Category: Politics

Thoughts on States’ Rights and Local Control

Everyday-Freethought / / Politics, Religion, Texas

It seems that conservatives push states’ rights when they disagree with the federal government. But when a state does something they do not like (usually a state other than their own), they have no issues siding with the federal government. They go on and on about local control, but they have no problem butting in when someone somewhere else does something they do not like.

Right now Wendy Davis is running for governor of Texas. A few months ago, the Texas Tribune Tribcast said it might look bad for her if most of her money comes from out of state. A lot of Ted Cruz’s campaign money came from out of state. The guys who ran against Hillary Clinton for Senate got money from outside of New York. A lot of Tea Partiers have gotten money from outside their states/districts. For people who go on and on about unchanging values, they sure seem willing to cast them aside when it’s convenient. IOKIYAR.

Many of them say gay marriage is a states’ rights issue. A lot of the money for Proposition 8 in California came from the Mormon Church in Utah. Why can’t those Utah conservatives mind their own business? There are a lot of states with laws against gay marriage. But I bet if they thought they had a chance of getting an amendment to the US Constitution passed, they would go for it.

When New York passed a law allowing gay marriage, Rick Perry said that was a good thing. He said if you’re okay with that, then live in New York. If you are not, you can live in Texas. I think that how they want people to think they view states’ rights. But then after he said that he was quiet for a few days, and said that gay marriage is always bad. I wonder what happened. Perhaps some of his paymasters had a talk with him about it.

Ted Cruz recently criticized the Obama adminstration for not going after people for marijuana laws. As some have pointed out, he doesn’t seem to think that states should not make their own laws on gay marriage, gun control and abortion. But don’t hold your breath.

And when a level of government below the state does something a conservative does not like, they think it’s okay for a state to make a law overriding a local law.

Travis County has required companies running gun trade shows to perform background checks for all “person to person” gun sales. And Greg Abbot had threatened to sue Travis County. Why can’t Travis County do what Travis County thinks is best? Would it really be so hard to have it in a different county? I have heard Taylor really wants to build up its economy. And Hutto has nowhere to go but up. (Hutto is northeast of Austin. It is about as small and rural as it sounds.)

One of the things I forgot to mention in my review of my first year in Austin is that Austin recently banned plastic bags at retail stores. At first I kept going into HEB and get to the counter and realized I did not have a bag. And I still see people walk out of the store without stuff in bags and they put things in their car one item at a time.

Well, a Repub in the lege from another part of Texas proposed the Shopping Bag Freedom Act.  His objection was that it could spread disease and bacteria, and it is an overreach of big government. I wonder how he feels about chemical plants polluting rivers and blowing up. To see why a bag ban can be a good idea, see this page.

Sometimes repubs have this magical view that state goverments can do no wrong. Unless they pass a law allowing people to smoke pot or allowing gay marriage.

Then there is the issue of Park 51 in New York City, aka the “Ground Zero Mosque”.  A lot of conservatives were against it, even though it got approval from a local zoning board. And let’s not forget, that Constitution they all claim to love says we ALL have religious freedom. I thought it was funny seeing all of these repubs fall all over themselves screaming about this. They don’t want outsiders telling them what to do, yet they have no problem sticking their noses in other people’s business. The best part: Seeing conservatives get soooooo concerned about NYC. Usually there is a competition amongst conservatives over who hates NYC the most.

Sidebar: This country is becoming more urban and less rural, and they seem to think that only people in small towns are “real Americans.” How can these people say they love America, when they hate most of the people in it?

These people talk about freedom. My question for them is: Freedom for whom to do what?

I am not saying that states’ rights is not a valid issue. But if you look at segregation and gay marriage, it seems to get the most airtime when Southern conservatives see something they do not like. If they only time you talk about states’ rights is when you want to kick someone around, do not be shocked if some people do not get on board.

Image from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

Thoughts On Snowden

Everyday-Freethought / / Misc, Politics

I have been thinking about writing something about Edward Snowden for a while. Why Snowden Won’t (and Shouldn’t) Get Clemency articulates a lot of my thoughts on the subject. For the sake of completeness, I decided to write some random notes on the topic.

When I first heard about this Snowden person, I thought he was not too bright. Here is a guy who is going on and on about how governments should not spy on or oppress their people, and he says this while he is in China. Then he flees to Russia, on his way to Cuba. I have gotten the impression that this guy is a Russian spy. Perhaps a real spy would not out himself, but in many ways he is acting like a Russian spy. They benefit from his disclosure. I am sure there are things he knows that are not in the files, and they can get that out of him too. If he had gone to Bolivia or Ecuador, those files would still be out there. But running to his Sugar Vladdy just rubs me the wrong way.

Why didn’t he just go to South America to begin with? I have read that the NSA places some travel restrictions on its contractors. I think they also have restrictions on leaking classified information, but Snowden didn’t seem to have a problem with those rules.

During his stay at the Moscow airport I read quite a few articles in which reporters tried to find any sign of Snowden or where he was sleeping at night. Nobody could figure out where this guy was. Perhaps that was all a big show.

This guy is kind of like the Bitcoin fanboys who rub virtual shoulders with the Russian mafia and Mexican drug lords. I find it odd that there are a lot of people who go on and on about how they do not trust the US government, yet they seem to have no problem with their new friends. You may not like having to choose between the lesser of two evils, but you really need to look at the other evil.

From what I have gathered, Snowden never contacted anyone in Congress about his misgivings. He supposedly raised his concerns with people higher up in the NSA. If so, let’s see the proof. Feel free to send me a link to that. He seemed to wait for what he felt was the right moment. He took the job at BAH just to leak files, and even used other people’s passwords. That hardly seems noble. All this time he was making about four times the median American income. What moral dilemmas did he face? Perhaps none. I really do not know much about how spies operate. But taking a job at a specific firm for the purpose of leaking files sounds like something a spy would do.

There have been a lot of indications that Wikileaks is pretty close to Russia. I looked on the Wikileaks site, and I could not find a lot of Russian leaks, and the ones that they had were kind of old. They seem to really not like the USA. Are they against government leaks, or just some governments?

This guy seems pretty high on himself. He goes on about how he put himself at risk to leak documents. No, you went back to your paymasters, so you were safe all along. At one point he said there were things that he would never reveal, not even under torture. First off, I don’t care how much of a badass you think you are. I have heard from people who have been in combat that you never really know how you will react to a stressful situation. Sometimes the person you think will panic saves the day, or vice versa. Secondly, flaunting your anti-torture psychological strength in Russia may not be the smartest thing to do. The FSB just might say, “Challenge accepted.” Unless, of course, he is on their side. Lastly, this is a guy who could not finish either college or basic training. He seems like someone who was just drifting through life. Where does he get this idea that he is a badass? Is there an amateur SERE meetup in Hawaii I am not aware of?

Anyone who thinks they can lecture the world about freedom while they are depending on the good graces of the Russian government and Sugar Vladdy is an idiot. Anyone who supports someone like that is an idiot.

Image Of Kim Philby memorial in Moscow from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42936_Fred_Kaplan_at_Slate-_Edward_Snowden_Doesnt_Deserve_Clemency
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42937_WaPo-ABC_Poll-_Most_Americans_Say_Snowden_Harmed_US_Security_Want_Him_Prosecuted

http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-and-edward-snowden-2014-1
http://www.businessinsider.com/edward-snowden-and-wikileaks-2014-1
http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-assange-wikileaks-and-russia-2013-8
http://www.businessinsider.com/did-wikileaks-sell-out-snowden-to-the-russians-2013-9
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-edward-snowden-needs-a-long-prison-sentence-2014-1
http://www.businessinsider.com/joshua-foust-on-the-nsa-leaks-2013-10
http://pando.com/2013/11/27/keeping-secrets/ transparency is being privatized

Thoughts On Image And Reality

Everyday-Freethought / / Politics, Religion

This whole “Duck Dynasty” controversy has led to a few thoughts on religious conservatives, and conservatives in general.

Many have pointed out that although a lot of christians are saying they hate the sin, yet love the sinner. Yet it doesn’t sound like they love the sinner.

There was an article on Daily Kos whose main thrust was these guys are not really the rednecks they appear. They used to look quite preppy. The article also pointed out that although they don’t like gay people, there are a lot of rules in the bible they do not follow. The article focuses a lot on the fact that they are wealthy. I also saw a tweet pointing out there are rules against idols, and these guys sell a LOT of stuff with their images on them. I saw a placard for “Duck Commander” eyewear in a WalMart in Boise just yesterday. They say they believe in absolute truth, yet they pick and choose which rules they follow, knowingly or not.

A lot of people think that all homophobic Christians are closet cases. Everybody loves to point to Ted Haggard. I do not think that is the main reason. 31 states have amendments banning gay marriage. I have a hard time believing that a majority of voters in that many states are closet cases. I think there is something else going on.

I read a book by a guy named Randall Balmer called Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts Faith and Threatens America. He thinks the reason a lot of christians focus on teh gay is because it is the perfect sin: The bible says it is wrong, and I am never going to do it, so let’s talk about that.

That makes a lot more sense to me. I recently read an article on Andrew Sullivan’s website comparing Obama and Democrats to Bush and Republicans. The starting point was a film about Rumsfeld. Obama admits his mistakes and corrects them, while Bush denied what was going on and just doubled down.  And the GOP never broke ranks. I think part of the root cause of a lot of all this is that conservatives care more about image than reality.

I have noticed a lot of repubs saying that they admire Vlad Putin. He is a dictator, he is harboring a leaker that many Americans regard as a traitor, he jails dissidents, but it’s all okay with some Americans because he hates teh gayz. I seems like from 2001 to 2009, repubs thought anyone who liked any foreign head of state more than the repulican dear leader were traitors. I guess for a lot of people morality has degenerated into nothing more than “Don’t like teh gayz.” Ignore the fact that he’s a dictator.

Another example of christians picking and choosing which rules they follow came from an interview Krista Tippet did on her show a while back, when it was called “Speaking of Faith”. I was not able to find it, but I think it might have been Calvin DeWitt. He said that he had a couple of decades ago he hard time getting churches to do anything about hunger, because allegedly Jesus himself said “You will always have the poor with you.” They used this as an excuse to do nothing. So he took a razor, and took out all the verses in the whole bible about helping to poor. By the time he was done it was in tatters. When he would preach he would wave it around and say, “This is the real bible of America.”

I guess for some reason people think they will be better people or nicer if they are christian or something. It seems to me if you are going to think that, you should also follow the rules that take real effort.

Maybe everyone fools themselves to an extent. But for a bunch of people who believe in an omnimax being who has the ability (and supposedly the desire) to get them to see things as they are, this is all pretty egregious.

Image from Pyongyang Traffic Girls, assumed allowed under Fair Use

Overheard Conversations On Airplanes

Everyday-Freethought / / Politics, Religion, Science

I have been travelling back and forth from Austin to Boise, Idaho for work over the past month. So I have spent quite a bit of time on airplanes and at airports. I have overheard a few interesting conversations.

On one flight, there was a guy who worked  for a “non-denominational” christian organization. It was either a school or a non-profit, I cannot remember. I think it’s kind of funny when christians label themselves “non-denominational”. They seem to think this implies an objectivity or neutrality that does not really exist.

At one point he said that as a society “we put too much faith in science.” I thought: You are in a metal tube filled with flammable liquid suspended thousands of feet in the air. You’d better have some faith in science. The taxicab fallacy at its finest.

If skeptics and atheists have “faith in science“, it is not faith in the sense of worshipping an invisible deity whose behavior is consistent with non-existence, or belief in things without proof. It is the assumption that since the scientific method has increased our understanding of the world in the past that it will continue to do so. I think that as long as religion claims to be a method for understanding the world, it will always be incompatible with science. Besides, if religion had anything to do with technology, why didn’t god tell people how to make airplanes 5,000 years ago?

Another conversation was with a guy who was a medical assistant at a clinic that did vision correction surgery. He said that Medicare reimburses them right away. But private insurance companies drag their feet. He said they have to submit claims to private insurance companies several times, but they only have to submit to Medicaid once. He said that about 50% of the people working at his clinic do nothing but deal with insurance companies. Do we really have the best health care system in the world?

Lastly, one time when I got back to Austin it was about 35 degrees Fahrenheit. I heard someone say that the day before it was in the 80s. Climate scientists have been predicting temperature volatility for years. Yet many people still think it’s a big hoax.

Image from Uncyclopedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use. I do not have the time to determine if it is allowed under Unfair Use

Separation Of Church And State

Everyday-Freethought / / Atheism, Politics, Religion

One of the myths of the Religious Right-Wing is that there is no such thing in the US as the separation of church and state.

Their main argument seems to be that the actual phrase (as well as the phrase “wall of separation”) does not appear in the Constitution. The phrase “wall of separation” comes from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote while President. Generally conservatives love to go on about what the Founders intended, and Jefferson always seemed to be one of their favorite founding fathers.

This topic comes up a lot on Freethought Radio since church/state issues are the point of the organization. They point out that while the phrase is not in the First Amendment, “separation of church and state” is a pretty good summary of the  Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

I had a Christian friend who used this argument since the actual phrase is not in the Constitution. Then he would turn around and tell me about his debates with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They do not believe in the Trinity, since the word “trinity” is not in the Bible. He would cite Bible verses showing that the concept is. He was pretty proud of himself. And he never saw the contradiction.

The hosts of Freethought Radio point out that the concept of Balance of Powers is in the Constitution, even if the phrase is not. Slavery is also in the Constitution, although the actual S-word is not.  The phrases used are “other persons” and “Person held to Service or Labour”.

There is another concept that is in the Constitution even though the phrase itself is not. And it is a concept that a lot of conservatives love love love: States’ rights.

Either you need the phrase in the Constitution, or you do not.

Image from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

Yet More Austerity

Everyday-Freethought / / Delayed Reaction, Politics, Science

Here are a few more links to articles about austerity.

This is an academic page on VoxEU.

Here is one from the New York Times by some professor at Cornell. At one point, he asks the question: If we are not going to spend money to repair infrastructure now, then when will we?

Here is one from Politicus that links to a Krugman article in which he points out that the pro-austerity crowd is not being honest. They really do not care whether it will help the economy. They just want to dismantle the welfare state and rip the safety net. If that is what they want, why not just argue for those things on their own merits?

He also makes an interesting point about motives: The pro-austerity crowd never seems to consider that the pro-stimulus crowd is pushing stimulus because the pro-stimulus crowd states and thinks that stimulus might be good for the economy. No, the austerity people insist the stimulus people have an agenda. After all, the austerity crowd has an ulterior motive. So they think that everybody else does as well.

We also see this in the climate change “debate”. I used quotes because from a scientific perspective there is no debate about climate change.

Image from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

More ‘Both Sides Do It’ Nonsense

Everyday-Freethought / / Ambient Echo, Delayed Reaction, Politics

One of the results of the government shutdown is some people on the web are pointing out that it is not the case that “both sides are to blame”, that it is in fact the case that one side is more to blame than the other.

I retweeted a few articles that I think at least mentioned the “both sides” fallacy:

Here is an article from the Washington Post pointing out that while there are fringe theories on the left, they were never spouted by any Senators or House committee chairs or any high-ranking Democrats, and there were not unending investigations into non-existent “scandals”.

Politicus has an article pointing out that the media is not as liberal as people think. It only got critical of GW Bush towards the end of his presidency. I guess spending billions on a war based on lies is okay with some people at least some of the time.

Dante Atkins at Daily Kos looked at the “both sides” BS when Olympia Snowe decided not to run for re-election in the Senate.

Business Insider had an article in April pointing out that some Repubs not only think the GOP is not waging a war on women, but think that Obama is waging a war on religion. Granted, a lot of conservatives seem to think they are being oppressed when they are not kicking someone around.

Maybe I should get a sticker that says I am a Proud Oppressor Of Conservatives.

Image from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

Thoughts On Syria, Protest and Unintended Consequences

Everyday-Freethought / / Politics

I saw a few posts on Business Insider about military members saying the USA should not intervene in Syria. (See the posts here, here, and here.)

I have also seen a few articles online from conservatives saying we should be careful because intervening could have “unintended consequences.” Some of the same commentators saying we are moving too fast on Syria are the same people saying that Obama did not act quickly enough in Libya.

Should active duty military be speaking out on policy? Can I yell at them that they are not “real Americans”, just as some people yelled at me at anti-war protests during the Bush administration? Yes, there could be unintended consequences. News flash: Every policy could have unintended consequences, whether it is pushed by someone you voted for or not.

A lot of people did not want to hear about any potential negative results from attacking Iraq. I guess a lot of people thought the Iraqis would buy mega-mansions, fill them with big screen TVs, and drive SUVs to mega-churches. Sectarian conflict, providing practice for al-Queda and a stronger Iran were considered impossible. And woe to anyone who was not on board.

It seems like a LOT of people only see potential downsides to military intervention when we have a Democrat in the White House. It seems okay to openly defy a Democratic president, as Colin Powell did over gays in the military.

I am sure there is always debate in the military over every policy all the time. Why is it that it only seems to become public when we have a Democratic president? Why do so many people turn their brains off and just obey when we have a Republican president?

In one of the posts, there is a photo of a soldier saying they do not want to fight for “Obama’s al-Queda rebels”. You guys had no problem fighting for Bush’s Shiite thugs (many of whom got support from Iran), so why is this an issue now? Another says he did not sign up to die for corporations. I am guessing he was not in the military when Bush and Cheney were running things.

Image from Wikipedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use

Thoughts On Crazy Conservatives

Everyday-Freethought / / Ambient Echo, Delayed Reaction, Politics, Texas

I have stated on this site that I think a lot of conservatives are pathological. Nothing is ever conservative enough, and each thinks that THEY are the only TRUE conservative.

Now we are seeing that the Tea Bagger voters are upset that the guys they sent to Congress are “waffling”, or “not conservative enough”, or, as some might put it: realizing that not everybody in the country agrees with you. One article about this was published in The Guardian.

Another was published in The American Prospect. I think the last paragraph is a nice summary:

As many a Republican politician will tell you (ask Marco Rubio, for one), convincing the Tea Party that you’re sufficiently conservative and that you hate Barack Obama enough isn’t just a full-time job, it’s a game that almost everyone will eventually lose. At some point you’ll take some position or express some opinion that is interpreted as less than maximal anti-Obamaism, and all it takes is one slip to be declared a traitor forevermore.

But I have an issue with the last sentence: So as crazy as Republican politicians sometimes seem, don’t forget that they’re under constant pressure from a base that is even crazier.

I wonder what was going through the author’s head when he wrote that. Are we supposed to have sympathy for these Tea Bagger congressmen? They chose to suck up to the crazies. Some of them bad-mouthed people who did not vote for them, or Democrats/liberals in general. And now they are choosing to not stand up to the Tea Baggers.

————-

A while back I mentioned the Texas Tribune Tribcast. I got through the first half of 2013 about a week ago. They also make the Tea Baggers sound pretty crazy. The TB’s don’t want to spend any money or raise any taxes. Two of the big issues in the past regular session and the special sessions were transportation and water. As I have stated on this site, lower taxes are nice, but they are not the answer to all the world’s problems. Neither is cutting spending. Cutting taxes won’t repair roads, and cutting spending won’t make it rain more.

Usually when you want to deride someone for magical thinking, you say, “XYZ does not just fall from the sky.” In the case of rain, it does fall from the sky. However, you have no way of making it fall when and where you need it to.

Image from Wikimedia, assumed allowed under Fair Use. Because Tea Parties are for little children with imaginary friends.

Ideology does not trump reality.

I Hope Voting Makes a Comeback

Everyday-Freethought / / Politics, Texas

I have voted in every election since I turned 18. I recently moved to Texas, and I got my registration card the day before the election. So my voting streak is unbroken.

I know a lot of people who do not vote. They think there is no point and that nothing ever changes.

There is a great line I have seen on the web: If voting is not important, why are Republicans always trying to stop you? I have noticed the Same Old Party goes on and on about invalid registrations. So their solution to this non-existent problem is to purge the voter rolls. They never seem to have any interest in registering people properly.

You have probably heard about or heard the recording of Mitt Romney’s statement about the 47%.  That was at a fundraiser with an admission price of $50,000. That is about the median income in the US. I bet the people at that fundraiser all voted.

If you don’t vote, you give people who can spend your annual salary in one night even more power. You are giving them more say in our government. You are causing the very thing you say you want to prevent. Granted, it takes a lot of median income people voting to equal the voice of a wealthy person. But if you don’t participate, then who will?

I think it’s funny when people say that there is no point in voting because it never changes anything. By itself it might not do much. But if you are not willing to stand in line to press a button every couple of years, then what are you willing to do to change society? If you won’t press a button, then how exactly is society supposed to change?

I think that slowly things are changing. People are starting to realize that a lot of things happen at the state level. The Trayvon Martin incident. The Wendy Davis filibuster. The Moral Monday protests in North Carolina. I think people are staring to organize. Secular Texas is part of this.

This really hit me after a few exchanges on Twitter (archived here). Do not ignore what happens at the state level.

Image from Bobbi’s Blog, originally from Political Loudmouth, although I could not find it there