The above is a letter to the editor publish in my newspaper this week. The author has graciously given permission for me to reprint it.
I offer my views on a few of the points he makes. If I do not address his points, assume I agree with him.
As this reply gets a bit winded (see the letter in the post just above this) I shall summarize.
Liberals say that all points of view deserve respect. The key is respect. What do they mean by that? I can’t get one to tell me.
|Objection noted. Coon jerky 4 days from now...|
If you think that sounds like conservatives, you win! Your prize is in the mail.
Anyway, my commentary. His items are in italics (if I remember to do it that way).
“I believe in not only personal responsibility but shared responsibility towards my country and fellow citizens.”
Weeeeelllll. Can’t disagree totally with this. But I do not believe my responsibilities go as far as Mr. Gentry indicates his in other parts of his letter.
|But I am NOT in charge of yours.|
“I believe that every person is entitled to dignity and respect, not because of what they have but because of who they are – human.”
Willing to stipulate that, provided the other person reciprocates. Liberals generally are not willing to do this when faced with someone of seriously opposing views.
“I believe that each individual’s religious belief should be respected, but it should not infringe upon others’ belief, non-belief, or personal freedom and that religion and government should be separate – for the good of both.”
|Calling John Lennon, Paging John Lennon...|
Nice concept. Impossible to implement. Contradictory even.
Say you respect my religion. But my religion requires me to convert other people by any means necessary. If you object, then you cease to respect my religion.
In that regard, liberalism (and conservatism) is a religion which attempts to force other people into that mode of thought.
A tenet of religion is to spread the faith. Religions older than 1,000 years have a history of doing this with violence. The history of humanity has intertwined leadership and religion to the point you can’t tell where one begins and one ends. That is the way people are.
“When people disparage ‘diversity’ (always said with the little eye-roll), I assume they prefer inbreeding.”
No argument, but his statement of respecting others just took a hit. When you "eye roll" anything you disparage it. So much for respect.
“I believe that the areas … that is, government.” [truncated for space]
|Not part of my system. Will you respect my wishes?|
Transportation infrastructure is not part of my package. I also have zero problem with private companies building, maintaining and charging people to use roads. You want a road? Convince enough people to go in with you to build it. I live in a rural county. Our Road Department maintains roads that benefit as few as 6 people.
I have no problem in a free educational system. I object to it being mandatory. Someone doesn’t wanna partake, cool! But when they drop out, they also drop out of any kind of assistance on the public dime, including everything Mr. Gentry listed in his essentials. If they can buy it for themselves, excellent. I shouldn’t have to foot a bill for such idiots. I also don’t have a problem with for-profit education systems.
I have HUGE objections to teachers who work in a public school and send their kids to a private school. I do see it as major conflict of interest. I would not make this illegal, but given the chance I’d also fire those teachers. Let ‘em work in a private school. If the school is good enough to draw a salary from, it’s good enough to educate your children in.
Private institutions are accountable to the people. You don’t like the private company, you don’t do business with ‘em. Period. Enough people take that attitude and the private business changes or closes.
“No one should be guaranteed a religious marriage; that is up to the tenets of that particular religion and not the business of government.”
|And the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster|
I REALLY REALLY REALLY wish I had said that in that exact way. I SO agree with that one.
“I believe basic health care is a right … No one should die because they can’t afford care!”
Socialism is a fine system until you exhaust the resources of the people who can pay on behalf of those who won’t pay. Socialized medicine provides longer waits, lower standards of care and fewer resources. You ain’t gotta believe me. Just check and see how many doctors in the nation are refusing to take Medicare and Medicaid these days.
If you force these doctors to participate in this kind of system, they will either close their doors or go into speciality medical areas where they can charge whatever they want and practice medicine on whomever they want. And, you’ll get some bloody poor doctors.
|R.E.S.P.E.C.T. Find out what it means to him.|
Respect has just been defenestrated
As for the ER argument, no one forces doctors to work in Emergency Rooms, unless they are in their training period. Personally, I think mandated care ER is a crock too. Too many people use it as a free doctor’s office for minor matters. Been there, seen it.
“I believe that government is US – We the People – and, as flawed as it can be, it is answerable to us.”
I wish this were the case. Ain’t. Nuf said.
“Privatization is not the answer to what’s wrong with government. “
Not in all cases certainly. But in a lot of ‘em heck yes. Not gonna detail ‘em.
|Take from those who do and give to those who don't.|
“I do not believe that tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs. All they do is add to the deficit and give Republicans an excuse to cut social programs in the name of ‘deficit reduction’.”
Not gonna argue the jobs bit. But tax cuts do not create deficits. Spending creates deficits. If you don’t spend money, you do not create a deficit.
“I also believe in reasonable regulation …For us? Not so much.”
Reasonable. Aye. There’s where the copper wires come together and spark. Define reasonable and I’ll tell you if I agree or disagree. Regulation is another word for saying “restricting rights.” There has to be a balance. As for our current Depression, I’ve not seen any plan that would have prevented it. Delayed it a bit maybe.
As for the corporate powers nit picking, I completely agree. I also point out in my mind this contradicts Mr. Gentry’s earlier statement of “We the People.” Either the people have the power or corporations do.
“I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT CORPORATIONS SHOULD BE LEGAL PEOPLE.”
|Sounds good anyway.|
Bit confused there. So be it. State of Confusion is my home territory.
“I believe that elections should be financed by the public to ensure that politicians are not purchased by corporations and that the important work of our nation is not disrupted by 24/7 fundraising once a candidate is elected."
No No No No No No No No. Well, maybe. Regardless, it’s a nice thought and it won’t work. Elected officials will merely figure out a way around whatever law is put in place to continue to get money from special interests. I also note in my opinion Mr. Gentry again contradicts himself.
But I contradict myself too. It is a prerogative of being human.
Having thought more, I again say No to public election financing. Why should my tax dollars go to finance the campaign of an idiot? I think immediately of Cynthia McKinney.
What is needed, instead, is an informed and education voting public. A public that researches issues and people. A public that ignores advertising and looks for detailed stories no matter the media. TV is the major problem. If this happens, the Cynthia McKinneys of this nation will be forced to move to Cuba, which is where they really want to be anyway.
|Wait! American Idol is on! Learning can happen later.|