Biggest Spending Package in the History of the World

Three halves of pork being delivered
Image via Wikipedia

Congress took the Stimulus package behind closed doors to prepare the final version. They’ve set it for a vote today.

What happened to the promise of “transparency?” Why aren’t we allowed to see what is in this revised package? Congress is expected to do a blind vote today. “Don’t read it, just vote for it! Otherwise the world will end!”

I am furious at this spending package. We’re told economists agree it’s necessary; that’s not true. We’re told a catastophe looms if we don’t approve it, but this solution *is* the problem. The amount of pork, we’re told, is not important to Americans. The other provisions such as the universal health care provision are just slipped in without debate.

And the final pillaging of the American taxpayer begins today and we march onwards toward Marxism. And we’re not even allowed to read the bill.

Call your congressperson today. Demand the bill be posted for 72 hours before a vote.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Scariest Part of Tuesday's Election

It can be summed up in this little quote:

Democrats are looking ahead to expanded power.

New New Deal. Unfettered ability to impose government oversight, appoint activist judges, raise taxes, and spend whatever they want on whatever they want.

I am so not looking forward to the next 4 years.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Left Hand of God

I was going to comment on the’s latest post, but after reading their “Terms of Use” that says their goal is to “combat the abuses of the religious right,” I decided my viewpoint would not be welcome there.

So I’ll post here. Note to Talk2Action authors, if you read here: Chasingthewind enforces a similar polite and professional tone but without mandating a right or a left viewpoint. I may be very conservative and right-wing with, but you do not have to be right-wing to comment. Feel free to disagree with me here. 🙂

The author, Silver, posts a review of a book called “The Left Hand of God: Taking Our Country Back From the Religious Right.” In the book, the author Michael Lerner says,

The Left Hand of God means looking at the universe through the perception that love, kindness, generosity and caring for others are the central ontological realities of life, and that when they do not manifest in the world in which we live, the world is distorted and needs to be healed. The Right Hand of God, conversely, means looking at the universe through the perception that life is a struggle of all against all, and that the only path to security is through domination of others.

I can’t imagine what he means by the religious right thinks that the “path to security is through domination of others.” The religious right thinks the path to security is safely in the arms of the Lord and no place else. I don’t ever think about dominating somebody else, nor do I know any good bible-thumpin’ preachers who do. Is it possible the author is confused about the Right’s support for the Iraq war? That has nothing to do with domination and everything to do with freeing the oppressed, protecting loved ones back home, and good old fashioned patriotism and support for a President in the middle of war.

The author goes on to note,

[M]any of the millions of people who get attracted to the Religious Right are not motivated by excitement for their political program, but by the experience of community, caring for others, and its ability to recognize and address the deep distortions in life that are caused by a societal ethos of materialism and selfishness.

I find it ironic that while Lerner says that “the world is distorted and needs to be healed,” he also notes that it is the Right that has “the experience of community, caring for others, and its ability to recognize and address the deep distortions in life.” That’s a fancy way of saying that the Right has figured out that a focus on the Lord brings the healing that the Left desires.

I’ll email this post to the author instead of posting it as a comment on Talk2Action; I know if somebody commented on something I wrote that I’d be curious. In her profile it says, “Diane Silver is a former newspaper reporter and wire service editor who currently resides in Kansas. She is an activist in the movement for civil rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people.” I suspect based on that kind of activism that she and I will have little common ground.