Skip to main content

Posts

Conceptualizations of freedom

Todd Akin offers one of his : AUDIENCE MEMBER: You voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Why do you think it is okay for a woman to be paid less for doing the same work as a man? AKIN: Well, first of all, the premise of your question is that I'm making that particular distinction. I believe in free enterprise. I don't think the government should be telling people what you pay and what you don't pay. I think it's about freedom. If someone what’s to hire somebody and they agree on a salary, that's fine, however it wants to work. So, the government sticking its nose into all kinds of things has gotten us into huge trouble. This is a pre-civil war conception of freedom. He can embrace the freedom to pay people whatever a business owner wants because he is a white man who has never been discriminated against. But to anyone who isn't a wealthy white man the limitations of free enterprise and the benefits of freedom are apparent. Notice that he tries ...

It's always 1979 to Republicans, continued

More evidence arises that Republicans still think it's 1979. The history of the "it's always 1979" mantra can be found in posts here , here , here , and here . This time it's Paul Ryan talking about the middle east : This week, GOP vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan topped off a critique of President Obama's response to violent demonstrations at American embassies across the Middle East by saying that because of the president's policies, the Middle East "looked like 1979 Tehran" – when demonstrations by Iranian student revolutionaries culminated in the invasion of the US embassy and the taking of 50 hostages in a stand-off that would endure 444 days. It has become all too easy for opponents of Ryan and his boss, Governor Mitt Romney, to level zingers at their foreign policy bloopers, and I had mine all ready: all this does is remind us that Ryan, who was born in 1970 and has no national security experience other than, as he has said, "...

How I Met Your Mother season premiere

I wasn't a big fan of how they ended last season. Ted leaving with Victoria, who left her fiance at the alter, felt extremely rushed. Marshal and Lilly having a baby is nice. But that really limits what they can do with them. And I hated Barney and Robin getting married. It never worked for me. So how did they handle all of those stories in the first episode of the new, and hopefully last, season? It was ok. It was a cop out to have Victoria's fiance bail on the wedding too. We were given absolutely no background on their relationship. So we really have no emotional investment in them and therefore no reason to care about what should be huge moments in their lives. It's almost like they had the guy bail just so that they didn't make Ted look like an asshole, like they did with Stella. Lilly and Marshal were simply played for laughs. Ha ha, they aren't getting any sleep because they have a baby. Cliche. The only thing that makes it not boring is the sheer gloriou...

Another "cross on public land" debate

I've discussed this issue before here . I was combing through Andrew Sullivan's blog roll for something to read and came across a site called "Secular Right". I thought it could be interesting given that you rarely hear about anyone on the right being secular. It's not a bad site. But I didn't care for this post regarding some cross that will be in a 9/11 memorial. I spelled out most of my objections to this type of thing in that first link. I'm not sure if they all apply to this situation. Andrew Stuttaford's post on "Secular Right" doesn't link to the story about the cross, so I don't have all of the info. But I just wanted to point out some things based on what is quoted: While these battles have become all-too-familiar, there’s one showdown brewing that distinguishes itself from the rest — atheists’ demands that a cross found in the rubble following the September 11, 2001 attacks not be included in a museum that is being plan...

Rick Perry calls out Satan and secularists

Being the secularist that I am, apparently Satan is making me push for the separation of church and state: “Satan runs across the world with his doubt and with his untruths and what have you, and one of the untruths out there that is driven -- is that people of faith should not be involved in the public arena," Perry said on a conference call with former pastor Rick Scarborough as part of the “40 Days to Save America” campaign. He goes on to say : This separation of church and state, which has been driven by the secularists to remove those people of faith from the public arena, there is nothing farther from the truth. When you think about our founding fathers, they created this country, our Constitution, the foundation of America upon Judeo-Christian values, biblical values and this narrative that has been going on, particularly since the ’60s, that somehow or another there’s this steel wall, this iron curtain or whatever you want to call it between the church and peopl...

Republicans against the environment

I must me missing something here because I don't completely understand this: Republican leaders in the House brought to the floor a bill called “Stop the War on Coal Act, “ which seeks to weaken and in some cases overturn laws and rules protecting the very things that Mr. Train stood for – clean air, clean water, a stable climate and fair effective regulation of the big polluters, including but not exclusively the fossil fuel industry. The bill (which the senate will certainly strike down) contains no new ideas. According to a database compiled by Representative Henry Waxman and the Democratic staff of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, House Republicans have voted an astonishing 302 times this year to hamstring the Environmental Protection Agency, weaken clean water and air rules, undermine protections for public lands and coastal areas, and block action to address global warming – all while seeking to make the regulatory climate as favorable as possible for the oil,...

Romney goes malicious again

Coming off his ridiculous comments about the attack on our embassy in Libya and the death of our ambassador I didn't think Romney could say much more that would surprise me. And granted, he was talking to a group of potential donors. But these remarks did surprise me: In his comments, Romney says that “these are people who pay no income tax,” but they are people “who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it.” Republicans in general think this and say it frequently. But I don't recall this kind of bluntness and embrace of conservative rhetoric before. Ezra Klein does a good job on the technical problems with it in that link I posted above. I'll also send you to Jamelle Bouie for more commentary. I'll just point out that he obviously has a very narrow definition of "dependent upon gov...