My Senator Doesn’t Speak for Me
Sep/090
From Think Progress‘ YouTube account comes this video of Sen. Pat Roberts (R, Kansas) defending insurance giant Humana.
Humana and I don’t get along anyway. What got me was this comment:
Really this guy just reflects the people of Kansas. They don’t like evolution, and they don’t like progress. Why they deserve as many senators as New York or California is beyond me. How about a constitutional amendment where the top twenty five states in population get two? senators and the rest get one. — cat00012000
Well, aside from his idea for an amendment subverting the intent of a bicameral legislature, I take offense to this comment. First of all, please don’t put all Kansans into the same category. Plenty of us do like evolution and progress. (And please note that is once again part of the curriculum enacted by the State Board of Education after their 2007 6-4 rejection of the controversial 2005 amendments.) Secondly, the author isn’t from one of those liberal bastions on the coast. Oh no, he’s from rural Missouri. Now this is not a jab at Missouri. I lived there once, have family that still do, and have some good friends that live there as well. I’m just saying that there’s a certain Missouri-Kansas feud that dates back to when pro-slavery types from Missouri tried to subvert the abolitionist (anti-slavery) movement in the Kansas Territory (this whole event, called Bleeding Kansas, is really quite interesting). Long story short, on May 21, 1856 some Border Ruffians burned buildings and looted homes in Lawrence.
My point is, Sen. Roberts is not representative of all Kansans. Just as the above-mentioned YouTube user isn’t representative of every Missourian. Sen. Roberts was last re-elected in the 2008 General Election by 60% of the votes, and as of the end of August his approval rating is 58%. It’s a majority, but it’s not an overwhelming one.
Communism, anyone?
Sep/090
This is just disturbing. Respect for the Office of the President of the United States is one thing. But this sounds like some over-zealous teacher who thought it’d be a real kick to teach these kids a song that sounds like a (bad) propaganda piece. It is (or shouldn’t be) no surprise that I’m pro-Obama. Voted for him, support him, support the DNC. And I find this appalling and inappropriate.
Of course, any viral video is going to have lots of comments from people spouting nonsense and their own idealogical beliefs. Like that somehow POTUS himself is behind this, or “I seem to recall that school children (das Kinder) sang songs praising their leader in Germany during the mid-late 1930’s.?” Here’s a comment that is so rooted in reason and education that it’s worth sharing with you all:
And to think, these kids aren’t allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance or pray to whatever they worship in that school.
Communism, anyone?
Yeah, sorry. Go back to high school civics and try again. They’re allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance. They just can’t be mandated to say it (or the words “under God” in it) by the school if they choose not to. And they may pray to and worship whatever and whomever they so choose so long as it is not school-sponsored and, again, mandatory. What ytaccount83 is suggesting is that they would much rather have a government where everyone is forced to say “under God” in the Pledge as well as have mandatory school/state-sponsored prayer. Well, unfortunately for them we do not live in a theocracy or a nation with a State religion, as much as it pains them because in their twisted mind Christians are still persecuted and the word of God must be forced upon everyone.
Social conservatism, “family values”, and the right-wing association with them is nothing new. It got Republicans lots of electoral victories in 2004, including President George W. Bush. But the lunatic fringe is becoming increasingly louder and increasingly “popular” among the party mainstays. (Not to mention the violence, racism, and anti-semitism that was so predominate with Glenn Beck, the tea parties and “9/12 Project” even in Washington, D.C. “We came unarmed… this time”? An armed revolt against the legitimately-elected government? Is that what they’re seriously threatening?) Polling indicates that the GOP is just a “party of the South”, considering that’s the only region where their favorability is higher than their unfavorability and even then by a comparatively thin margin. The GOP lost big in the 2008 election and are trying to find their footing. I don’t object to many ideas the fiscal conservatives have. And I think healthy debate is good for government. But I don’t think a major political party should play to a minority constituency that demonizes education, civil rights, and religious freedoms as hard and fast as the GOP has in recent years by using lies and distortions that harken back to the “red scare” of the mid 20th century.
Flickr
