Presentation Matters

It's not the 

Quantity or

Quality

Of your words that matter

It's just 

How

They are

Arranged

Messy Logic

Today I listened to the neatest and most internally consistent sermon I have ever heard.  It stood out in stark relief to the sermons I usually listen to ... complicated and sometimes convoluted  attempts by self proclaimed liberal Christians to reconcile the Bible with reason, logic, science, and modern understanding.  It was simple, neat, and clean.  I can certainly see the attraction of such a sermon.  I love it when things neatly fit together, like the pieces of a 24 piece puzzle.  If only the world could fit into twenty four pieces without sacrificing ... well, just about everything.  If only the satisfaction I felt with such neat, clean, and simple illusions was more lasting.  If only the I didn't actually enjoy the messiness and struggle that comes with reason, logic, and a clear view of the circumstances in which we live.

Democrats For Senate

Until we have free and fair elections for the House of Representatives and President, I will have to vote for Democrats for the Senate, regardless of their qualifications for the office or whether their opponent would be more qualified.  I strongly believe that everyone, regardless of party affiliation, should follow suit.  

Many Republican state legislatures have redrawn district lines with the idea of maximizing Repiblican districts.  By and large they have succeeded.  The result is that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for the House of Representatives to be controlled by the Democratic Party.  

Republican state legislatures have also begun to change the rules for choosing a President, with an eye to increasing the chances that a Republican will be elected President. In some states where Democrats have scored narrow victories over Republicans lately and law making is controlled by the Republicans, schemes allowing for the state's votes for President to be divided among the candidates rather than all going to one candidate have been proposed.  If the changes that being proposed would have been in place during the last election, the result likely would have been different.  

The only way to balance out these structural advantages in the short term and create a strong incentive for all involved to make wholesale changes in the long term, like having resditricting overseen by impartial bodies, is to have citizens take collective action.  If we vote only Democrats into the Senate, there will be real changes and they will come real quick.  It is time we took some action before our democracy slips completely away from us.

I Believe In The Second Amendment To Protect The Other 26

If you don't think about it, it sounds like a message anyone should be able to get behind.  The right to bear arms clearly allows us to force the government into recognizing our other rights.  The main threat to our rights is the government after all, that foreign and uncontrollable power.  It would seem to be an awesome statement to put on your bumper.  The problem is, while there are indeed twenty seven amendments, the right to bear arms is not a guarantor of any of them.  In fact, the guarantor of our rights is not the presence of guns in the hands of citizens but the government itself, the democratically elected representative government, and the presence of ballots in the hands of citizens.

First of all, while there is a right related to gun ownership that is recognized by the current Supreme Court, it is not an un-qualified right.  No right, however sacrosanct, cannot be limited by the government in some circumstances.  In some cases, the circumstances under which the government can abridge it will be quite rare ... but they will always exist.  The Supreme Court did not proclaim the right to bear arms to be at this highest level.  It is fairly clear that limits can be put on it.

Second, the idea that having folks wander around malls, playgrounds, schools, etc. with guns will make it safer and easier for me to exercise my rights is kind of silly.  I've seen road rage in action, and watched people get belligerent with customer service or erupt at the sign of perceived injustice, and the thought of adding guns to these situations does not make me feel more likely to speak my mind or proclaim my religion.

Lastly, this notion that gun ownership guarantees freedom of religion or the right to practice one's religion rests on a particular vision of government as a threat to rights no people everywhere.  The reality is that if there is. Right that guarantees all the others it is the right to vote. The right to choose the folks who make the laws and have a direct influence on policy making.  In a democratic government that functions as it should the people are, in a very rel way, the government.  The people, the citizens of America, don't protect their rights by holding a gun to their own heads ... they simply need to assert their rights to participate in the political system.  When we focus on our right to carry a handgun what we are actually doing is ceding the right we have to really make. Difference ... Our right to participate in our own governance.

Assumption

When you learn that the person you are talking with is a banker, gay, Muslim, a mechanic, Jewish, Republican, Chinese, Lutheran, into Geo-Caching, a hunter, a teenage mother, etc. ... do you assume that they are thoughtful, nice, honest, interesting, sincere, smart, giving, accommodating, open minded, strong, etc.   If not, how come?

Listen

The problem in politics today is simple ... no one listens.  Democrats believe they are right, and they may be, but they don't do enough listening to the common folks they claim to be fighting for.  Republicans believe they are right, but probably aren't because they don't 'listen' to things like reason, common sense, or compassion.  The bottom line is that we would be a lot better off if folks talked less and listened more.

Of, By, For

Lincoln would most likely be horrified by the state of his political party in 2014.  First of all, they are no longer interested in striving to achieve "Government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth.  They want to abolish government and are seemingly unaware of the self hatred that involves in a country where government "of" and "by" the people is a long tradition and desire.  Second, they are hardly on the forefront of either racial equality.  Third, Lincoln was hardly a strong proponent of state's rights or the evisceration of the federal government.  Fourth, Lincoln aimed at solving problems even if that meany joining with Democrats .. which today's Republicans would be highly unlikely to do.  Lincoln also put country before party' which is certainly not the motto of Republicans in 2014.  Abraham Lincoln was a great President who worked hard to solve problems.   That just does not sound like todays's Republicans!