Some people hate trickle-down economics. They speak of its “failure,” its “victims,” and they claim that it “doesn’t work.” On the other hand, some people like and endorse it. Before we get into the arguments for and against it, the question is: what is it?
I recently heard a radio show host (a guest on another's show I have since forgotten) call pro-choice people “pro-abortion.” While this is true of a minority of those who call themselves pro-choice (those who would try to prevent women considering abortion from receiving pro-life information pamphlets or from requiring waiting periods or ultrasounds), I do not believe it is true of the majority. Many of those who call themselves pro-choice speak of their unease and concern that they might be ending a life, and many even admit that they would probably choose life themselves. Even after an email was sent to him by a listener, equating calling “pro-choice” “pro-abortion” with calling “pro-life” “anti-choice,” this radio host dug himself in deeper and continued his characterization, using an argument I admit I didn’t really understand.
“’Live Free or Die’ isn’t just the official motto for a great state. As the 62nd Republican National Committee Chairman, I think it’s a mantra our party should live by.” So begins Kel Mehlman’s call for the GOP not to “strip citizens of their right to marry,” speaking of HB 437, which would repeal the recent extension of marriage to homosexual unions in New Hampshire. It is a noble sentiment to wish greater freedom for all citizens, and I whole-heartedly back that sentiment – but at the same time, to frame the debate over gay marriage as freedom versus non-freedom is to grossly misunderstand what the debate is even about, and to miss exactly why it is that so many people are against gay marriage.
I recently met a young man who calls himself a socialist, but he's really a libertarian. I'll explain.
In his speech to congress, President Bush said, “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.”
It is no mystery to those who know me that I dislike political labels. Now I find some people that actually like them.
Though I am not yet ready to whole-heartedly endorse them (I am uneasy about most campaign finance reform, which is one of their issues.), www.nolabels.org is still worth checking out. They are a non-partisan organization that proposes eliminating the use of partisan labels from political discourse.
Sometimes communication frustrates me.
I wasn’t aware of any disagreement between my peers. I thought that everyone had the same sense of fairness; it was just that some people were jerks or bullies. Even if there may have been some disagreement over what our rights were, I assumed that everyone knew what a “right” was. Then I grew up and was exposed to the world of politics.
Symbols often mean different things to different people. To some, the Confederate Flag is about freedom. To others, it is about slavery. Both of those meanings make historical sense. I can easily understand why some people are offended by the Confederate Flag. I have a harder time understanding why some people are offended or ashamed of the American Flag. I also have a hard time understanding why some are offended by religion and spirituality.
I recently came across this blog post claiming that Sarah Palin (and the right wing in general) were consistently more violent in word and deed than the left. I think that perhaps the author read a bit too much into Palin's words and assumed that she was inciting violent activity. I think maybe she was speaking metaphorically. The author also went on to claim that the right often gets a free pass in the media while the left gets called out for every little outburst.
Obama is a socialist! Or is he? What is socialism? It seems to be one of those words that is loosely defined enough to apply to nearly any government policy. Below are some of my observations I have made over the course of my lifetime and how they relate to our current struggles to understand each other.
At least part of the problem in the debates over allowing gays to marry is a failure to understand the different positions. On the one hand, homosexuals feel unfairly discriminated against for something that is nobody's business but their own. This is perfectly understandable to me. I fully agree that any sort of "bedroom behavior" or whom we choose to socialize with should not be subject to regulation, but what many "homosexuality activists fail to understand is the opposing position.
Hi, I'm Dan. I like chocolate, hiking, and politics.