Redefining Rockel

You know I never discuss female thermodynamics - Lou; Rescue Me

Poll

Rockel Recipes

Untested Recipes (1)

All Recipes (6)

Peeps

Politics

News

Fake News

Stuff

The Film of the Week

The WORD of the Week

Matthew 3:7-10

But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.

And do not think you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father.' I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.

The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

Stupid Fact of the Week

There was only one civilian casualty during the three-day Battle of Gettysburg

17 March, 2008

What the Hell? (Better late than never Political edition)

My apologies for the delay in posting anything, much less this previously announced topic.

I'm a bit apprehensive to post, however, due to what happened to Duke after my posting about them (subsequently lost their next two games and finished out the season by losing to "that team" and not even making it to the ACC finals).

Ah, well. Caution to the wind. Politics.

I guess the most recent event in the political realm is the Spitzer scandal. First of all (here comes the libertarian in me), why is prostitution (or rather, the mere act of solicitation) illegal? Is there any other good or service that the government bans the selling, solicitation, or forceful taking of, but allows the free giving of? And let's not even get into the humongous grey line of "wine me, dine me...", jewelry, dinner-and-a-movie lifestyle where you're basically paying by proxy.

[non sequitur - what do you suppose deaf people think when they see a huge crowd of people clapping?]

Secondly, I realize he's a public figure, but does there really need to be a public press conference to announce something like this (with his wife right there)? Couldn't he just send out a press release or something? I mean, I realize if he had been using taxpayer money (I haven't been following the details; strictly hypothetical) there would have to be a public trial and the people could very understandably scrutinize the situation, but come on, is there a big press event every time he fills a pothole or enacts some type of environmental legislation? (maybe there is, who knows?)

Anyway. I will sum up by saying (as I'll [probably] come back to this) that I don't really need to know all the details of a public/elected offical's life (and this is in no way a defense of Bill Clinton).

Next topic: Democrats.

Nobody knows how to kill a party like they do. A completely historic election has deteriorated into to a discussion of how sexist and/or racist America is/was/could be based on what he/she said about/to him/her. Good stuff, guys. In November you'll be sending somebody up against Dubya 2.0 who has all but turned his back on his party's base, and YOU are the ones leaving a sour taste in peoples mouths. Amazing.

Finally: Republicans.

I could speak volumes about McCain, but I'll save that for another time, as there will be plenty of time to discuss him in the coming months. What I would like to talk about briefly is Ron Paul. He's remaining "in" the race even though it is essentially over. I think this is amazing. While his financial support is obviously not what it was several months ago, he is still receiving financial support because there are still people that believe in the cause of limiting government. If nothing else, it will assure Republican voters in late-primary states (like NC) that if they want to cast a vote against McCain's heavy-handed foreign policy, there will be a representative carrying that voice to the convention. And maybe, if the voice is loud enough, it will effect some of the policy choices McCain will make.

The only other thing I want to address with Dr. Paul (and here's where I'll tie in to Spitzer) is the (now pretty dormant, as he is "out" of the race) racism allegations. I never really knew what to make of this as it was never really a major story (as he was never a major candidate), but it came up in a recent (few weeks ago probably) video clip I was watching, and I had an interesting reaction. First let me say that I support Dr. Paul and (as I've said before) about 99% of his policy position. I think a lot of his following was made up with people looking for a break from the status quo, and willing to overlook/compromise with some of his policies, but this is not me. I voted for Dr. Paul, I like him and his positions, and I even contributed to his campaign (a first for me... yay growing up). So when the racism allegations started being brought up, I very quickly discarded them as senseless since I had so much admiration for him. He obviously couldn't be a racist. However, when I saw this particular video clip a few weeks ago, I actually considered the possibility that I might be wrong (something I strive to do often, but usually ignore).

And that's when I realized: I don't care if he was a racist. Furthermore, I don't care if he still is a racist.

I, myself, am not racist. I'm not someone who cares for any type of bigotry, classism, sexism, etc. I try not to associate myself with such people. However, racism, along with sexism and pretty much any other type of -ism, is not a crime (when it is not acted on in a violent or otherwise abusive way, outside of a workplace environment). If Dr. Paul, in his private life, secretly loathes members of a race (or races) other than his own, yet in his public life as an elected official has spent several decades promoting legislation that empowers people of all races (and for that matter genders, religions, etc.) and limits the governments power over them... I have no problem with that.

I prefer to think that he is not racist, since his extremely consistent voting record shows no evidence to support this, and because he has said he is not. But either way, I feel confident that he would continue to promote the healthy legislation his record shows.

But all of this is moot, as you will not have to ask yourself if you're willing to vote into the highest office an alleged racist who promotes anti-racist legislation, rather you will have to decide between an alleged conservative following the spend-and-expand path of the current alleged conservative and whomever the dems can finally decide to back as "the anti-McCain." Here we go again, America.

posted by Rockel @ 8:05 PM

5 Comments:

At 18/3/08 4:06 AM, Andronicus said…

I think when deaf people see a crowd of peopel clapping, it would not bother them. It would be like any other sign in sign language. it is the sign for APPROVAL. Right?
At 22/3/08 8:56 AM, Chuck Wade said…

Great post! The people demand more of this! Good to hear from you again, I was beginning to think you were too busy to tell the world your long awaited view points. Keep it up.
At 31/3/08 2:28 AM, Doyle said…

Caution to the wind, or three sheets to the wind? Yo, ho, ho and a bottle of rum.
At 1/4/08 1:45 PM, Bethany said…

Human beings love to see people who are in positions of power come a-tumb-a-lin down. Maybe if we can cast all the hypocrisy stones at someone else no one will notice our own.

I never thought about the Ron Paul racism allegations that way. How very libertarian of you. I have to agree that his voting record speaks more to the kind of president he would have been(or with the tiniest shred of hope - will be) and also the fact that one of his largest influences as President would have been to reduce the amount of influence he and the executive branch are allowed to have. He said he hoped to have the strength to be a weak president. What a lovely thought.
At 15/4/08 9:17 AM, Doyle said…

Post Man, Post!!! Or is it the Postman Only Rings Twice? Then again, perhaps if you toss a ring on a post only twice you get a prize? I don't remember, but where's the new stuff?