Posts

Showing posts with the label politics

Thoughts on Impeachment and Corruption

A Swiss friend of mine, Martin, has asked for my thoughts on the current impeachment of President Trump and the details surrounding it. Since these thoughts are far too long for a reasonable Facebook post, I’m sticking them up here. Enjoy! 😊 * * * * * Hi Martin. Since you asked for my thoughts, I will share. Unfortunately, this post will be a fairly long one, since as with most things in life, neither this situation nor my thoughts regarding it are anything approaching black-and-white. First of all, my thoughts on President Trump: I do not like the man. I didn’t vote for him in 2016, and I don’t plan to vote for him in 2020. I think he’s a jerk, and he definitely comes off as immature. In short, he is not the kind of person I want serving as President of the United States of America. (This could also be said for most of those who have run, in the past couple of decades. I really liked Mitt Romney in 2012, but I’ve even become disillusioned with him.) That being said, I do a...

Flannelman Seems a Mite Confused

Image
When I was a sophomore in high school, there was a guy in my English class named Jeff Little. Jeff Little often wore flannel shirts and was thus dubbed “Flannelman” by the class clown, Chris Ziegler (whom, I now realize, I hero-worshipped for his ability to make everyone laugh). One day, during our study of Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn , we were discussing things that men and women just naturally do differently. Our teacher, Ms. Furia, asked us each to look at our fingernails. In general, the boys all held up our hands, palms facing us, our fingers bent halfway into a fist. The girls, on the other hand, held their hands with palms out and fingers extended. As Ms. Furia explained the difference, I happened to notice Jeff Little suddenly drop his hands to his side and glance around embarrassedly. Chris Ziegler obviously caught it, too, and deadpanned loudly enough for all to hear, “Flannelman seems a mite confused.” Of course, this was met with raucous laughter an...

Multiculturalism

Image
An online friend recently alerted me to an article in Psychology Today entitled “ Colorblind Ideology is a Form of Racism .” I looked it over, and the author, Monnica Williams, Ph.D., makes a fairly intelligent-sounding case for her proposition. Unfortunately, at further glance the article boils down to an exercise in circular logic. As I commented on the original Facebook share: [B]asically, the author’s argument is that we shouldn’t work toward a colorblind society because we don’t live in a colorblind society. By that argument, we shouldn’t work for world peace because we don’t live in a peaceful world; we shouldn’t work to feed the hungry because we don’t live in a world without hunger; we shouldn’t work to educate the masses because we don’t live in a world without uneducated people. In short, if we have a goal, we must abandon it immediately because we live in a world where that goal has not yet been achieved. How does that make even the slightest amount of sense? Not su...

The Electoral College

Image
Today’s question comes from a high-school friend of mine, Erin Solej. She asks: “Jeff, I remember you commenting on the necessity of the electoral college, but I want to understand it better because I don't see how my vote counts with this system. Of course, I will vote, but can you please post your thoughts on this.” This is seriously a great question, Erin. I hear about this all the time—people don’t understand the Electoral College, and since people tend to fear what they don’t understand, a lot of them want to do away with it. On this point, though, I must respectfully disagree. Knowledge brings familiarity, and frankly, the Electoral College isn’t nearly as bad as some of the more outspoken among us make it out to be. So Erin, thank you so much for your question. Per your request, here are my thoughts: Back when our nation was still in diapers and the Constitution was still being written, there arose a big controversy between the states regarding representation. Some s...

Double Standard

First of all, let me be perfectly clear. Rush Limbaugh is an idiot. I don’t like the guy, I never have, and the fact that he recently made some sexist statements doesn’t enamor me any more to his cause. I’m also not a fan of Sarah Palin, whose name will also appear in this post. Now, that being said, I just received an email that makes a very good point: what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I honestly don’t have time to run down every one of these statements, but every one I checked is indeed legit. If you happen to find any that aren’t, please let me know. So without any further ado… Rush Limbaugh's words have given the… left the opening [it] needed, and they have pounced. Rush has apologized. But the radical left will never accept it because they despise him and want him off the air. To the left, this is simply an opportunity to put their attacks on religious liberty in a feminist frame, and an opportunity to try and shut down Limbaugh and end his career. It is...

2012

For the past few days, I’ve been discussing politics on Facebook: specifically, the 2012 Presidential election. One of the friends I’m talking to, right now, is a rabid Ron Paul fan (as are, in my experience, most of his supporters) and sounds like she’d be very difficult to convince to vote for anyone else. Another is a right-leaning independent and quite anti-Obama, but still feels that our incumbent president will be very difficult to beat, in 2012. (This I agree with.) Since my own thoughts on the subject are long and varied, I figured I post some of them here. First of all, I am a Conservative. Despite this, I have no ties to the Republican Party and probably never will. I vote for the candidate , not the party; and when a Democrat, Independent, or whatever comes along that I actually agree with, I’m happy to vote for that person. Secondly, I am a Latter-day Saint. This certainly affects the way I see things, but in no way dictates the way that I vote. When another Latter-day ...

Awareness

Before you begin reading this post, allow me to give you fair warning: what I’m about to say is anything but politically correct. Breast cancer is a pop culture disease. The reason I say this is not because I want to minimize breast cancer; I don’t. I’m definitely in favor of curing breast cancer. It’s a horrible disease, affecting about four million people at any given time—and about 20% of those four million will die from it. That’s 800,000 breast cancer patients who will not win their battles, and that’s 800,000 too many. Now, that having been said, let’s consider diabetes for a moment. Diabetes affects about 200 million people at any given time, and that number continues to climb. Unlike breast cancer, which has decreased as better treatments are found, diabetes is expected to grow another 50% in the next dozen years or so. By the early 2020s, roughly 300 million people will have diabetes. And unlike breast cancer, diabetes is almost impossible to cure. So, almost 100% of...

Obomney?

Now here’s a fascinating turn of events: we were having lunch at McDonald’s yesterday, and the TV was showing CNN’s live feed of Obama addressing a group of Pennsylvania union members. In the course of his remarks, Obama used the opportunity to once again drum up support for his health plan. As I listened to our illustrious president speak, he came to part about how’s he’s going to pay for all this, and I was flabbergasted. It was Romneycare! Now, don’t get me wrong: there are still plenty of differences between Obama’s plan and what Romney pushed through, in Massachusetts. However, the main sticking point—that the government stop paying doctors to treat the uninsured, then turn around and use that money to insure the same people they’re no longer paying for—was there. Frankly, I don’t know if this has always been a part of his plan (and don’t really care), but I do know a good idea when I hear it. It made sense when Romney suggested it, and it makes sense when Obama suggests it....

Obamarama

So last night, Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina spoke out in an unbecoming outburst, during the President’s speech before Congress (not that he was really addressing Congress, but that’s not Obama; that’s presidents in general). In case you’ve been in a cave this morning, Obama claimed that his health care plan—which he has now essentially vowed to push through, no matter what, and if the Republicans don’t like it, that’s just because they’re stupid whiners—would not apply to illegal immigrants. Representative Wilson yelled out, right then and there, “You lie!” (Nancy Pelosi was not amused.) So here’s the problem: Wilson’s outburst was inappropriate, but not necessarily inaccurate. And even if one does believe that Wilson is wrong, he spoke his beliefs, which last I checked, was still okay in this country. So the question now is: how does Wilson—a virtual unknown, until last night—turn this into a positive? Wilson has been apologizing (through his people, of course) almost since...