Monday, August 15, 2011


At one time I considered myself a pretty tolerant person. Now to an extreme right winger that means I was bad bad bad as they have equated being tolerant as being liberal, evil, communist, socialist, etc. etc. But to me tolerant means if you don't come knocking on my door to try and impact my life, I don't care much what you waste your money or life on. I have seen too much foolishness to believe I can really impact what other people swallow or how they want to spend their dollars.

BUT that is changing and my tolerance is disappearing as more and more I feel threatened by religiosity that spouts pious phrases (while too often living anything but pious lives) and wants to push that onto me through laws. The desire among some is to go back to Puritanism and here is the kind of thing that makes me worry it just might happen.

If you have known very many people on a personal level who talk like these two, you know their personal lives often show anything but what they claim in public. Not to say it's true with today's crop of right wing religious leaders; but even if they live those pious lives, what they want to push onto me, the government they want to dismantle to replace with something new of their own invention (of course, actually their concept of god's invention), well that makes me worry.

I hope anyone thinking of voting for those of this mindset (read above article), will consider that no matter what they say, their religious views will be primary in their decisions and right after that will be profiting the rich.  I think this should be a very scary time for anybody from either party as when one party becomes the tool of an extreme religious view, the other party feels they need to be less responsible for what they do-- as though, of course, people won't vote for this. Look around the world and through history for how that worked out in the past!

Is this how far the right will take this?

And if it is, will government pensions be any safer with the current court?


Kay Dennison said...

It is indeed a very scary time. And I share your concerns. Someone wiser than I said, "You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you!" And they really are so I'm trying to fight back. And if it kills me, I'll have gone down fighting -- not bowing down to those who hide behind their evil interpretation of God.

As your question re: Social Security, you can bet that Congress' undeserved pensions will be preserved. These idiots like Perry and Bachmann are reincarnations of Marie Antoinette with their "let them eat cake" agenda!

Renie Burghardt said...

If this doesn't scare the heebie-jeebies out of anyone, then I don't know what will!

Robert the Skeptic said...

Some have noted that the GOP is a dying breed... old white men. The demographics of this country is younger, increasingly secular and multi-cultural. Things as they are now may not be what the future holds.

Ingineer66 said...

The GOP dying. Puhlease. The GOP is being invigorated by young conservatives and hard working people of color that see the coming financial calamity caused by the handouts of the great society baby boomers. I guess we could say that the Democrat party is a bunch of welfare recipients and sixties burnout socialist wannabe's.

Rain said...

I think you 'young' right wingers better realize who the GOP is really supporting and what their goals are. Most of you benefited from public education but if people like the Koch brothers get their way, it won't be there for your grandchildren. I see you as duped by the rhetoric that blinds you to seeing that those tax cuts for the rich are at your expense. I do not know what the future of this country is going to be but if the current crop of GOP leaders get their way, it won't benefit the middle and you are part of that middle... or were before they ditched it for the rich and poor.

wally said...

I find it odd how those on the right blame the financeial calamity we are now experiencing on the excessive spending of liberal administrations. Historically the Democrats have been bigger spenders than Republicans, but both parties have used the treasury as a blank check over the years. When Clinton handed over the keys to the White House to George W. Bush in 2001 he also left him with not only a balanced budget, but a surplus that could have gone to help lower the national debt or at least strengthen Social Security for decades to come. But Bush made a decision to implement massive tax cuts for the rich, start two wars that have already cost us 1.3 trillion dollars, and gave the drug companies a 272 billion dollar windfall in the form of Medicare part D. President Obama's policies have added 1.7 trllion dollars to the debt but eight years of Bush account for 7 trillion dollars of debt. Now,I am not so delusioned as to think that the Democrats have all the answers, but for those on the right to blame the Obama administration for the nation's ills is unrealistic. Yes, he is an ineffective president, but this mess didn't begin the day after his inauguration. In my opionion our political system may be corrupted beyond remedy.

(figures from Congressional Budget Office)

Rain said...

If we don't find a way to deal with the tactics, no Democratic president will ever again be effective. McConnell said as soon as Obama got elected that his whole goal as a leader in the Senate would be to make him a one term president. So nothing else mattered and the things the left wants cannot happen unless we also deliver a left wing Congress and that doesn't mean DINO!

Reading what the Koch brothers have set out to do against education explains why that has suddenly been a right wing cause. They set these agendas, throw out email after email, talk it up on Fox and then the ordinary people lose all sight of what they actually were and do get from having public education. I am amazed it works to talk people against their own selfish best interests but I have seen it too many times to think otherwise. They might not listen to Rush but they listen to the sycophants down the line who have been listening to him or gotten their marching orders from the same people.

The Republican party's leaders know what they have to say and it is parroted back over and over from wherever it originally came. For all I know Limbaugh also gets his marching orders from somebody and if he doesn't say it, he's out the door too.

What I don't understand is how people who benefit from government can say they want to dismantle it with no clue what it'll do to their lives. There was a reason for social security and medicare but if the right and then the country really turn to these people like Perry and Bachmann for president, another generation down the line will be the ones to feel the consequences. When there are things wrong, responsible, conservative people fix it; they don't gut it without thinking some about why it was ever wanted. Public education and the disgusting rhetoric against it from the right is a good example.

Dang, this should have been a blog :).

Ingineer66 said...

Wally, most of us real conservatives had a problem with W's drunken sailor spending. But just to be clear W cut taxes for all taxpayers not just the wealthy. And that saved us from an even bigger recession after 9/11. That is why Obama has kept the Bush tax cuts in place even though he really would like to raise taxes "to spread the wealth around".

As far as dismantling government, I do not think most Republicans want to dismantle government or eliminate essential services. What we want a leaner government that intrudes less on our lives. And we want people to take more responsibility for themselves instead of depending on the nanny government to care for their every need. In the US we have the right to the pursuit of happiness. The government should not try to guarantee happiness.

I am sure that if we dug into the Federal Budget there are plenty of programs that we could get 70% of the population to agree should be eliminated or cut back. But anytime a Republican lawmaker tries to insert some common sense into the budget process they are demagogued by the left and the media as wanting kids to starve or some nonsense. That is what happened when George Bush wanted parents to show proof of income to get a free breakfast and lunch for their kids. He just wanted the funds to go to the people that truly needed it, not liars and cheats.

I guess that should have been a blog too.

Rain said...

I'd like to hear the names of these 'sensible' Republican leaders. They sure aren't any of the ones running for the presidency. They spend money like a drunken sailor also but for different things like oil subsidies, etc. i hope you are reading these links on Perry, keeping up on what that man really did or Romney or any of them.

When Republican governors got power, legislators likewise, the first thing they try to do is enact their odious religious dogma into law. They talk one way and act another.

As for the tax cuts for everybody. You got a pittance. The real issue here was that kind of tax cut for top earners and you are supporting a party who wants to lose benefits for the middle so that the rich can have a little more than they don't need. Even many of the more responsible rich disagree with that.

How many people do you know who ask for charity to get their kids free lunches when they have plenty of money? I don't know any, but that is a drop in the bucket in comparison to what the oil companies got and you don't blink an eye on that.

If Perry and the right wing get their way, SS will be history and likewise Medicare. You don't ever plan to retire? Or maybe you think state pensions will solve your problem? Keep in mind that's also government and a lot of people are more unhappy about them than they are the small amount from SS that the elderly get. You don't protect one group and you'll be next. Read about Perry's Texas and tell me again that's what you want?