chance to survive and flourish is the sacrifice of some small liberty. But these small liberties, once dead, are nearly always gone forever. We must fight for our liberty at every opportunity, with our words and with our votes.
Ultimately, though, I have to side with [Supreme Court] Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution - that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.
And a far more telling quote from page 93:
It's not just absolute power that the Founders sought to prevent. Implicit in its structure, in the very idea of ordered liberty, was a rejection of absolute truth, the infallibility of any idea or ideology or theology or "ism," any tyrannical consistency that might lock future generations into a single, unalterable course, or drive both majorities and minorities into the cruelties of the Inquisition, the pogrom, the gulag, or the jihad. They were suspicious of abstraction and liked asking questions, which is why at every turn in our early history theory yielded to fact and necessity.
This is at the core of the Conservative's disagreement with President Obama; the above quotes could not be more wrong, however well intentioned. The Constitution does not reject absolute Truth, it appeals to it. The Founders appeal for our "unalienable rights" was to the absolute power of Nature's God; if there is no higher, absolute truth than our civil government, then we had no right to rebel in the first place. The struggle of reflecting God's higher, moral law into the laws that govern civil society should not be mistaken for compromise. The Founder's struggles were for principle, namely which principles to strive for when building this Republic. It was not about theory versus necessity, it was about the fundamental rights and responsibilities of men and governments.
We are living now in a country with a foundation of sand; to say that the Constitution is subject to interpretation by each successive generation is to rob it of its very meaning in the first place. If our Constitution is merely a social contract, arbitrary laws subject to the whims of men, then we have no foundation to stand upon when the storms of adversity come.
I hold our Constitution to be a standard for behavior, a standard for law. Far from being subject to our whims, we must hold firm to what it teaches, and go where it leads. The President swears to uphold the Constitution, to protect the standard so that it remains for all time; he does not swear to recast the meaning of the document to fit the circumstances of our time. The difference in philosophies between the Conservative and President Obama (as Mark Levin would call him, the Statist) is one of perspective. I start at the Constitution and argue how best I can live within its tenants; the Statist starts with himself, or the individual Citizen, and seeks how best the Constitution can serve his needs.
The danger for our nation is that tyranny often flows from "necessity;" that our only chance to survive and flourish is the sacrifice of some small liberty. But these small liberties, once dead, are nearly always gone forever. We must fight for our liberty at every opportunity, with our words and with our votes.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
"Torture," and a Step Too Far
You won't find any links today, there is plenty available to read online about this topic of "torture." Extreme measures, enhanced interrogations - call them what you will. I am saddened and disappointed... not by the brave men and women of the CIA who defend us everyday, but by a President who would sell them out to gain some political points with the far left at home and abroad. To this point, should you read my previous posts, I have always respectfully disagreed with President Obama on matters of policy. I have always said I believed his intentions and motivations were pure, but that he (from my perspective) is misguided.
No more.
I cannot respect a man of so little character that he and his administration would attack the very people whose lives are on the line defending us from terror in an effort to appease radicals who fail to understand the nature of this conflict. This is monstrously wrong, and this will end badly for all of us. Even our national security is not above petty politics to this man. Make no mistake, I am very angry. I am upset. I think former Vice President Cheney had some very good questions (on Fox News): why were some documents detailing this "torture" released, but very few that show the positive results of these interrogations? Mr. Cheney has called publicly for the release of additional documents, and I truly hope those are brought forth, and I hope that all involved avoid legal problems from this. They won't of course; this is a witch hunt, after all. But I hope and pray they do.
A word on "torture:" what we have done to these terrorists does not even qualify. Sleep deprivation, loud music, forced hygiene (I am not making this up), a member of the opposite sex being in the room with you, even water boarding which simulates drowning - if only our captured soldiers, civilians and agents were so generously treated in captivity. The standard of our enemies should not become our standard for the sake of reprisal, but I ask those who go on and on about how we shouldn't "torture:" with all the time and angst you are spending defending the rights of these animals, how about the rights of their victims? Who - in this day - is standing up for the rights of the 2,996 dead Americans from September 11th? If we were treating these terrorists roughly for our own general amusement, I would join the chorus of voices saying it is wrong. We must not become the monsters we are fighting. But there are principles at stake here; these interrogations are not about the end justifying the means, but about something more.
Here is a direct quote from the White House website, the Homeland Security page:
"The first responsibility of any president is to protect the American people. President Barack Obama will provide the leadership and strategies to strengthen our security at home."
How does throwing CIA agents under the proverbial bus assist in this commitment? I agree with the 1st sentence of the quote. The principle here is that the American President has the responsibility to protect the American people. President Bush did an excellent job of this in the wake of September 11th. The second sentence has become a sad, sick joke.
Our enemies are rejoicing as this administration assists them in weakening our national defenses. I pray that someone you love does not have to pay with their lives for this folly.
No more.
I cannot respect a man of so little character that he and his administration would attack the very people whose lives are on the line defending us from terror in an effort to appease radicals who fail to understand the nature of this conflict. This is monstrously wrong, and this will end badly for all of us. Even our national security is not above petty politics to this man. Make no mistake, I am very angry. I am upset. I think former Vice President Cheney had some very good questions (on Fox News): why were some documents detailing this "torture" released, but very few that show the positive results of these interrogations? Mr. Cheney has called publicly for the release of additional documents, and I truly hope those are brought forth, and I hope that all involved avoid legal problems from this. They won't of course; this is a witch hunt, after all. But I hope and pray they do.
A word on "torture:" what we have done to these terrorists does not even qualify. Sleep deprivation, loud music, forced hygiene (I am not making this up), a member of the opposite sex being in the room with you, even water boarding which simulates drowning - if only our captured soldiers, civilians and agents were so generously treated in captivity. The standard of our enemies should not become our standard for the sake of reprisal, but I ask those who go on and on about how we shouldn't "torture:" with all the time and angst you are spending defending the rights of these animals, how about the rights of their victims? Who - in this day - is standing up for the rights of the 2,996 dead Americans from September 11th? If we were treating these terrorists roughly for our own general amusement, I would join the chorus of voices saying it is wrong. We must not become the monsters we are fighting. But there are principles at stake here; these interrogations are not about the end justifying the means, but about something more.
Here is a direct quote from the White House website, the Homeland Security page:
"The first responsibility of any president is to protect the American people. President Barack Obama will provide the leadership and strategies to strengthen our security at home."
How does throwing CIA agents under the proverbial bus assist in this commitment? I agree with the 1st sentence of the quote. The principle here is that the American President has the responsibility to protect the American people. President Bush did an excellent job of this in the wake of September 11th. The second sentence has become a sad, sick joke.
Our enemies are rejoicing as this administration assists them in weakening our national defenses. I pray that someone you love does not have to pay with their lives for this folly.
Friday, February 27, 2009
A Presidential Mindset (Barack Obama)
The above web link takes you directly to the "About Us" page at the church formerly attended by President Obama for an extended period of time, commonly cited during the 2008 election as 20 years or more. Obama credits Rev. Wright with leading him to Christ.
My specific concern here is the description of the church, written by the church itself. I believe this to be a crucial insight into the mindset of our current President, and indeed the controlling Democratic party at large. The critical issue here is one of labels. How do you view yourself? What are the first adjectives that come to mind if I asked you to describe yourself? Your church? Your specific social circle?
As a white male in modern American society, I am endlessly confronted with the "fact" that I am inherently racist, inherently biased. In no possible way can I understand the experience of a minority in this country, since I am of the majority. But in answering for myself the questions I posed above, my first descriptive word is not "white." As I work through my mental list, I can think of dozens of words and never come to any that describe the color of my skin (unless you include sunburned, which is me every summer). My point here is that I do not think of myself-or others-in terms of color.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/11/05/state/n111547S31.DTL
This article is very telling of the election situation in California. Obama has stated clearly that he is in support of homosexual marriage. Looking specifically at black voters, you had an overwhelming majority vote for President Obama, and yet vote in support of a measure - Prop 8 - that is in direct opposition to his stance on the issue (one of the most significant issues of our time, far outweighing the economy in my opinion). A question, then: if I vote for a President who I don't agree with on crucial issues, merely because his skin color matches my own, how then must I label my behavior?
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2710
I picked one short article out of many on the subject, but according to exit polling data, Obama gathered 95% of the black vote. The media labeled this "historic" and it seems everyone was quick to point out how we have overcome another barrier in our quest for a racism-free society. But again, I pose a question: if reports after the election had indicated that 95% of white people had voted for McCain, and he won because of it, what would have been the media response? Would the solidarity of race that black voters showed on election night been applauded if it had been white Americans instead?
I will not answer the above questions myself, I am probably in enough hot water already for even asking them :). But I will say this: the color of my skin has nothing to do with the content of my character. Dr. King was not trying to get to a point where a black man would be the President of the United States; he was trying to get to a point where we (as a nation) looked past skin color to matters of true importance. Skin color is a matter of style, as it were, and not of substance. And that becomes the point of my argument in regards to both how President Obama his administration view our nation. In dealing specifically with the racial issue, we will be past our racial problems when we no longer notice the skin color of a candidate, but instead examine his (or her) stance on the issues. I don't want a white President, or a black President, I want a President of sound judgment and strong, positive character. As we applaud the fact that we now have a black President, are we inferring that the particular pigmentation of his epidermis makes him qualified to run the most powerful nation on Earth? I ask this question honestly, without malice and assuming the best intentions on the part of President Obama.
If I were laying on the operating table waiting for a life-saving surgery, I don't want to hear about how hard my doctor is going to try, or that he's the first great doctor of his ethnicity to perform this procedure. I want to hear that he knows what the heck he is doing, and that he is respected in his industry as one of the best around.
Our country - our basic freedoms - are undergoing life-altering surgery at this point. Consider the surgeon, and let me know what you think.
My specific concern here is the description of the church, written by the church itself. I believe this to be a crucial insight into the mindset of our current President, and indeed the controlling Democratic party at large. The critical issue here is one of labels. How do you view yourself? What are the first adjectives that come to mind if I asked you to describe yourself? Your church? Your specific social circle?
As a white male in modern American society, I am endlessly confronted with the "fact" that I am inherently racist, inherently biased. In no possible way can I understand the experience of a minority in this country, since I am of the majority. But in answering for myself the questions I posed above, my first descriptive word is not "white." As I work through my mental list, I can think of dozens of words and never come to any that describe the color of my skin (unless you include sunburned, which is me every summer). My point here is that I do not think of myself-or others-in terms of color.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/11/05/state/n111547S31.DTL
This article is very telling of the election situation in California. Obama has stated clearly that he is in support of homosexual marriage. Looking specifically at black voters, you had an overwhelming majority vote for President Obama, and yet vote in support of a measure - Prop 8 - that is in direct opposition to his stance on the issue (one of the most significant issues of our time, far outweighing the economy in my opinion). A question, then: if I vote for a President who I don't agree with on crucial issues, merely because his skin color matches my own, how then must I label my behavior?
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2710
I picked one short article out of many on the subject, but according to exit polling data, Obama gathered 95% of the black vote. The media labeled this "historic" and it seems everyone was quick to point out how we have overcome another barrier in our quest for a racism-free society. But again, I pose a question: if reports after the election had indicated that 95% of white people had voted for McCain, and he won because of it, what would have been the media response? Would the solidarity of race that black voters showed on election night been applauded if it had been white Americans instead?
I will not answer the above questions myself, I am probably in enough hot water already for even asking them :). But I will say this: the color of my skin has nothing to do with the content of my character. Dr. King was not trying to get to a point where a black man would be the President of the United States; he was trying to get to a point where we (as a nation) looked past skin color to matters of true importance. Skin color is a matter of style, as it were, and not of substance. And that becomes the point of my argument in regards to both how President Obama his administration view our nation. In dealing specifically with the racial issue, we will be past our racial problems when we no longer notice the skin color of a candidate, but instead examine his (or her) stance on the issues. I don't want a white President, or a black President, I want a President of sound judgment and strong, positive character. As we applaud the fact that we now have a black President, are we inferring that the particular pigmentation of his epidermis makes him qualified to run the most powerful nation on Earth? I ask this question honestly, without malice and assuming the best intentions on the part of President Obama.
If I were laying on the operating table waiting for a life-saving surgery, I don't want to hear about how hard my doctor is going to try, or that he's the first great doctor of his ethnicity to perform this procedure. I want to hear that he knows what the heck he is doing, and that he is respected in his industry as one of the best around.
Our country - our basic freedoms - are undergoing life-altering surgery at this point. Consider the surgeon, and let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
