All Posts Tagged With: "partisan"

Taking a break from something can often give you some perspective that you may not get in the day-to-day grind. This 28-day (more or less) hiatus from blogging was good for me. It gave me some extra time to concentrate on some other things and it allowed me to step back from the blogosphere and view it from a casual observer perspective instead of an active participant. And it was eye-opening.

Since the latter part of last year, my blogging has been disproportionately focused on politics. The political commentary often evolved (or devolved, depending upon your perspective) into a response/counterresponse interaction with other bloggers and commenters — some of which escalated into ever-increasing caustic comments that became more personal and less substantive. I confess that I haven’t always lived up to my own standard of civility, respect and reason. And when I find myself wallowing hip-deep in the same mud as the other mudslingers, it’s time to reevaluate. And that’s what I did during my break.

When you step away from it, it’s amazing how juvenile it has become. The level of animus and disrespect among the dueling blogs is really amazing — and, quite frankly disheartening. It’s a microcosm of the larger “war” in this country between the firmly entrenched ideologues, who by their actions demonstrate that partisan loyalty comes first before the country’s bests interests. It’s not confined to the right wing and the GOP; the Democratic soldiers and left wing are just as unyielding. And as each side pulls the nation toward its position, the country is ever-so-certainly being torn asunder. And that, more than any other foreign threat, is the biggest danger we face as Americans.

We are facing the worst crises in nearly a century. Yet, partisans are more focused on winning the ideological fight than they are with saving our nation from economic devastation that few in this country are equipped to handle. The Republicans have disgusted me in ever-increasing ways with their grandstanding obstructionism; at the same time, Democrats have further convinced me why I will never join their ranks with their politically motivated power grabs and undemocratic governance of Congress. It’s all enough to make me want to throw up and simply give up.

It doesn’t seem to matter any more. Nothing that we say really makes a difference in Washington. Republican and Democratic politicians share at least one common purpose — to maintain and expand their grip on power and to pander to those who fill their campaign and personal coffers. Corruption is not the sickness of any one party. They are all mired in varying levels of corruption with very few exceptions. Money talks; constituent needs take a hike.

Meanwhile, the loyal minions of each wing war with each other in the blogosphere, discussion boards and chat rooms — unaware that Washington doesn’t care. Little that is said in the blogosphere changes anyone’s mind. Very few actually listen with an open mind. Fewer still take the time to truly educate themselves on the very issues they so passionately argue about. Misinformation, distortions and misrepresentations abound, which muddies everything to the point that it’s difficult to debate the merits of issues when the facts of those issues are so much in dispute. So often, it’s like arguing with a wall — pointless, fruitless and maddening.

To be honest, my break from the tit-for-tat spats in the blogosphere was refreshing. The absence did not make my heart grow fonder. Which is why I’m, once again, changing how I blog.

I’ll still opine about current affairs and politics, but certainly not nearly as often. In fact, my blogging over all will be much less prolific than previously. Instead, I’m going to go back to doing more non-political blogging. Yes, I’m indeed changing course once again. But as yesterday’s quotation by Heraclitus said, “Nothing endures but change.”

Stay tuned.

Blindly partisan crusaders typically don’t let the facts get in the way of their crusades. It’s as true here in the Oklahoma blogosophere as it is anywhere. It’s frequently comical, but more often pitiful. In any case, it certainly diminishes the credibility of the blogger who makes statements of fact that are, in fact, not fact. Take for example, this statement:

Liberal democratic courts have allowed the turn pike authority and a few others to unconstitutionally incur liability and debt to the state

Aside from the reality that Oklahoma’s courts are hardly “liberal,” even if some of the judges and justices have been appointed by Democratic governors, the statement of fact about the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority is, in fact, not fact. The Authority does not, in fact, incur liability and indebtedness to the state.

The Authority is authorized to construct, maintain, repair and operate turnpike projects at locations authorized by the Legislature of the State of Oklahoma and approved by the State Department of Transportation. The Authority receives revenues from turnpike tolls and a percentage of the turnpike concession sales. The Authority may issue Turnpike Revenue Bonds for the purpose of paying the costs of turnpike projects and Turnpike Revenue Refunding Bonds for the purpose of refunding any bonds of the Authority then outstanding. Turnpike Revenue Bonds are payable solely from the tolls and other revenues of the Authority and do not constitute indebtedness of the State.

The Authority receives no tax money to operate its turnpikes. Turnpike revenues pay all operating and maintenance costs for the turnpikes and pay off the bonds issued to finance their construction.

In fact, the Authority actually puts money into the state budget for the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT).

Besides being an alternative to state funded roads, state-maintained roads receive motor fuel tax money generated by those driving on turnpikes. Under the Authority’s Enabling Act, and amendments thereto, a portion of the motor fuel excise taxes collected on fuels consumed on the turnpikes is made available to the OTA from the Oklahoma Tax Commission. Since July 1, 1992, the motor fuel tax monies have been apportioned to the OTA on the first day of each calendar month. All motor fuel taxes apportioned to the OTA are available to fund debt service; to the extent monies are not otherwise available. If such motor fuel excise taxes apportioned to the OTA are not necessary in such month, the fuel tax monies shall be paid over immediately to the Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Since 1992, the Authority has received, and immediately remitted to ODOT over $365 million.

The OTA’s turnpikes actually bring funds into the state…

Roughly 40% of the toll revenues collected on OTA turnpikes is generated from out-of-state motorists. If tolls were eliminated, the State would have to spend at least $93 million per year from gasoline taxes to maintain existing turnpikes, necessitating a tax increase.

And the Authority also helps fund the Oklahoma Highway Patrol…

Oklahoma’s turnpikes also pay in excess of $13 million per year for salaries and cars for the Highway Patrol Officers assigned to these roads. Without toll revenues, Oklahoma would have to pay for these troopers out of tax dollars.

So, the fact is that the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority doesn’t incur liability and indebtedness to the state, but actually brings in assets and revenues to the state. If anti-liberal crusaders want to credit the “liberal democratic courts” for that, I’m okay with that and I’m sure they would be too.

For each drop of wisdom or rationality by Hugh Hewitt, there’s a barrel full of willful delusion and partisan bullshit. Earlier today, I agreed with Hewitt’s assessment of what’s at stake for the Obama administration and Congress (particularly the Democratic leadership) with this monumental stimulus package. Yet, this evening I read another post of Hewitt’s from today that’s patently absurd:

the massive spending splurge unveiled by House Democrats is just a joke, an expression of eight years of pent-up liberal frustrations at fiscal discipline –the teenagers given a fifth and the car keys, out on a destructive joyride.

Does Hewitt seriously believe we’ve had eight years of fiscal discipline? What planet has he been living on? Is he that delusional or just that much of a partisan hack. Andrew Sullivan says it better than I could:

Every time you think: nah, they can’t say this with a straight face, they can’t actually pretend - in January 2009 - that the Bush Republicans were adept at fiscal discipline for the past eight years, can they? … not after doubling the national debt, not after raising spending more swiftly than LBJ or FDR, not after a surplus became deficits of trillions of dollars as far as the eye can see, they can’t say that, can they? … you realize - yes they can!

Just like his fellow Republicans at FGO and the Oklahoma GOP, former Oklahoma congressman and failed Oklahoma gubernatorial candidate Ernest Istook chose to besmirch the Spirit of Christmas with an unabashedly (and unashamedly) partisan Christmas message. I received the following email in my inbox yesterday morning — Christmas morning:

*
Forward this to your friends who care.  Merry Christmas!
*

Santa Evacuated from North Pole!

Read the details at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84508

Here are excerpts:

Evacuation operations continue at the North Pole, as Santa Claus, Mrs. Claus, their reindeer and an estimated 5,000 elves are being relocated due to global warming to a secure but undisclosed location.

* * * * *

“The only way to save future Christmases was to evacuate the toymakers and Mrs. Claus and to re-locate operations before the ice melts,” said Nobel Laureate Al Gore, who was on the scene with a camera crew for the occasion.  The footage will be included in Gore’s new documentary, “An Inconvenient But Jolly Old Elf”

* * * * *

Observers confirmed that Santa was red with anger and threatened to retire.  Said one onlooker:

“His cheeks were like roses and his nose like a cherry.

His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,

And the heat of his anger was as white as the snow.”

It was unclear who would have the power to appoint a replacement, but several governors volunteered to accept responsibility for picking a successor to Santa.  Said one, “You don’t get many opportunities like this.  Appointing a Senator is worth a lot.  But choosing a new Santa Claus?  Priceless!”

There’s more.  Read it all in Ernest Istook’s column at: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84508

*

I’ll repeat what I said in my post last Saturday regarding co-opting the Christmas holiday for partisan pandering:

This partisanship by the party that so often likes to believe it’s more “Christian” than others certainly doesn’t reflect the spirit of this Christian holiday or the Christ whose birth is being celebrated.

…nor is he a Democrat. He cannot be boxed in, or appropriately represented, by any political party — especially in the American political system. But that doesn’t stop some Christianist pastors from projecting divine partisan preferences upon the Almighty.

Evangelical pastor’s opening prayer at a McCain-Palin rally in Bethlehem, PA, last week —

“O God, we are in a battle that is raging for the soul of this nation. You, O God, have raised up Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin for such a time as this … Help them, O God, to strengthen our economy, to keep our taxes and spending low … and grant them the privilege of being elected the next president and vice president.”

Pastor Arnold Conrad at John McCain’s rally in Davenport, IA, last week —

“I would also add, Lord, that your reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November, because there are millions of people around this world praying to their god — whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah — that his opponent wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you will guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their god is bigger than you, if that happens. So I pray that you will step forward and honor your own name with all that happens between now and election day.”

If God’s reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November, was it not involved in everything between now and January 2001? Was His reputation honored and guarded with an unjust war that claimed the lives of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children — His created beings? Was His reputation honored and guarded when our country abandoned its fundamental principles by suspending basic human rights — including habeas corpus — and engaging in torture (and blatantly lying about it with legalistic euphemisms)? Was His reputation honored and guarded during one of the most dishonest and secretive administrations of my lifetime?

I agree with the pastor on one thing: “God, I pray that You will step forward and honor Your own name with all that happens between now and election day.” It just might not be the same results this pastor is expecting. I just don’t presume to know what preference God actually has, if any. Both men and both parties fall woefully short of His plan, His desire and His reputation.

It’s very dangerous to inject partisanship into the Christian faith. God is not partisan. God is holy and just. God’s agenda is far bigger than any election or any political party. I don’t believe that God has chosen sides in this election. And pastors should be careful in doing so; to do so unwisely in the name of God is unwise and foolhardy indeed.

I echo what Abraham Lincoln said,

“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.”

That is chiefly why I am no longer Republican… and I am assuredly not a Democrat. In my humble opinion, it’s unwise for God-fearing and Bible-believing churches to do otherwise. Partisan loyalty can divide allegiances. And as Christians, we are to have but one allegiance. Tony Campolo summed it up best:

“Evangelicalism getting wedded to any political party is like ice cream mixing with horse manure. It’s not going to hurt the horse manure, but it sure will mess up the ice cream.”

*

This just plain irritates me. Jesus is not a Republican (or a Democrat). I believe with all my heart that He cares about more than just the abortion issue and the gay marriage issue.

Indeed, Jesus is pro-life, but pro-life is more than just about pregnancy and birth; pro-life extends beyond the womb and encompasses all the life issues each and every individual all around the world faces, including extreme poverty and obscene disparity of wealth, famine and hunger, genocide and war.

Jesus certainly cares about the sanctity of marriage, but that extends beyond the issue of a union between homosexual couples and encompasses the union and marriages of heterosexual couples, including fidelity and marriage “until death do us part.” Why do the divorce rates within the Christian Church so closely mirror that of divorce rates outside the Church? If fundamentalist Christians, like the gentleman in the video, care so much about the sanctity of marriage, why doesn’t he focus on the truest threat to the “traditional marriage” — rampant divorce rates among heterosexual couples who even occupy our church pews?

Do I condemn those who have been divorced? Absolutely not. I simply want the same standard of “sanctity” to apply to heterosexual couples as these Christianists want it to apply to non-heterosexual couples. I do not oppose civil unions between two adults, heterosexual or homosexual. Marriage is an institution that should remain within the religious context, and it can be defined by the respective religious institution.

What irritates and frustrates me most are that Christianists like this gentleman continue to reduce every election down to these two issues. And how successful has that proven to be. They’ve had eight years of a pro-Christianist presidency with control of at least two branches of government for the first six years. Look at where it has gotten us.

Has there been significant improvement in our nation and in the world with these two issues? Has the Christianist agenda really worked?

There are more issues than just these two that devoted followers of Christ should consider when voting this November. Failing to consider the other bigger issues — poverty, hunger, war, the Gospel message of faith, hope and agape love — is ignoring the larger messages of Jesus and the Bible.

*
[Stepping down from my soapbox now.]