Anyone But Bush NOTD – 4/29/2004
Warning: Use of undefined constant template_directory - assumed 'template_directory' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /homepages/10/d87402808/htdocs/backporchbeer/wp-content/themes/andyblue/single.php on line 11

By jank - Last updated: Thursday, April 29, 2004 - Save & Share - 14 Comments

Today’s reason: it’s my birthday … “I’m not even supposed to be here today.”:http://www.sinekow.org/mt-archives/2002/01/16/what_clerks_character_are_you.html

Take a moment…relax…breathe deep. For me — for my birthday, take a clear-headed view at the current administration. Ask yourself how you’d feel about Bush if the rhetoric were dialed back and you were allowed to calmly review the last four years.

Truth is, I’m no fan of Kerry, but we need to give someone else a try since Bush is not doing a good job.

Posted in Politics • • Top Of Page

14 Responses to “Anyone But Bush NOTD – 4/29/2004”

Comment from Jorge Flores
Time April 29, 2004 at 5:44 pm

I have to disagree. I think Bush has done a great job so far. I can’t see how Kerry could do any better. The economy is good, the sun is shining and I’m making more money than ever before. When asked if Bush should get a second term I proudly raise my hand and say “two two thats what we need”

Comment from etrigan
Time April 30, 2004 at 8:36 am

See, this addresses one of my primary concerns for the conservative (and particularly neo-con) movement:

??I’m making more money than ever before??

Besides the core values (that Bush is abandoning) like “personal responsibility” and “fiscal conservatism”, the central theme is “I got mine — don’t touch it.” It revolves around a theory that the only value in money is money you keep. This seems to counter what should be a core belief of the Christian community. Which leads to another rat-hole that the Moral Majority is very OT(Old Testament) when the positive Christian experience should be very NT(New Testament). Has the Neo-Con movement been steered off-course by people who don’t really believe in Christianity but simply want to get/stay rich?

(This is more a philosophical question than a personal attack. Sorry, Jorge, if it feel otherwise.)

Comment from Jank
Time April 30, 2004 at 12:27 pm

> It revolves around a theory that the only value in money is money you keep.

I (as if you couldn’t smell it a mile away) still fail to see how the government taking money away from me equates to “Christian” charity. Couldn’t it be just as convincing to argue that it’s “un-Christian” to support high taxes since higher taxes take money out of the church and gives it to the state.

Likewise, isn’t it somewhat hypocritical to stand wholesale behind separation of church and state, and then advocate the state picking up social functions that have traditionally been the purview of the church, potentially leading people away from God?

Comment from etrigan
Time April 30, 2004 at 1:38 pm

> somewhat hypocritical

The teachings of Jesus — and many other excellent “modern” religious philosophers/teachers/prophets — support the idea of freedom to choose (religion) as a God-given right. This logically leads to the restriction on religious coercion. Which leads to the logical wholesale seperation of church and state. On top of that, social functions — not just charity, but the support of “the state” for it’s citizens — should bear the same freedom from coercion.

That’s not to say I would stop the CotLDS(Church of the Latter Day Saints) from running a soup kitchen, but the state should provide minimal nutrition for citizens who want their cup’o without the fire and brimstone.

Comment from Jorge Flores
Time April 30, 2004 at 6:28 pm

Dont worry, I dont take it personally :-)

Guess when election time rolls around we’ll see if George W Bush gets another term.

Question – if he does get elected for a second term by “we the people” will you then accept that the majority want him as their President or will you continue to protest? Again, nothing personal, just wondering.

Comment from etrigan
Time May 1, 2004 at 10:47 am

I can’t say since I believe we should operate our relationships as a meritocracy. If the privacy intrusions of the Patriot Act are repealed, and enemy combatants receive a chance at a fair trial, and the federal budget is balanced, and women’s rights are reinstated, and we successfully get Iraq headed in the right direction, and the government starts enforcing EPA standards…then I’ll stop complaining.

When W was elected, I put on a good face and was looking forward to the goalposts of Conservative Politics (personal responsibility, fiscal conservatism, and reduced government) and a President who was going to be a uniter. I haven’t seen any of that yet and it’s why I’m so upset.

Comment from Jank
Time May 3, 2004 at 12:16 am

> On top of that, social functions — not just charity, but the support of “the state” for it’s citizens — should bear the same freedom from coercion.

I haven’t found this in my New Testament. I’ve found lots of instances of Jesus telling folks to “go and sin no more”, or using social functions to make clear moral points. I agree completely that religion does need to be a personal choice, but if I’m handing out a cuppa, I ought to be able to bend the ear of the person I’m handing it to.

> but the state should provide minimal nutrition for citizens who want their cup’o without the fire and brimstone.

Why? How come I cannot control my dollars that are going to a charity? Do you have a pre-Depression precedent on this?

I had a kind of “come to Jefferson” moment in DC last week. IMO, the key to separation of church and state is the realization that the state must be a completely amoral actor. The only duties of the state are the relatively small set outlined in the 10 pages or so of the Constitution. Setting moral policy, even on the level that the idea that taking money from people by threat of force to give cups of soup to hungry people is a good thing, should not be the business of the government.

Comment from etrigan
Time May 3, 2004 at 8:38 am

It’s more than bending an ear. How many church soup kitchens will hand out a cup’o to a homeless dad in a turban? How many homeless dads in turbans are comfortable getting a cup’o from a Baptist deacons? There is little doubt in my mind that we can trust the church (while there is little doubt in yours we can trust the state). The difference is every 2-4 years I have an opportunity to change someone out in the state while ministers have to be scandaled out.

Comment from Jank
Time May 3, 2004 at 9:51 am

> The difference is every 2-4 years I have an opportunity to change someone out in the state while ministers have to be scandaled out.

The difference is that the state can take money by force while I have to consent to giving it to a church/mosque/temple/claven by choice.

And quit fooling yourself about the voting. Incumbency gives an advantage such that our “elected” officials may as well be appointed for life at this point. Scandal’s the only real way to get someone out of office, and even then, it’s not always effective.

> How many church soup kitchens will hand out a cup’o to a homeless dad in a turban?

All the ones I’ve donated to or volunteered at. There may be a tract on the cuppa, but there’s no force involved in getting it read. (BTW – I’ve got extreme self loathing going on here for using my least favorite literary device – using a specific, personal example to illustrate a general cause)

Comment from matt
Time January 12, 2005 at 3:15 pm

I’m so sick and tired of hearing all you fucking pussies crying about Bush not being a good leader so just stop it. if you damn people think he’s so bad i’d like to see you do any better so just shut the fuck up you little bitch’s.

Comment from KMc
Time January 12, 2005 at 3:28 pm

Do you kiss your mother with that mouth, Mr. random-Internet-guy-we’ll-never-hear-from-again?

Comment from etrigan
Time January 12, 2005 at 3:38 pm

Oh, he’ll be back in 7 months. Just you wait!

Comment from k-pho
Time January 12, 2005 at 4:34 pm

Easy, boys. He doesn’t know any better. That’s what they teach you at Hargrave: to follow your leaders blindly and don’t question authority.

Comment from etrigan
Time January 12, 2005 at 4:53 pm

Apparently technology is something outside the vaunted Hargrave goals of “Traditon, Integrity, Merit”. See the difference between “this”:http://hargrave.edu and [“this”:http://www.hargrave.edu].

Write a comment

You need to login to post comments!