On the Contrary

“There was a time when Americans could think on such a scale and get it done. We used to be better than any other nation on the planet at getting things done. It would be tragic if the 21st century turns out to be the time when that extraordinary can-do spirit disappears and we’re left with nothing more meaningful and exciting than lusting after tax cuts and trying to pay off credit card debt.”

This quote is from Bob Herbert’s Column Saturday, The Human Equation.   He lays out the case that things are a mess and getting worse and the real issue is unemployment.  He is wishing for a real national jobs program like when we built the highway system or sent a man to the moon.  He even suggests how to pay for it, but notes that our Republican friends (and many Democrats) just don’t think big anymore.  It does no good if the market stabilizes and banks are saved if no one has a job.

Unless you have been asleep, and apparently most in Washington are, you will have noticed that the economy is getting worse not better.  Just read the headlines from the paper on Saturday.  In California (and I would guess elsewhere) mortgage defaults are rising and these are from people with fixed rate mortgages.  Just what do you think happens when you cut state wages by 30% (forced furloughs) and cut back on almost every program?  Even in my little town of Placerville, many business owners are talking about shutting down as business has fallen way off.  We are just beginning to see the real recession and it is only going to get worse.

Those morons on the 24/7 news/business shows are still watching the stock market and they judge the economy by its ups or downs.  The stock market is so detached from the real economy and it is amazing no one has figured that out yet.  All you have to do is understand that if there is nothing we are making and selling to the rest of the world, people are not going to have jobs and what the stock market does is irrelevant.  Note that the New York Times ran a story on Saturday about how the tight rules on mortgages is preventing people who are a good risk from getting mortgages.  In other words, we have fixed nothing.

What is really sad is that the lessons to be learned from the Depression were all out there for all of us to see and we ignored them.  President Obama saw we needed a stimulus plan, but then let the Republicans railroad  and eviscerate it.  I listened as one of the faithful explained that we could not afford another stimulus package and what we need is another tax cut so that business will invest and grow.  Let’s see.  Isn’t a tax cut a decrease in treasury funds, just like what would happen if you expend funds out of the treasury in a stimulus bill?  Second, if there is no demand (and it is ever shrinking) your return on profits from a tax cut would also shrink and why would you invest it to expand your business in a shrinking market?  Faith is an amazing thing isn’t it?

So what is the message here?  We failed to learn from the Depression and we are cowered by our fear of taking a risk for our future.  We have failed to fix the banks, make a real investment in our future, or solve any of our real problems as we tinker around the margins.  We have let Republicans with their mindless belief that now is the time to be frugal tie our hands and it is going to lead to a real depression.  Hang on folks, here it comes, and you asked for it.  The once great nation of the United States is a cowering child afraid of the future.

Since my last full blog about the failures in our critical thinking skills in regards to celebrity worship and Michael Jackson, Bob Herbert wrote a wonderful piece in the New York Times that demonstrated the difference between my bumbling attempts to make a point and a true professional (Behind the Façade).  As I started to read his column the first sentence really surprised me because finally someone was actually telling us the truth and not pandering to the ongoing and undeserved adulation of MJ.  Then he described the real and very troubled MJ, not the fantasy that so many worship.

But my point here is not about MJ, but about our failure as a society to think critically, and separate what we want to believe from what is.  Mr. Herbert made the same point in another way by showing our ability to deny reality and create our own fantasyland (should we say Neverland?) from the Reagan years of tax cuts will produce more tax revenues, to ignoring all of our problems assuming some magic hand of the market place would sweep them all away.

So this morning I was reading about how the Supreme Court is tilting to the right (while the rest of the nation is tilting left) and that got me to thinking about their recent decision to say that employers can’t disregard the results of hiring and promotion exams on which minorities score lower than whites unless they have strong evidence that the tests were invalid.  Better known as the New Haven Fireman Reverse Discrimination case in which Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayer was involved in upholding that the tests could be thrown out, this case is a prime example of why and how most Americans don’t think logically.

To make this really simple in terms of how people confuse this case, there are really to very separate issues here.  The first regards the law and the second involves justice, and no, the two are not the same.  So critical thinking error number one is the assumption that by following the law we get justice.  In our political system we have established a nation of  laws.  By that I mean that once a principal of law is established either through historical understandings (common law), precedent (historical interpretations of the meaning of laws), or through legislation, the law is established and equally and consistently applied.

Stability and “justice” are a byproduct of the consistency of this legal framework.  Anarchy results when laws are only followed when they are convenient or only enforced against those less fortunate.  In the course of our history we have found that a stable set of rules to operate by, applying equally to everyone, usually produces a just system, and as a result we are “a nation of laws”.  But it is a false leap of faith and a logical error to say a consistent legal system equals justice.  If the laws are unjust, following them faithfully and consistently will ensure injustice just as assuredly as an unfair application of just laws.

The second issue is justice.  Was the outcome just?  If you think the test of a legal procedure is justice, you have fallen into the trap of this logical fallacy.  I think most of us can agree that in the O.J. Simpson murder trial the outcome was anything but just.  But the system followed the law.  The system worked, but the outcome was unjust.  In the New Haven Firefighter suit there is a wide divergence of opinion on whether the outcome was just.  But here is the critical point:  If you bend the law to suit your view of what is just, that is judicial activism.  It violates the ideal of consistent application of the law.  If the law keeps changing based upon the desired outcome, then the law is what the rulers say it is, not what is written.  In other words there is no law  or said another way, power is the law.  Welcome to Iran.

Now to tell you the truth, I guess I have mixed emotions about whether these white firemen were treated justly or not.  It would seem that after some time, where true disadvantages suffered by minorities has been dealt with either through racial balancing or affirmative action, we ought to level the playing field with one standard for all.  On the other hand, police and fire departments have been hot beds for good old boys, racial discrimination, and nepotism, and we all know that hiring and promoting standards can be weighted to favor some over others.  One has to wonder if not one person of color did well and we think there is something wrong with them instead of the test, there just might be discrimination.  My point here is that I don’t have an axe to grind on how the case was decided. Who won is irrelevant to the question.  The real issue is, and this is what is missed by most, did the decision follow the law.

This is the critical question and that is where logic is skewed by one’s political beliefs and conflating the notion of justice and law.   My view of this is very simple.  Whether the firefighters were discriminated against is irrelevant.  That was not the question before the court.  The court was asked if the city followed the law in throwing out the tests because no person of color scored well enough to be promoted and there was a fear of a lawsuit.  In other words was this enough to demonstrate discrimination under the law?  They were not asked whether this is a fair test or whether the firemen were unfairly treated, only whether the test for discrimination as determined by legal precedent and existing law had been met.  My answer, and the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on which Judge Sotomayor sat, was yes, the city did following the law as legal precedent had determined.

What the Supreme Court did was say that having all the people of color fail the test is not enough to say the test is discriminatory.  You now have to prove it was.  This is the very definition of judicial activism.  It is also a failure in logic.  But that is a blog for another day.  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied the suit because legal precedent said that the test of discrimination was met when no qualified person of color could pass it and there was a real threat of suit if no persons of color were promoted.  What the Supreme Court did was to say we think this test for discrimination needs to be modified (change legal precedent) and then set a new standard to be met to prove it.

The point here is that most Americans do not understand the basic argument.  The argument is one of law, not justice.  But when we conflate the two for political ends we lose the logical thread.  We don’t understand the real argument and cloud it with our desired outcome.  I think if you are true to logic (Spock are you out there?), you would see that the court should have upheld the decision with the opinion putting the onus on the legislature to fix the law if it is flawed.  Instead, they changed the law to allow the firefighters another bite at the apple.  It may or may not be a just outcome, but it is not one that supports a consistent reading of law and precedent.  It makes the Supreme Court, dare I say it, Supreme Leader to decide just outcomes, not matters of law,  Conservatives are funny like that.  They are only conservative when it suits their political ends.  Otherwise they are what they are, radicals.

So what does all this have to do with MJ, celebrity worship, the New Haven firefighters, and our political situation?   Well in the MJ case we fantasize our image of who we wanted him to be with the reality of who he was.  In the New Haven firefighters case we fantasize our ideal of justice and ignore the legal arguments and process.  In the case of our political situation we ignore the reality around us and fantasize simple solutions to complex problems because we can’t face up to the hard choices that face us.  We continue to kick the can down the road (See It Costs Too Much).

We have an ideal about what we want to believe and we try not to let the facts get in the way.  People have a tendency to see the world in a certain way and they interpret reality to support that view. They block out or ignore information that challenges that view.   Michael was a sensitive and shy artist.  Or he was an emotionally stunted individual whose grasp of human interaction and relationships was truly dysfunctional.  The truth is in there somewhere and only when we are willing to be intellectually honest will we find it.  The reality is that intellectual honesty is in very short supply these days as we continue with business as usual.  We are too good at denying reality because it is just too painful to face the sacrifices of doing something about it.  The resulting debacle we are participating in is the result.

I think it is time for a reality check.  In America we only seem to remember the last problem as long as it personally affects us and then it is forgotten to come back and bite us another day.  Take ex-Vice President Cheney.  Here is the guy who had the memos and intelligence to prove WMD and an Al-Qaeda connection in Iraq and now we are listening to him on the efficacy of torture?  Oh well what can I say?  More importantly have we missed the lessons of our latest problems as things seem to be abating and we have changed nothing,  Here are some things that I think are patently obvious or as one of my math professors used to say, glaringly obvious to the casual observer, but totally being ignored by the mainstream, media or otherwise:
•    Economy – On Tuesday there was an article in the New York Times that the economy might be getting better (Markets Rise on Consumer Optimism).  Simon Johnson in his Baseline Scenario blog noted that “…among the people I talk with on Capitol Hill, there is a very real sense that business is returning to usual; certainly, the lobbyists are out in force, they want what they always want, and it’s hard to see many of them as seriously weakened.”  If this is correct then nothing has really changed and we still have a fundamentally flawed market and banking system.  But I don’t think they have it right.  I think the worst is yet to come.  Those on Wall Street are all patting themselves on the back because the banks haven’t failed, but the U.S. is up to its eyeballs in debt bailing them out and they have not been restructured.  They are still too big to fail which is how we got here in the first place.  Almost every state is facing cutbacks and layoffs.  More and more mortgages are defaulting as people lose their jobs.  I think what we have is that the middle class and working people are continuing to suffer and that suffering is getting worse, while the investment class has been saved from feeling the effects by the bailouts.  As more states tighten their belts and more people get laid off, there is going to be anger like we haven’t seen in a long, long time.  There is a real disconnection between working men and women and our upper classes.  We have corrected nothing and restoring the status quo is a recipe for disaster.
•    Iraq – The reality here is that it is going to get bloody and there is nothing we can or should do.  The “Awakening” is over and the results for the Sunnis were not what was hoped for.  Now we will see a great deal of violence as each party jostles for position in the coming power grab.  This is inevitable and the Iraqis will have to sort this out among themselves if they are ever going to stand on their own two feet.  Delaying our withdrawal will simply delay the inevitable and get us caught up in the middle of their local power politics.  Al-Qaeda will be a minor player and should be of little concern as Iraqis dual for power and control, use Al-Qaeda if it suits their means, and then abandon them when they secure power.
•    Afghanistan – The reality here is this will also get a lot bloodier.  As we step up our efforts to eradicate drugs and empower a very corrupt government, we are going to be in the middle of tribal warfare.  I have mixed emotions here as I see that if we are willing to fight the hard fight, the fight that should have been fought seven years ago (thank you Dick and George), it is going to be another 10-15 years before Afghanistan is stable.  I really wonder if it is worth it.  I guess I would have to say no since if I don’t want to sacrifice my own son for this endeavor, then I cannot justify sacrificing anyone else’s.
•    Health Care – This one is a no-brainer.  Without a single payer, government option, nothing is going to get accomplished.  I have written at length about the business model of health care insurers and nothing is going to fundamentally change that until you take profit out of health insurance (See Health Care Wars and Scare Tactics and Reinventing the Wheel – Universal Health Care).  We need a pared down Medicare plan for everyone as a choice with the ability to add additional services and benefits by piggybacking private insurance.  That really is their only role and the only place where profit makes sense in health care.
•    Energy – I don’t think we are getting anywhere fast on a real energy policy that will change our country in a fundamental way.  As soon as gas prices dropped, our eye was off the ball and the forces of the status quo swiftly reasserted them selves in our choices.  But the reality here is that this is the lull in the storm, but in the meantime we are losing precious time.  The cap and trade bill to reduce our dependence on polluting fuel sources is being watered down by special interests invested in the status quo.  If you are not even going to make a dent, why bother.
•    Infrastructure – On the infrastructure side, there may still be hope if I am right about the economy.  If I am, and the economy will stagnate further and a massive infusion of money this time actually focused on rebuilding our infrastructure is our only hope.  It provides good jobs in the short term, and is a long-term investment in a viable economy in the future.  I am not the only one who sees this no brainer.  See Bob Herbert’s column in the New York Times on Tuesday (Our Crumbling Foundation).

I don’t know about the rest of you, but it seems like we are being lulled asleep again and we are failing to make the big changes that are necessary to really change our direction.  I almost feel like we have lost our momentum for change and the Republicans will be allowed to obstruct any real progress as we lose our sense of urgency.  I hope I am wrong.

I have to totally agree with Bob Herbert (The Same Old Song) on this one, why do we care what they think.  Is our memory so short that we don’t remember how we got here?  The Republicans are demanding, in a bipartisan way of course, their way or the highway.  They had their way for eight years and it has almost bankrupt us.  Their spending ways have left us with nothing in the bank to spend our way out of our coming Depression when we now need to spend.  You would never know they got clobbered in the last election because they ran up the deficit and have nothing new to offer for a failing economy except tax cuts that don’t work.  Now they claim they are the force to keep us on the straight an narrow?  Not one Republican voted for the stimulus package after compromises on tax cuts were made in their favor.  One would think that after their twelve years of stewardship in Congress they would see the error of their ways.

Today they were misrepresenting data on how effective tax cuts are on stimulating the economy (not very).  Of course the media, once again not having done their homework, didn’t know the facts so they just let these misguided souls prattle on (see Depression Economics).  Note how we are getting political arguments again as a substitute for news instead of subject matter experts who might actually clarify the issues.  But in the same vein there was Chris (Catholic) Matthews implying that the money in the bailout for family planning was the government trying to control the number of children you have instead of giving poor families choices.  Who doesn’t think preventing unwanted children is an investment in our future and reduces cost in Medicare, childcare, incarceration, food stamps, and welfare?

But what is it about eight years of failed tax cuts that does not enlighten Republicans and those morons that listen to them?  I keep pointing out the GAO study that showed that two-thirds of businesses pay no taxes (CBS News) so why doesn’t any one ask how a reduction in zero taxes is going to help?  Of course our friends in the Republican Party obfuscate this fact also by saying we have the highest corporate tax rate in the modern world.  That is true, but nobody ever asks what the effective rate is (that rate after all those loopholes are applied, hence the two-thirds who pay no taxes).  The cutting tax religion is just that, a religious faith whose underlying belief is not informed by reality.  It didn’t work last time and it won’t work this time, but it fits into their free ride beliefs (we can get out of this without sacrifices by allowing trickle down from the rich if the rich get richer).

So what gives here?  Why can’t they and their conservative base get it?  Well here is the basic difference between conservative (not moderate) Republicans and Democrats.  These conservatives basically believe in their bones that anything government does is done poorly if at all and is an infringement on their freedoms.  This belief is not informed by reality, which is an advantage for the Democrats, but is to their disadvantage because they can’t see that this belief is a religious faith and still think these Republicans can be reasoned with.  The reality is government does some things really well, and other things very poorly.  What it can do well and what it does do well is a function of the talent of its managers and the flexibility we give them to perform their jobs.  But these distinctions are lost on these conservatives.  In their imaginary world the failure of FEMA during Katrina had nothing to do with Brownie or the gutting of the organization.

So we have the spectacle of the President trying to bring them on board and in the process, watering down the stimulus package to make it less effective, and the result was that it was a waste of time.  House Republicans live in narrowly defined districts that are inhabited by their base, the Know-Nothings.   The game isn’t over yet as Senate Republicans have to appeal to a broader audience and therefore must be a little more reasonable, but if it were up to me, I would change the bill to be as effective as possible (move much of the tax cuts to infrastructure), dump the concessions, and get a bill that might actually work.  I think you can still change the tone in Washington without compromising your values and catering to failed ideas.

Sooner or later we have to just say it.  Conservative economic theory has run its course and compromising to cater to their ideological needs is making our situation worse.  We can’t afford to fail.  It is time to march in a different direction and leave the Republicans to stew in their juices.  Besides, they have Rush Limbaugh to lead them to a world I would not want my children to grow up in.

Oh, and one last thought:  when the Republicans were grabbing microphones that our media obligingly provided them without any critical analysis of what they were saying, did you see anything but white people?  We are a mixed race nation, but the Republican party and their ideas are squeaky white.  It is a world that doesn’t exist anymore.  Somebody ought to tell them.

The late Molly Ivings, that great columnist and humorist from Dallas Texas, was once asked how a girl brought up in the South in the Republican Party could be so liberal.  Her answer went something like this, “When I realized they were lying about race, I wondered what else they were lying about.”  Conservative belief in their ideology is tightly engrained in their pyschy.  They can’t afford to let it go or they would have to ask themselves what else they have been wrong about.

There are two classes in America (who vote) and they are the rich and the middle class, with some poor thrown in (many don’t vote).  There is a war for our future going on between them.  What this war is about is free enterprise in its present form, which has allowed for large profits and gains for the wealthy, but also has resulted in a shrinking middle class, job insecurity, and a growing split between the haves and the have-nots.  Because of the laissez-faire approach to our economy, the economy ran wild with greed and group-think which allowed for very risky investments to seem the norm and the resulting crash.  Clearly the old concept of markets that are rational; that markets will determine where value lies and make the appropriate choices with the invisible hand; and that these allocations are neutral and fair and to be preferred to any government solution needs to be rethought.

Now for conservatives like David Brooks, this will bring on socialism (‘Big Government Ahead‘).  Note that in conservative speak “Big Government” is code for socialism and in their dogma this idea of big government is anathema to their idea of freedom.  The question in this discussion is freedom for whom?  Yet in the last eight years the conservatives have grown government larger than any other administration.  It is not that they are hypocrites (although they are), it is that their competing dogmas don’t quite mesh.  Incorporating the religious conservatives into the party means injecting government into your life on your personal choices.  Being xenophobic means an ever-increasing military and border police, not to mention incursions into what we though was private.

But back to the topic at hand:  Conservatives see the Democrats as the party that will bring us government intervention into everything and destroy the economic engine that has made them fat cats.  Well that belief is partly true.  What was freedom for them was enslavement for the rest of us. While the current policies of the Republican administration gave them tax breaks and a free reign to ignore regulations, it increased the wealth at the top and the poor at the bottom, and made most of us fearful for our jobs.  What most of us would like to see is a more controlled economy that works for all of us.  But ideology of the conservatives will get in the way.

That is because they don’t see a middle way.  In their world things are black and white.  It is either good or bad.  If they had their way the bailout would be minimal, and like Herbert Hoover, would have fiddled, while Rome burned.  It is interesting that the real direction of the bailout is being driven by better ideas from “liberal” Europe and specifically the English.  They are not wedded to conservative ideology and are unafraid of a more aggressive government action.  Conservatives cannot accept that Democrats also know the benefits of the market place and their fear knows no bounds.  Just pick up the paper and read the letters to the editor who are terrified of a Democratic approach to problems.

But there are some realities that have to drive the train and upset the apple cart of ideology.  Here is a sampling of what I think are the realties that conflict with that conservative economic ideology:

• The profit motive does not serve many basic needs and the most salient example is health care.  Making profits by skimming the healthy or denying coverage is expensive and is counter productive to a healthy population.  What is it about the success of Medicare and health care in other countries that we cannot learn from.  The objections are usually based upon anecdotal stories and fear of anything government.  There are two medical systems in the United States, the one that works really well for the wealthy, and the one that fails miserably for the rest of us.
• The market has not been a good decision maker for public policy.  We have let the market place determine our energy policy for the last 30 years since the first oil crisis and it has served us poorly.  Had we put a dollar tax on gas, set tough mileage standards on new cars, and focused on getting off oil back then, we would not be in the fix we are in today.  Now the choices are more dire.
• Public spending has been equated with big government and we have to get over it.  In order to replace and replenish our infrastructure, only government with a grand plan for our future is going to be able to manage such a program.  We need to set priorities and this is not going to get done without federal government planning.  Did it ever occur to conservatives that this is one of the best ways to put money into the economy because it provides jobs, spending money for those employed, and increases equity for the country?
• In this time of large deficits, conservatives (who created these deficits) are going to try to leverage the bad times to reinstitute some austere spending plans and cuts in government.  It is exactly the wrong thing to do.  Even though it seems counter-intuitive, we are going to have to spend our way out of this problem we are in.  We have gone so long ignoring our problems that they only way to start turning around our country is to invest in our future. This investment will pay great dividends in the future in a robust economy and tax revenues, but in the short term will worsen our deficit.   This also has large implications for cutting military spending and our adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• Being secure may have little to do with our military and everything to do with our ability to project our economic strength.  This will have to be addressed in what are the real limits of military power, and what are these implications on moving budgets from the pentagon to our infrastructure education, health care, and other investments in our human capital.

All of this is best summed up by Bob Herbert on Tuesday in his column, “Amusing, but not Funny”.  While John McCain and Sarah Palin appeal to the anti-intellectual Joe Sixpacks, with small town simplicity, racism, fear, and appeals to character and conservative ideology, Barack appeals to looking at new ways of doing business and thinking about our challenges.  What we need is a leader who is not tied to ideology and will do what works and be flexible to change.  If you listen closely to John and Sarah, they are creatures of the true faith of Republican cronyism and the interests of the old guard.  It is time for a new direction that will terrify the old guard, but will be the only path to our salvation.  Hopefully Barack will be elected and have the courage to take us down this road.

There are three stories that are in the news that may seem unrelated, but if you look closely, they are all the symptoms of Republican ideology that has become a faith, uninformed by reason.  These stories are the failure of the economic bailout bill, the report on the firing of the Attorney Generals by the Justice Department, and the failure of the Dream Act and a recent California court ruling banning in-state tuition for the children of illegal aliens (and by extension, illegal themselves).

Ever ask yourself why most religious fundamentalists are conservative Republicans?  Religious fundamentalists believe in a strict interpretation of their religious texts and unquestioning adherence to their dogma.  They call this deep and abiding faith.  I called it traveling through life with the blinders on.  Conservative Republicans believe in a strict interpretation of their political philosophy, and unquestioning adherence to its political dictates.  Both are a form of religious faith that denies being informed by reality.  If you just follow the rules, life will be fine.  Those that follow the rules are moral, those that don’t follow the rules are immoral and should be punished.  The two beliefs systems fit snuggly together.

So what does this have to do with the three stories cited above?  Let’s start with the failure of the economic bailout bill failure.  The faith here is in the free hand of the marketplace.  As Bob Herbert in his New York Times Op-ed described (When Madmen Reign):

“With the fate of the Bush administration’s desperate $700 billion bailout of the financial industry hanging in the balance, Representative Darrell Issa, a Republican from California, stuck to his political playbook like a man covered in Krazy Glue. He pronounced himself “resolute” in his opposition to the bailout because to be otherwise would amount to a betrayal of party principles.  To deviate from those principles, in Mr. Issa’s view, would be like placing “a coffin on top of Ronald Reagan’s coffin.””

In other words as Bob questioned, will they continue to drink the same Kool-aid called the conservative economic theory or will they let reality inform them that these policies in a global economy have no traction and see the devastation these beliefs have caused?  Up to now the answer is no.

In the other important news of the day, an investigation by the Justice Department into a pattern in firing of US Attorneys “found significant evidence that political partisan considerations were an important factor in the removal of several …U.S. Attorneys”.  Okay, you say, but what does this have to do with some conspiracy theory you have about a Republican religious takeover?  To quote from Eugene Robinson’s column (Politics over Prosecuters):

“The people who have been running our government for the past eight years have nothing but contempt for government. They believe only in politics and ideology, in that order. First, win elections by any means necessary. Second, once in a position to act in the public good, govern with the ideological conviction that government is either irrelevant or harmful to the public interest.”

It is no coincidence that those involved in these ideological firings were also conservative Christians who have brought their religious and political dogma to our government as a test for employment.  It violates everything our government stands for.  How is this related to the failure of the economic bailout failure?  They both are an application of dogma to policy without brooking any dissent or as Eugene said:

“You can draw a straight line between firing U.S. attorneys for political reasons and turning a blind eye to the ruinous excesses of Wall Street. What’s impartial justice against the possibility of gaining political advantage? Why shackle the hallowed free market with government oversight?  And, if you want to draw the line a little further, who cares if the prospective vice president appears to know nothing about anything?”

The last item I would like to connect to this faith based conservative Republican political philosophy is their vote against the DREAM act and their continued attempt to somehow punish all illegal immigrants.  Lou Dodds is the primary demagogue on this issue.  Now the DREAM act was to allow children of illegal aliens who have come to this country through no choice of their own, and have grown up here knowing no other home, to be able to go to college, become contributing members of our society, and earn citizenship.  Conservatives are against for a very simple reason.  These people are rule breakers and we don’t reward rule breakers.  The fact that this policy of punishment is counterproductive, sending more and more into the underground society, and increasing our societal problems is not relevant to a faith based belief that all rule breakers must be punished or we will have chaos and increase immorality.  Actually this belief system isn’t even Christian.  But that is what a religious faith based belief in the ultimate righteousness of your political beliefs becomes, intolerant and counterproductive.  It has nothing to do with what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they thought that rational people could have rational arguments, and the truth would win out.

So here is what you need to be thinking about in the next election.  The problem is not just George Bush.  The problem is the whole conservative Republican theology of political thought.  It does not allow rational discourse and it prepares enemies lists if you are not true blue to their beliefs.  It is a political belief that we must jettison if we are to save our democracy and move forward in our efforts to pull ourselves out of this tail spin.  The nomination of Sarah Palin is the latest reflection of this belief system that cannot look at a very troublesome belief system uninformed by knowledge, experience, or reality and make rational decisions that will move us forward.