Sunday, February 28, 2010

Proposition 4 on the March 2, 2010 Ballot

  The Texas Republican party has placed five propositions on their March 2, 2010, primary ballot.  These propositions are non-binding.  The propositions are not amendments to the Texas Constitution.

Ballot Proposition #4: Public Acknowledgement (sic)of God
The use of the word “God”, prayers, and the Ten Commandments should be allowed at public gatherings and public educational institutions, as well as be permitted on government buildings and property.
YES or NO

Here we go again, planning to change national law with a proposition in the Republican primary, except this time the Texas Republican Party wants to amend the Constitution.  Remember the First Amendment?  Freedom of religion?  Two hundred years of Supreme Court decisions?  The audacity of this Proposition is breath-taking.  Texans should decide the freedom of religion issue for this whole nation. 

Texas Republicans want to use the word "God" at public gatherings.  I have listened to speeches in Congress and in the Texas legislature.  There is no absence of references to a Supreme Being.  Problems begin when we look at schools, government policy dictates, and other situations where the power of the state is used to demand adherence to one religious viewpoint. None of us want our children indoctrinated in another faith.  Why do we want to do it to others?

What happens if Muslims are the majority in a school district and want to use the word "Allah'? Or Buddhists?  Want your child to pray to Brahman? I doubt a Hindu wants their child to pray to God, either.  This is not a well-thought out proposition.

Any private person, student, or employee of government can pray at any time or any place.  Only when the prayer is made as an official act of government is it disallowed.  In Matthew 6:6, Christ said it was better to pray in private.  I think we should follow Christ's command.

Texans say let the majority have its way.  We are a democracy.  Wrong.  We are a democratic republic with a constitution designed to protect minorities.  The majority is not always correct.  Look at the history of civil rights. I would not negate our freedom of religion in order to make a public spectacle of prayer.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 4!

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Proposition 3 on the March 2, 2010 Ballot

The Texas Republican party has placed five propositions on their March 2, 2010, primary ballot.  These propositions are non-binding.  The propositions are not amendments to the Texas Constitution.

Ballot Proposition #3: Cutting Federal Income Taxes
In addition to aggressively eliminating irresponsible federal spending, Congress should empower American citizens to stimulate the economy by Congress cutting federal income taxes for all federal taxpayers, rather than spending hundreds of billions of dollars on so-called “federal economic stimulus”.
YES or NO

Another badly written proposition that is so vague that it is open to any interpretation.  In addition, the proposition dictates the actions of Congress.  Note to Texans: you do not control the Congress of the United States.

What is the definition of "irresponsible federal spending ?"  Any spending that benefits another state?  Any spending that cares for the indigent elderly or mentally ill?  After all, Texas is working hard to be the state that spends the least on its elderly or mentally ill.  Why should other states or, heaven forbid, the federal government keep the elderly from sitting unattended in the hallways of nursing homes? I dare you to drop in on any Medicaid funded facility in Texas after supper.

The stimulus worked no matter how Repubs lie about it.  Could the plan have been better?.  Yes, if more money had been sent to direct job creation instead of tax cuts.  Yes, tax cuts.  The stimulus contained substanttal  tax cuts.  If tax cuts weren't good in the stimulus, why are they any good now?  Of course, we need to give the wealthy more tax cuts.  Life is so difficult if you make a million dollars. That was what Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican party, .said


VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION THREE!

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Proposition 2 on the March 2, 2010 Ballot

The Texas Republican party has placed five propositions on their March 2, 2010, primary ballot.  These propositions are non-binding.  The propositions are not amendments to the Texas Constitution.

Ballot Proposition #2: Controlling Government Growth
Every government body in Texas should be required to limit any annual increase in its budget and spending to the combined increase of population and inflation unless it first gets voter approval to exceed the allowed annual growth or in the case of an official emergency.
YES or NO

This proposition is so vague that it has no meaning.  How do you measure increase in population?  There is an official census only once every ten years. I am sure that someone would disagree with the population increase chosen and sue to use the number they believe is correct.  What about inflation?  Is that a national inflation number or local?  Vague.  The exception is big enough to swallow the whole proposition "in the case of an official emergency."  What is "an official emergency?"  I suspect it would be whatever the government body says "an official emergency" is.  The whole proposition is pointless.

VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION TWO!

Photo by Annie Mole

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Proposition 1 on the March 2, 2010 Ballot

The Texas Republican party has placed five propositions on their March 2, 2010, primary ballot.  These propositions are non-binding.  The propositions are not amendments to the Texas Constitution.

The first proposition is as follows:
Ballot Proposition #1: Photo ID
The Texas legislature should make it a priority to protect the integrity of our election process by enacting legislation that requires voters to provide valid photo identification in order to cast a ballot in any and all elections conducted in the State of Texas.
YES or NO

I wrote about this previously in this blog when the legislature considered making people get a photo ID to vote.  See Could Jesus Vote in Texas?   

A Brown University study cataloged the negative effects of the introduction of photo ID's. The following is the last paragraph in their study.
"In 2004, despite higher white registration levels in voter ID states, the net effect was a substantial reduction in voter turnout. The reduction cut across racial and ethnic lines, but disproportionately affected blacks and Hispanics. It also disproportionately diminished electoral participation by citizens with lower income and education, tenants, and people who move more frequently. These groups already stand out for lower participation, and voter ID has the consequence of further reducing their engagement with the electoral system. In our view the selectivity of these suppressive impacts is their most objectionable feature. But even aside from placing a greater burden on some groups than on others, this is a policy that has not been shown to have any benefits. If reversing this policy in the 20 states that implemented it in 2004 could have increased overall turnout by registered voters by 1.6 million — from a rate of 67.7% to 70.3% — that is a strong argument in itself."
 The Texas Attorney has spent $1.4 million in 2 years to find 26 cases of voter fraud. He uncovered no grand fraud schemes.  Most of these cases involved technical infractions where someone carried a properly marked mail-in ballot to the mailbox for elderly people.  What a dastardly crime!   I suppose Attorney General Abbott will prosecute me if I take my 85 year old aunt's sealed ballot to the mailbox in her apartment complex.  That is what we are talking about.  In addition, Abbott only prosecutes Democrats by the way.  He ignores Republican misteps.

If you vote for Proposition 1, you are voting for suppression.  This proposition is designed to elicit a yes vote that will be used to further the Republican position on voter suppression.  Republicans know that those most affected are the elderly, the disabled, and minorities; people most likely to vote Democratic.  Anything that can be done to reduce their numbers aids Republican candidates.

Let's recall Texas sad history of voter suppression.  It was called the poll tax and was designed to suppress the black vote.  Obviously, the desire to suppress the vote of non-whites still exists.  The tea-baggers have openly called for literacy tests.  Tests used in the South to keep blacks from voting.  I expect Republicans to embrace that position.


I go into detail how needing a photo ID discourages the least among us from voting in my article Could Jesus Vote in Texas?

I will paraphrase Jesus. "I tell you the truth. You kept the least of these from voting, so you kept me from voting.."

VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION ONE!










Tuesday, February 16, 2010

DNA Detective Work Sheds Light on King Tut's Life, Lineage, Death - AOL News


The article, DNA Detective Work Sheds Light on King Tut's Life, Lineage, Death - AOL News, hit me hard.because I have suffered from the same bone disease he had, avascular necrosis.  My bones die unexpectedly, just as his did.  Maybe I am related to King Tut.

I have lost most of my right ankle bone and have had my left femur replaced because of necrosis.  I can tell you that the pain is intense and the crippling profound.  Tut may have been lucky to die young because without modern medicine his bones would have continued to die leaving him more and more disabled.

Before my hip replacement my left leg had lost more than a half inch in length,  My last request to my surgeon was "Make my legs the same length."  He did.

My problem is not related to inbreeding.  My mother and father were from different states and different ancestries.  I know my genealogy on both sides and their were no family intermarriage.  I have no ancestors to blame.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Conservative Views Shaped By Fear

           Nicholas Kristof
In an Op-ed piece published February 13, 2010 in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof delves into research that indicates conservatives are more fearful than liberals, that spankers are more fearful than parents that choose time-out, and hence those that support the National Rifle Association are more skittish than those in favor of control.  How wonderful.

Conservative Christians who like to paint God as judgmental may do so because they fear God more easily than those who see God as love. Fear makes conservative Christians think that God is after them.  If God is after them who are trying so hard to follow his rules, how much more must God be after those who interpret God's rules less dogmatically.

Conservative Christians see interpreting the Bible in anyway, but literally (dictated by God) as a chink in their wall of belief.  Conservatives are hard-wired to be afraid that their whole system of belief could collapse at any moment.  More liberal Christians are hard wired to be more laid-back. Liberals understand that the Bible was written by fallible human beings and must be viewed through the lens of history. No wonder there is conflict.

Liberals need to deal with conservatives as fearful children.  Conservatives must be convinced that those with other views can keep them safe.  The logic of an argument does not matter.  The argument must instead convince the conservatives that its goal is safety.

Photo by Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Friday, February 5, 2010

Barry, Barack and Barak


On February 4, 2010, on his radio show, Glenn Beck went after the President for abandoning the first name he had been using, Barry, for the more formal Barack:
"He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Is -- really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion."
I remember many of my male friends changing their names when they entered college.  Bobby became Bob, Billy became Bill, Jeffy became Jeff, Andy became Andrew, another Billy became Will, and another Bobby became Robert.  I am sure President Obama had a more sophisticated explanation, but I think he was simply participating in a male rite of passage that had no sinister overtones.  President Obama was simply exchanging what he viewed as a child's name for an adult's name.

Did Glenn Beck have so few friends that he never encountered these name changes?  I doubt that.  No, Mr. Beck found another way to make our President one of "them," where "they" are not like us.  That is the key he uses to feed his audience's fears.  Our instinct is to fear the unknown.  Characterize the President as an unknown, a different, make people fear him.  Glenn Beck is an expert at fear-mongering.

But is Barack that strange a name?

Not to anyone who has read the Old Testament.  In the book of Judges,  we meet Deborah, a married woman, a judge and prophetess, and Barak, a military leader.  Barak hesitated to lead his army against the Canaanites. Deborah challenged him to follow God's will. With her by his side, Barak led his army against the Canaanites and conquered.  In time, Barak became a judge, too.

I am happy to have a man named Barack (Barak) as President of the United States.  Perhaps, this Barack has been chosen by God to lead just as the Barak of Judges was chosen to lead in war and in peace.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Bridges in the Past

I'm in the memoir mood. When I turned sixteen,  I learned to drive and became the only driver in the family.  My mother bought a car for me with the understanding that I was obligated to be the chauffeur for both grandmothers and her.

So one spring day, I drove both my grandmothers to visit my maternal grandmother's aunt.  My great aunt Margaret was the same age as my maternal grandmother.  The two had grown up together and been close companions.. My aunt( we never bothered with great) lived in a rural area in Caldwell County. In those days the roads were unpaved but coated with a gravel and clay mixture.  The less used stretches were covered with grass and weeds.  My aunt lived on one of those dusty tracks.

Once together, the three women (all in their seventies) decided they wanted to visit one of the local cemeteries. I, of course, as the chauffeur, had no say in the matter. My Aunt Margaret gave directions and soon I drove down a grassy road that showed very little sign of use. Aunt Margaret was unperturbed when I suggested that a paved county road might be a better choice.

"This is a short cut. Just the locals know about it, " she said.

"Keep going," chimed in the grandmothers.

I drove about five miles when a bridge over a creek loomed ahead. I stopped. This bridge looked on its last legs with a badly rusted superstructure and a wooden road bed. That road bed was no longer completely covered. Planks made two parallel strips about two feet wide each that stretched across four by four cross beams. The bridge did not look safe and I told my passengers that  There was a least a thirty foot drop to the creek bed below. The three matriarchs were unperturbed and ordered me to drive on. I considered disobeying, but I was young, my grandmothers and aunt adamant and totally sure of the safety of the bridge, I drove on.

The minute my front wheels rolled onto the bridge, it shuddered. If I had been a passenger, I would have closed my eyes.  I was the driver; I had to look. The bridge actually swayed as I inched forward. My heart pounded and I concentrated on tracking the two rows of planks which now seemed very narrow.. Some of the planks tipped upward when the car moved forward.  The weathered boards were not nailed down.  From the back seat, both grandmothers urged me to go faster.  I did speed up, but only by a couple of miles per hour. Creaks, metal groans and wooden thuds accompanied our movement forward.  After what seemed like an hour, but in reality was only a few minutes, I drove onto the grass on the other side of the creek, grass that looked undisturbed by any vehicle.

Relieved, I glanced in the rear view mirror. There was a sign. I stopped the car and looked back.

In bright red, block letters was the word "CONDEMNED." My stomach jumped. I pointed to the sign and told my passengers, "We could have been killed."

"Well, nothing happened," said my paternal grandmother..

"If you're so nervous, we can go back the long way," said my aunt.

The matter settled we proceeded to the cemetery, then back to my great aunt's home the "long way."

I have never felt the same about bridges after that excursion.  I always look back for the condemned sign.


Photo by accent on the eclectic.  Bridge in photo is not the one I drove across.