Friday, September 23, 2011

Hooray for Death!

Hello everyone.

In my last post, I mentioned that fall is here, which technically wasn't true, but I meant that it felt like fall.  Well, now fall is officially here, and it's currently 82 degrees.  The forecast for tomorrow calls for a high of 90.

If this were, say, Phoenix, the weather would be pretty normal.  For North Idaho--mind you, we're less than 100 miles from the Canadian border--it's downright crazy.  I've already talked about how the global warming deniers have been silent all summer, and I fully expect that as soon as we have the inevitable big snowstorm or cold spell this winter, they'll be quick to point out how it's "evidence" the global warming is nothing but a big scam to make Al Gore rich, and that the oil and coal companies really have our best interests at heart when they fund focus groups with the stated purpose of denying and/or downplaying global warming.

The worst thing about this weather is that we've already had a few hard overnight frosts, so most of our garden plants (including all out tomato plants) are history, even though the daytime temperatures are ideal for growing.  Sigh.

Anyway, I've spent the last several blog postings yammering on about beer, which is something I obviously love to drink and blog about.  But I realize not everyone cares.  So today, I'm going to avoid beer talk, aside from the brief beer mention in this paragraph, which you're already past.  Instead, I'm going back to my roots: politics.

Politics

Even though the 2012 presidential election is over a year away, the circus that media pundits like to call "campaign season" is in full swing, and since it's pretty much a given (though not entirely) that Obama will be the Democratic nominee, on the Republican side there's a host of idiots clamoring to do the bidding of the wealthy elite that run this country. 

The candidates have already had several debates, and they've certainly said some interesting things.  But I've been more interested in the crowd reactions than the meaningless catchphrases and other nonsense they try to pass off as responses to questions.  At the debate earlier this month at the Reagan library in Simi Valley, Brian Williams asked George Bush wannabe Rick Perry about the death penalty.  Take a look:



At the mere mention that the state of Texas has killed 234 people, more than any other state, the crowd breaks into applause. I'm not talking about a few people clapping, but widespread applause, complete with a couple of "whoos" and whistles.

As I said on Facebook at the time: regardless of your feelings are on the death penalty, it's nothing to cheer about. A person being killed, even when killed by a state, and even if the person is a really, really bad person, is still a tragedy. Every time someone is executed, someone else loses a son or daughter, or a parent, or a spouse, or a friend. And of course, the person on death row is likely there for committing murder in the first place, which adds to the overall tragedy.

But the knuckledraggers in the crowd cheered the death of 234 people a year as if their favorite football team had just scored a touchdown.

This sort of behavior reveals an incredible lack of empathy for fellow human beings, as well as an incredible lack of critical thinking.  It points to a mindset in which everything in the world is black and white, and people are all either good guys, or bad guys who deserve to die. And it also shows a disturbing willingness to wholeheartedly embrace authoritarianism, where the government is never wrong in its judgement and punishment. That last one is exceptionally odd to see among self-styled "small government" Republicans.

Who decides who gets executed? Juries, which are made of people like me and you, as well as the guy down the road with the Camaro on cinder blocks in his front yard. Also, judges, who are appointed by self-serving politicians, or who themselves become politicians to get elected to their post. And don't forget the lawyers who fight over the cases. And the politicians who passed laws to permit the death penalty. Not exactly the salt of the earth.

In short: dumb people often make dumb decisions.

And let's not forget that numerous times people have been executed only to later be found innocent.

There was just a recent high-profile example in the Troy Davis case, where a number of the witnesses later recanted their testimony and said the police pressured them to testify, and some said that one of the other of the witnesses actually confessed to the murder. Some of the victim's family members even tried to prevent the execution. Despite all the doubts, Troy Davis was executed anyway, quite possibly for no good reason. That's what the people in the crowd were cheering.

At the next debate, Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul a question about a hypothetical person with no insurance:



When Ron Paul was asked if the person with no insurance and who couldn't afford a life-saving procedure should just die, several people in the audience shouted "Yes!"

Unreal.  The people in the crowd apparently think you deserve to die if you don't buy insurance.  That sure gives a lot of power to those health insurance companies, no?

Republicans hate the mandate in Obamacare, but I can't really see much of a difference between a system where you're compelled to buy private health insurance by the government, and one in which you're compelled to buy private health insurance because you might die if you don't.  I guess the latter provides Republicans with the illusion of freedom, so there's that.

Here's the thing about both of these debate incidents: If you agree with the crowd reactions in either of the videos, you no longer get to call yourself "pro-life." The same goes if you support the numerous wars/bombing campaigns/occupations/drone strikes happening across the world by our government. There's nothing pro-life about any of it.  And if you're cheering death, you're a sociopath.

I don't know what has happened, but I remember when death used to be considered a tragedy.  Apparently, it's something to cheer about now.  And the downward spiral of our country continues.

In Closing

As much as I follow politics, I've been trying to keep all things political to a minimum here, mainly because it can be downright depressing.  This particular past has been especially so, at least for me, so I'll try to make my next post a bit more fun.  A while back I promised a blog posting about my chili recipe, so maybe I'll do that next.

Now, here it is, your moment of Tucker:



Rob

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Is Ron Paul our Savior?

Hello everyone!

I found myself in the middle of a MySpace debate about Ron Paul. Ron Paul has been getting a whole lot of hype on "the Internets" lately, and while I agree with his some of his political stances, I think others would be disastrous, especially for poor people. I've just spent an hour and a half composing a response to one of my MySpace friends, a former inventory coworker. It was a response to a response to a response about Ron Paul, and I figured, "I spent all this time working on this, so why not post it on my blog?" It's not very funny, but hey, I'm not getting paid for this.

My first message was basically a copy and paste of a DailyKos blog posting. He responded, but in the interest of privacy, I'm not going to include his message here. Here's my response to his response, with some minor tweaking done to make it more "blog-friendly":
Hey

Thanks for the response!

Yeah, [the DailyKos article] was definitely slanted, but it was the best I could find in a moment's notice. I do agree with Ron Paul about the war and (most of) his foreign policy, pulling out of NAFTA and WTO, his being anti-Patriot Act, anti-Federal ID card, etc.

But I totally disagree with him about immigration. He basically wants to build a big wall and round up all the brown people and send them packing. He says that they're unfairly using welfare benefits at the cost of taxpayers, but most illegals pay taxes too, usually more than they should because they rarely file for a refund at the end of the year. The problem isn't the people coming over here to work--it's the corporations that hire them to exploit them. And I haven't heard a peep from Ron Paul about going after them.

He wants to deny citizenship to babies born in America if their parents are illegal. But then you'd have a bunch of kids being born that weren't citizens of any country, which would cause a big mess. If we kicked them out, what if Mexico wouldn't take them? And then when they got older, they'd be probably be perfect targets to become slave laborers or child sex slaves (which goes on all the time in "undeveloped countries" and are exploited by "developed countries") because they'd have no country's laws to protect them.

Even though he's against NAFTA and WTO, he's big on embracing domestic free market policies, which basically means let all the corporations do what ever they want by "eliminating government barriers" such as minimum wage and any safety and environmental standards. From the mid 1800s to the 1930s, we had a "free market". This meant that people were working 14-16 hours a day, children were working in factories, and people were getting hurt or killed in factories and mines all the time. And it was a boom and bust economic cycle--business would be great for a few years, then there would be a surplus of goods that nobody wanted or could afford to buy, so they'd shut down the factories and most people would be out of work. Eventually, it led to the Great Depression until FDR implemented New Deal government regulation (see "Poor People's Movements" by Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward) which led to the rise of the American middle class.

On that same note, he wants to cut taxes, which is fine for regular people like us, but he wants to cut corporate taxes, too. He thinks this will cause businesses to hire more workers. But it doesn't work that way. The amount of workers they hire has to do with how many products or services the businesses are selling, not how much tax they pay. When we worked at WIS, the amount of people in a store was based on how many people it would take to get done in time, not what the corporate headquarters in San Diego was paying in taxes. When taxes go down, the CEOs give themselves bigger bonuses, but it never "trickles down" to the working class.

I'm totally fine with the Libertarian ideology when it comes to personal rights such as legalizing drugs, letting people marry whoever they want, unregulated gun ownership (though I'm personally opposed to guns), etc. But too much of it is about letting corporations do whatever they want and property rights (the more property you own, the more rights you have). Then there's the whole "eliminate welfare and replace it with charity" idea, but most charity is affiliated with churches. And if the church doesn't agree with your beliefs, they can turn you away.

I just think that Ron Paul, while he adds something to the Republican debates that is sorely needed, is not the answer to our problems.

Anyway, I'm a Poly Sci major, so I love talking about this stuff. I have to say, I know political debates can get heated, but even if we disagree, it's never personal with me.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond. Hope things are going well on your end.

See ya around!

Rob
There ya go. I welcome any and all comments.

Rob

Labels: