Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Being Democratic
When has not allowing others to express their opinions democratic? What is occurring at these town hall meetings is not democratic and it's frankly un-patriotic. Democracy requires discussion and patriotism that considers diverse opinions. Is this not a democratic country? Why not have a democratic discussion on health care instead of uproarious irrationality?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I agree, we need open and frank discussion.
Yes, I would hope for some civility too.
False hope Judith. I've beem looking over the history of the US for the past 9 years and all I see is one scandal after another. 9/11, the war on Iraq, Bush's reelection, crimes in big business, the economy collapsing due to illegality and stupidity in the private sector, congressmen having affairs on the side with boys and girls, the loss of a moral ground (if we had one) the rise of anti-democratic behavior as we're seeing today, the failure of banks, people losing their homes and jobs, and complete childishness and gullability on the part of American people. I don't know what has happened to my country, but I weep for it. DB
Oh, DB, I have been upset by the many things that you have listed here. You may find this article in Council for Secular Humanism interesting. I read it on another blog.
Amazing and frightening article. I want to pass it on to a few people.
DB - I was simply shocked by it. I wrote these words on another blog about the article the other day, a part of the response includes the fact that nother commentator wrote of the greatness of Eisenhower and explained that he wasn't "particularly enlightened but that he wasn't a racist."
"Wow! One of the most disheartening things that the article bears out is that the likes of these guys give Christianity a very bad rap and such faulty ideology and abhorrent hypocrisy, including the members of C-Street, are unacceptable. What the article points to is one of the reasons I say that the Republican Party has been hijacked.
"If we were to judge a great many of our past American leaders, including Abraham Lincoln, solely on statements on race, there would be very few to praise. Instead, I choose to view these gentlemen wholly historically and judge accordingly. Some emerge far better than others. But none of us is perfect and if the light was held brightly on each there would undoubtedly be things that we would not like brought under scrutiny.
"The problem arises when such views as those of the past president emerge into public policy and the reason for war then becomes, as stated earlier, a war against the infidels, those who hold different religious beliefs than yours, those espoused by the Neo-Cons to essentially murder many innocent citizens of a different faith in the name of God. This religious ideology is no better than the radical Muslim fundamentalists who murder.
"If what the article says is true, there undoubtedly needs to be a commission to look into the past administration more closely. I have been reluctant to say this. But it now seems to me a necessity for the integrity of our country."
It is a strange, bizarr and frightening article, but the one thing that strikes me about it is that the Gog and Magog references in the Bible are so obscure I doubt Bush came up with that theory on his own. Just as we needed to know how much Nancy's astrology affected Reagan's decisions, we should know what fanatical voice had Bush's ear.
Chirac's response brough on a wave of anti-French rhetoric, notabley in Congress, where they talked of banning french fries (as if frenching a bunch of pottoes had anything to do with France). How childish the whole thing is in retrospect.
But I agree the carpet under Bush's feet needs to be lifted.
Please pardon my horrible spelling in my last comment.
DB - President Bush never really struck me as a Christian conservative. His father most certainly was not. The Neo-Cons seemed to have embraced such religious ideology. But what they, and even many Christian pastors and evangelists, fail to recognize is that everything in the Bible is true, but not everything is truly spoken. This is a point my brother, a pastor, made some time ago that I have never forgotten. Another pertinent point is that if you are a Christian your are not under the law, the Old Testament, but under grace, the New Testament. There is only one law under grace and that is the law of love. God is love and Christ is the fulfillment of the law.
Your thoughts matter most to me, dear sir. I appreciate you, DB.
What I find interesting about these people who disrupt is that they never seem to have any coherent complaint. They have no clear concerns about health care, they only want to disrupt. That could be one of the reasons none of them showed up at Obama's town hall. If they had behaved like that, it would have been carried live (not by a youtube-er) and might very well have revealed their true colors to a national audience. The nut with the gun was very unsettling. The quote on the sign he was carrying around was the same quote that was printed on Timothy McVeigh's t-shirt when he was picked up after the Oklahoma City bombing. Stuff like that is not coincidental.
Zorro - I think you're right and the guy with the gun was just way over the top. Someone mentioned that someone could have wrestled that gun from him and caused the lost of life. Why bring such a thing to a health care debate? It was just crazy. I do think, though, that unmarked guys were surrounding him that day. He was an apparent threat. Some things may be lawful but not expedient.
Post a Comment