Since You Asked...

A friend writes: "I'm wondering what you think of this video

I found myself agreeing on a few things, like the "nothing is free" and "personal responsibility" aspects.

It also reminded me of the things a parent might say to a child..."

Well, since you asked, here is the heart of my entire political philosophy.

As far as fiscal policy goes, he's got some good ideas. "Forgiving" student loans by paying them with taxpayer dollars is wrong. (And what a perfectly sad picture of the wretched occupy kid! To misquote Jewel, I hate him 'cause he's pieces of me!) I even think bailing out GM was a bad idea, even though it won Obama Michigan and probably Ohio. I am on the fence about Obamacare, but I'm willing to wait and see. Basically, there's still an awful lot about Democrats I like less and less as I get older and this guy kinda nails it.

I am a fiscal conservative. No doubt about it. I am Taxed Enough Already. Government is overly huge and incredibly wasteful and gets more so all the time.

HOWEVER

Believing this causes me to vote for Democrats. What? Why? Aren't they the ones who tax and spend?

Here are the last six presidential administrations (basically my life), in order by the size of the percentage increase in the national debt on their watch:

Ronald Reagan 188.6

George W. Bush 89.0

George H. W. Bush 55.6

Jimmy Carter 42.3

Barack Obama (through 2011) 41.1

Bill Clinton 35.6

source

Historically, Republicans waste more money than Democrats. Republicans do not like wasting money on American poor people. Democrats do not like wasting money on wars. Whoever is in office, some of my taxes will be wasted. But I'd rather have them be wasted here on something that helps our people instead of there on something destructive. Ergo, I am a fiscally conservative Democrat.

This naturally leads me to where this video goes horribly off the rails: foreign policy. Yes, there are bad societies who do horrible things. But it's not our job to kill them all and replace them with good societies. We simply can't go to war with Darfur, China, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya, Alabama, Mississippi, Pakistan, and Egypt just because they aren't free democracies with full rights for all citizens. The cost is just too high in blood and treasure.

Instead, we must be a model of freedom that other societies will see and want to emulate. Revolutions will happen. They will grow towards us and our way. If we learned anything yesterday and in the last thirty years, it is that the tide of time swells toward freedom. Like the United Federation of Planets, we will welcome these countries to the big table when they are ready. But we must not bomb them in the meantime unless we want dreams of revenge against us to become inextricably linked with their dreams of freedom.

Let's move on to domestic policy and a word about the Republican narrative of personal responsibility, entitlements, and the culture of poverty. The story goes something like this. Ever since FDR and LBJ created all these entitlement programs like social security, the American people have become more and more dependent upon them. FDR inadvertently created a monster, a lazy person who just sits at home and lets the government money roll in and uses it to buy high speed internet, Cheetos, and beer. Times a few hundred million. They choose to live in a culture of poverty supported by the government. This narrative is not completely false. The situation must be reformed.

I believe in personal responsibility. I believe in working hard and having a good life come as a result. I believe in if you snooze you lose. But take a person who is born into poverty. Say they work their way up. The person takes responsibility and doesn't ask for nothin' from nobody. Works two or three jobs. Gets married, stays faithful. Has children they love. The person is scrimping and saving $25 a month for higher education to get a better job someday, providing for their children, basically living on a razor's edge like so many Americans are. Then the person's spouse is killed by a drunk driver. All the personal responsibility in the world isn't going to bring that spouse back, continue to bring in that spouse's income, or fill the permanent hole in those kids' lives.

Bad things happen to good, hardworking, personally responsible people. And when they do they don't deserve to be abandoned by their government.

There has to be a safety net. My theoretical person needs social security and maybe even welfare and food stamps and those things should be there for that person. That is not a waste of my taxes. That could mean those kids go to college instead of living under a bridge. Yes, Democrats perhaps tend to cast the safety net too wide, even to lazy people who just lean back and use the safety net as a hammock. But it's better to cast the net too wide than than to shred it and let everyone who gets unlucky fall.

I finally understand what my seventh grade history teacher Mr. Peck was talking about when he contrasted the "culture of poverty" ideology with the "cycle of poverty" ideology. I tend to believe that government aid will help people break out of the cycle more often than it will encourage them to loaf in the culture. Man, Mr. Peck was a good teacher.

Finally, ever since I started paying attention to such things as a teenager, Republican presidents have brought war and recession while Democratic presidents have brought peace and recovery. That's hard to ignore.

That's about all I got. Like all of us, the guy in this video has got some good ideas and some horribly bad ideas.

Billy, Ya Let Me Down

So Billy Graham. Has he always been a conservative tool and I just wasn't paying enough attention? All these people that I thought about positively during my Christian upbringing. I even put one of his delightful book titles in a GUH song. Geesh. James Dobson, whose book we read as a family to help my transition into puberty. Turns out? Right wing tool. I couldn't listen to him on the radio for two minutes without becoming furious.

These people who take the extremely powerful name of God and use it to promote their pet political agendas really piss me off, especially when I find those agendas un-American, restrictive, and hateful. What makes me maddest is that if someone was to ask me if I was a Christian I would say definitively yes, but I would feel the need to add "...but I'm not a misogynist, homophobic, idiot asshole."

I believe the bible is the inspired word of God; a beautiful, wonderful, endlessly engaging, guiding, and challenging holy scripture that I elevate above all other books. I'm also able to admit that a lot of it is really specific to the time and place it was written and a lot of it is just fucking weird and you can't possibly live by it all.

Perhaps unfortunately, what you CAN do, if you want to, is take any position you want to and support it with cherry-picked quotes from the bible. Whatever else you can say about it, the bible is versatile.

Plus, this country was not founded strictly on biblical values. And despite my own personal love for the bible, I think that's a good thing. Countries that try to mix holy scripture with governance never look like good places to live from where I'm sitting. America was founded to promote life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Some people think that means running as far away from the bible as they can get and I respect their right to do that.

My favorite moment from any of the debates, Presidential or Vice-Presidential, was Joe Biden admitting that his Catholicism told him that abortion was wrong but that he didn't think he had the right to force that belief on someone else. I agree on both points. This is the line that we people of faith must walk as we vote and help to create public policy in this wonderful, amazing, miracle of a country we live in. (I also have a fervent love of America but again there feel the need to add "...but I'm not a etc.")

So how can we solve the original problem, that is that the very words "Christian" and "American", which are both so precious to me, have come to suggest a hateful, misogynist homophobe who would have us living in an Iranian style theocracy? How about if someone says something like this:

I'm a Christian who believes in the bible and I think it's time for America to acknowledge marriages regardless of the gender of the two people involved.

I'm a Christian who believes in the bible and I don't think states or the nation should be making decisions about women's bodies for them.

Whew! I feel better! I think that's what I needed to do. Okay, now you.

Judiciary Election Thrills!

Against my better judgment I spent time researching the candidates in today's primary election. I blame my friend Justin Bell, esquire, for telling me that if people really understood politics they'd be as excited about the judicial branch elections as they are about the executive (President/Governor) and legislative (Senate/House) branch elections.

So I read the websites for all of today's candidates. By the end of it I was indeed wound up about the judicial elections, as well as the primaries. Why?

Democratic primaries:

For U.S. Senator I support Amy Klobuchar. As I understand it she will be the Democratic nominee. This is not why I decided to go.

For U.S. Representative District 5 I support Keith Ellison. He did a direct mail piece and some facebook ads that ultimately made me check out the candidates and wonder why he was bothering with campaigning in the primary. Well!

Ellison, who is a Muslim, is facing a Tea Party DINO (Democrat In Name Only) who is accusing him of all kinds of things. As soon as I saw "Sharia Law" on the front page of the guy's website I decided I'd continue researching and maybe even vote. I like to vote against any candidate who uses hate and fear. And I like what I see of Ellison. His interview with Stephen Colbert and the fact that he embedded it in his website doesn't hurt either.

For State Senator District 46 I support Ron Latz. He is running unopposed in the primary.

Judiciary elections:

For Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court I decided to support Jill Clark. The incumbent has scads of supporters, some of whom I like (Walter F. Mondale, etc.) but she was appointed by Pawlenty. Jill Clark has a very good website where she clearly outlines her candidacy.

In these judiciary elections the winner will not be decided until November. However, the candidate field will be whittled to two. As I understand it the incumbent usually wins the primary, gaining one of those two spots. This basically means I'm voting for either Jill Clark or Dan Griffith. Griffith had a lot of smart, meaningful things to say about judges and how they are chosen but I just heard and saw too many buzzwords suggesting he resents the poor and is basically a Republican.

For Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court I decided to support Alan Nelson. A clear, well written website splash page (and more importantly its content) made this an easy choice for me. That's actually where I learned the electoral procedural information in the previous paragraph.

For Judge, 4th District Court 22 I narrowed it down to either Deborah Russell or Elizabeth V. Cutter. I asked J. Bell if he had any information and he did not. Deborah Russell would be a fine candidate and I will vote for her if she makes it to November. However, she used two spaces after a period on her website. Thus today I voted for Cutter.

Cutter had a lot of evidence to back up this bold statement on her about page: "Liz is dedicated to issues of fairness, justice, and integrity across a wide spectrum." Plus she is a musician.

So that's what I did today for the first time ever. I actually researched and cared about judicial elections. Then I ran across the street and voted my conscience and my beliefs. When I got home I told bride who I had voted for and encouraged her to do the same since we have similar visions for America and Minnesota.

For someone who once wrote in the Twins lineup on the judicial part of the ballot, today was progress.

Update: 8:44 p.m. The Dems we voted for and Elizabeth Cutter are winning in landslides. Nelson and Clark are losing pretty decisively and will not make it to November. It doesn't look like my vote, even combined with bride's, if she even voted my line, is going to make any difference. Was it all worth it?

Check your own races here if you are so inclined.

The Electorate With A Pearl Earring

My last detour into the political in this blog turned out well, with thoughtful, encouraging comments. Here is another.

A lot of Democrats or even just intelligent people are concerned about this upcoming election. Those of us with long enough memories might realize that 2010 is just 1994 all over again, only a touch crazier. Let's remember together. (Please wave your hands in front of your face Wayne's World style and say "doodle-oodle-oo, doodle-oodle-oo!")

A charismatic Democrat has taken over for an inarticulate guy named Bush who ruined the economy, tried unsuccessfully to make Iraq the 51st state, and made that middle ten percent of voters swing solidly Democrat. The Democrat won a decisive presidential election victory. Young people especially loved him.

In his first two years in office the Democrat has not completely fixed everything and voters are angry. The Democrat has even had to compromise on some of his campaign initiatives, for example those involving the health care system and allowing gay people to serve openly into the military. Republicans are capitalizing on this voter anger with their traditionally effective appeals to ignorance, fear, greed, racism, etc.

Newt Gingrich appears on the scene. The Democrats lose their majorities in Congress. Eventually the battles between the legislature and the executive become so pronounced that the government has to shut down for a few days. In the election two years later voters realize it wasn't all the Democratic president's fault. The Republican candidate implodes under pressure and the Democrat wins a second term in office. The Democrat basically does a good job, the economy recovers, and America doesn't start any protracted, misguided wars.

Now back to now. It's 2010 again (Why am I suddenly 20 pounds heavier? Dammit!) and we can all hope that 2010-2016 will go so well as 1994-2000, even if I do not run the Twin Cities Marathon again.

Which memory leads to two personal memories regarding that 1994 election:

I remember playing a Great Uncle Helmer show at the old location of Hogan Brothers in Northfield a day or two after the 1994 election and we played our original song "Richard Nixon" as a protest. Democrats, including both members of GUH, were disappointed and worried. Gingrich's Contract On America seemed to be a death knell for the beloved country we had known. But the system of checks and balances and the constant swaying back and forth of that fickle, easily angered, middle ten percent of voters with short memories did its magical work.

As I remember it, the biggest thing that happened as a result of the battles between the Republican legislature and the Democratic executive was that they had to shut down the government entirely for a few days because they couldn't agree on how to spend our money. I happened to be in D.C. at the time and the only thing that was open on The (rather glorious, highly recommended) Mall downtown was an exhibit by the artist Vermeer. A friend and I put on our thickest winter coats and waited in an incredibly long (outdoor) line of remarkably good spirited fellow Americans. We saw the legendary, beautiful "Girl With A Pearl Earring" and, I think, one where a woman is sitting looking out a bright window to the left of the viewer.

So if, in a year or so, the only thing of which the government is capable for a few days is putting on an exhibit of luminous, elevating paintings, so be it.

Finally, remember to go see the band for which I am playing bass tonight at Station Four in St. Paul. It's the Skittish CD release party! How does that tie in? Hmmm. I think most of my bandmates in Skittish were still young children in 1994. Does that work?

Political Nonsense

Billy Bragg is a hero of mine and at least half his facebook posts are enlightening comments on issues of the day. I've enjoyed some spirited political conversations with people whose views are on either side of mine lately. So, you know, this occurred to me:

I am beginning to think that a person who has the following characteristics:

1. Doesn't spend more money than he has and has largely avoided credit card debt and overdraft fees
2. Has obtained health insurance and makes some effort to stay well
3. Cares for his children and likes to see them more in summer and take them on vacations
4. Believes gay marriage is a basic civil right
5. Is not a major corporation and/or bank that the free market has left an abject failure
6. Favors lower taxes, including property taxes and estate taxes
7. Is against more death in unwinnable wars

has no further reason to support Barack Obama. Longer school years? RUFing kidding me? More Afghanistan? Throw another bad idea out there. Forget it. I am unsubscribing from your twitter feed and facebook page. I am barfing up the kool-aid.

The longer school years was just the last straw:
"That (extra) month makes a difference," the president said. "It means that kids are losing a lot of what they learn during the school year during the summer. It's especially severe for poorer kids who may not see as many books in the house during the summers, aren't getting as many educational opportunities." (full article)

Is there not already summer school for the kids to whom this applies? Schools and teachers are already under enough stress. I am young enough to remember school in June and how pointless and empty it seemed by then. I can't imagine what it would be like in July. What useless facts I lost over the summer I more than gained in relaxation, social interaction, and vacations. I can't believe I'm siding with Kansans:

"It's been tried," (Kansas state education commissioner Diane DeBacker) said, describing one instance of a Topeka-area elementary school that scrapped year-round schooling after just one year. "The community was just not ready for kids to be in school all summer long. Kids wanted to go swimming. Their families wanted to go on vacation." (ibid.)

Duh! I thought I was too cynical to be bitterly disappointed. Turns out I was wrong. FAIL! DISAPPROVE!

Still, I'll probably vote for Obama in 2012 just because the Republican option will be so incredibly much more totally repulsive. Palin? As if. Pawlenty? Ick. Minnesotans know firsthand the damage he would do to cops, schools, homeowners, cities, bridges, etc.

The sad thing is, I think Obama is trying and I share many of his goals. However, as with any ideologue, there are too many unintended consequences to everything he's trying to legislate.

If you limit the fees banks can charge to delinquent customers, banks do not just say, "Aw, shucks. I guess we'll make less money now." They start charging fees and higher interest rates to responsible customers. News flash: I worked at a bank. Banks are not your rich friend who loves you and wants to help you out. Banks are an entirely profit-driven business who encourage their employees to project the illusion of caring. Especially when it means getting more of your money. If this were a speech I would say, "Let me repeat that" and repeat the sentence before that last one, so read it again.

Like banks, health insurers will also not simply shrug their shoulders and accept their new, more charitable and less profitable role as envisioned by Obama. I have paid thousands for (mostly) private health insurance over the years and have barely broken even on the gamble and then only because my appendix burst. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Obama's ideological health care bill kicks in I'm betting my premiums will eventually go up without any corresponding increase in coverage. I get the sense from reading the articles that I will be financing the care of those less fortunate and those who do not take particularly good care of themselves to an even larger degree than I already have been.

I hate the hundreds of trillions of dollars in bailouts for failing companies and their overpaid CEOs. Like the wars, they began with Bush and I had hoped Obama would end them. Fuck! How cynical do I have to become about government and politicians before I am never again disappointed? Answer: Extremely. No. Extremely was not enough. Answer: Completely. Tell me why I'm wrong. Please. Someone. Anyone.

Election Predictions

Well, seeing as how I am so good at predictions, I will now tell you who and what will win on election day.

President: Barack Obama
Senator from Minnesota: Norm Coleman
Local school 1.4 M operating levy: pass
Local school 11 M building maintenance bond: fail
Vote Yes for MN: fail

Not saying that's what I want to happen. I'll be disappointed in the Senatorial result. Dean Barkley is going to draw votes from Al Franken. Many people of conscience and intelligence who would normally vote Democrat will go independent because of how totally filthy that race was.

I would like to see both levies for our schools pass, but they've asked for too much during a time when most people just lost 20 percent of their savings or more. Plus our city is loaded with seniors. I would also like to see vote for MN pass, even though it seems procedurally shady. Unfortunately for Yes For MN, Minnesotans have seen too much procedural shadiness with The Great Twins' Stadium Rip-Off.

Now you know. So get out there and vote! Remember - it's Tuesday, November 4 for Democrats and Wednesday, November 5 for Republicans.

-----------------------------------------

Oh, also. Is this the stupidest product you've ever seen? It's like a joke, right? I guess I get it - it's a really, really hard puzzle. I guess there are people who do those. Okay. Not AS stupid as I thought. Still. Abbey Road would have worked better for me. Just sayin'.

A Return To Trivia

So, not really biting on the fake baseball story, eh? Fine. I thought it was a very effective piece of writing, but whatever. You people. Here is a more blatant attempt to generate comments using something much less important than baseball, politics.

Here's my take on Obama's comments regarding people who suffer through economic difficulties taking refuge in guns, religion, "antipathy toward different people" (which I think we're all old and mature enough to call racism), and anti-immigration sentiment:

I totally, totally agree. It was the first thing I've heard him say that I really, really liked. See also Bob Dylan's 1963 thoughts on the matter, which played a role in forming my own.

Ironically, the comments I like so much may be the thing that helps Hillary win Pennsylvania if she whips peoples' minds into a frenzy over their misinterpretation. I would certainly rather have Hillary win because I would love for my daughters to grow up "in a world where" (to borrow a phrase from that movie preview guy) there has been a woman as president of the US. But if Obama wins now I won't feel quite as bad about it because at least Obama has said one meaningful thing I agree with. So these controversial comments are really win-win-win - for Obama, Hillary, and me!

Incidentally, my take on immigration is quite radical. I believe in extremely strong borders. However, I would use them very differently from the way they are currently used. I would control the flow of people based on merit, not place of birth. Let me explain.

If someone was born somewhere else, but comes here willing to work hard and not commit felonies, they can stay here as long as they want to continue to be a contributing member of society. However, if a person who was born here has demonstrated that they are a good for nothing bum who commits one crime after another, that person should be expelled, however important they may be to the Minnesota Vikings' playoff hopes.