Response to another e-mail

What follows is a response to an e-mail sent by a dear friend who does so to "wind me up" It usually works, and I take keyboard in hand accordingly, in this case the e-mail was a series of pictures with questions attached, I''ll post them and my responses.  

If this e-mail is seen as an example an example of
"liberal logic"  whatever that is, then it truly shows the depths of ignorance of the producers.

Start with #1:  So? why is personal choice affecting no other living human on earth such a concern? Oh, and let this child be born  and the Far Rightists (FRs) couldn't give a shit less what happens to them after that, it can starve, so what, if it commits certain crimes it's now OK to kill it. And the picture shows a fairly mature fetus, by the way, another example of bending the truth to suit preconceived ends.

2. Most "liberals" would prefer she be born. Most liberals would also think it's not their business to dictate. Humans are not endangered, by the way, there are lots of us; too many in some places, which is the real issue with the eggs. Again, illogic and bloviation.

3. The gays kissing is encouraged where? by whom? The issue is not and never has been (except in the recess of the conservative mean spirited heart) "encouragement" of such behavior (public displays of affection), but rather non-persecution of those who do it. I have seen heterosexual Public displays of Affection which make this seem tame. Again, the huge lie: Gays (women, atheists) want an "edge"-no, just equal rights. Why that bothers anyone escapes me.  School prayer by the way has never been ruled "unacceptable" (lie of the Right #347). Your telling my child that they must pray, or pray your prayer, or listen while others do (peer pressure?) on the other hand has been ruled (correctly in my opinion and upheld numerous times) as your forcing your religious values on me. I assume you'd also be in favor of mandated circumcision reversal for Jews?

4. Of the 3 empty boxes, none has historically been relegated to second class citizen status as were Blacks. No other has been classed as not even eligible for citizenship (see Dred Scott vs Sanford)  None still faces the same degree of bias in society either. Last I checked, unless you're Joseph McCarthy, freedom of association and assembly is still allowed (nay, specified) in America. Why does it bother anyone should be the question, shouldn't it?

5. Start with the Bible never being mentioned in school. Hogwash, pure and simple fiction. Not true, never been true. Science (climate change) and social reality ("two mommies")  should be no more or less available for analysis. Teaching based on the Bible is another issue. Unless of course you want your child to learn about genocide in the name of God. , arcane dietary laws you're breaking by feeding them ribs, how to enslave your daughters, mass murder , etc. If you substituted the Koran, Baghavad Ghita or Ramayana for the Bible here, Far rightists would totally agree.

   

  So it isn't scripture they're worried about, it's "their" version. why should a Muslim child have to sit through Bible study (it's mostly fiction) vice Koran studies (also mostly fiction) instead of Buddhist philosophy (reality based and far more humane) ? Obviously the answer is to keep religion personal and private in groups of like believers. Why is this problematic?  I'll address this in summary.

6. I heard essentially nothing regarding Romney's Mormon faith of a negative nature during the campaign, but I'm sure it killed Palin and Bachmann not to mention it, so I'm not sure where this comes from. Liberals don't tend to be the "guilt by association" fanatics that far rightists are. If you think Jeremiah Wright is militant, so do I. I also doubt that much of what he said had any more real influence on President Obama than did Billy Graham, that publicity seeking whore (according to some his former seminary colleagues) on Nixon. Graham frequently visited the White House, did Nixon seem to have espoused his "Christian values?"  Might this be another good reason to leave religion in private? I'm just sayin'.

7. The story here is in the bottom line "Guess which one liberals think is typical of Black people?"  Most sentient persons I know don't stereotype based on race, as apparently whoever wrote this drivel does.  Martin's death was a disaster. So is the asshole who shot him after directly disobeying the police and following him with a gun, which he had also been told not to carry.  I really can't answer the question, because I don't judge people like that, if I did, I might think all Far Rightists are assholes (but I don't). The difference here is that I truly can't tell from the question what the author thinks the answer is, but I'm sure he has an idea!

8. So nothing from his past is relevant?  not his birthplace,  his name, his alleged Islamic faith? This is reversed from reality. The relevant issues from both men's past are their performance in previous endeavors, both stellar. Of course one had to work for it and the other had it given to him. Both men are honorable, moral family men. Unfortunately,  Far Rightists only treat one of them that way. So who's biased and reactionary?

9. NPR has never acted as the mouthpiece for an administration or a party, unless you count Big Bird's obvious  Asian roots (he is "yellow" ya know, just like Tinky Winky was purple.) The McNeil Lehrer report was the most straightforward news program  that probably ever aired in the US. Sadly, most FRs  never listened and bought the hype from Faux NonNews instead.  NPR's status as favorite media target of the FRs amazes me, and I'm sure kids who watched Morgan Freeman on Sesame Street and learned their letters from him are now deeply in therapy trying to heal the scars of liberalism. Really? Puhleeze. If you don't want to pay taxes, move to .....oh wait, every nation has taxes, most civilized ones far more than we do.

10. Barack Obama vs Dan Quayle. Where to start? Experience as senator or representative? OK , by that measure Sarah Palin, that darling of Wasilla AK, should be scrubbing floors, as she has no experience. Lincoln - one term Representative - unqualified. But how about the recent ones? Ok, consider the following areas of elected/appointed public service:    active-duty military service;  a role as a state executive (governor, lieutenant governor, or state attorney general);  serving as a mayor;  serving in a state legislature;  serving in the U.S. Congress; serving  a presidential Cabinet or in a cabinet-level position (H.W. Bush led the CIA, for example); and  serving as either president or vice president.

The least qualified with four years as a Governor is Mitt Romney! Second least qualified at eight years is George W. Bush. Third least qualified is  at 12 years experience are Reagan,  Bush(after one term as Pres), and McCain. Obama had 12 years as candidate in 2008. Aren't facts fun? Don't you feel foolish? Oh, but I forgot, the race was Quayle vs Obama, so by the criteria ,(established by you, remember?) Quayle was better than Reagan, Bush, McCain and Romney. Really?

OK, so let's look elsewhere - education,  intelligence and work experience. Obama- scholarship student, Columbia grad, edited Harvard Law School journal, instructor,  U.of Chicago Law School 12 years,  3 term Illinois State legislator, 4 years, US Senate.  All, of course, without family wealth.   

Quayle: C student at Depauw (never worked, family wealthy), entered Indiana U. law School on an equal opportunity scholarship after being initially rejected due to inadequate grades. Took bar exam three times before passing. backed by family money and name, elected to US house, three terms, Senate in 1980, all while never learning to correctly spell potato.

My point here- clearly the idiot who produced this series of photos has suffered a massive recto-cranial inversion!

11. The oil question is just plain stupid. Oil taxes by federal govt. have remained steady since 1996, while prices have fluctated all around. This actually adjusted for inflation amounts to a significant decrease. This has no point, since oil companies don't have to build roads and infrastructure. Let's look at it another way. Clearly FRs  like low tax, so those states with FR or Republican control should have lowest taxes on gas, right? It turns out that gasoline taxes by state are all over the place, not identifiable by partisan means. It is true however, that most states take more per gallon than the Fed. Florida (hard wired Republican ) takes almost twice as much in gas tax as do the feds. Only nine states take a bigger bite out of your gasoline cost than Florida does. 

Don't want to pay your fair share? Go to France, then, where taxes are 56% of the cost  per gallon. And puhleeeze don't tell me you really feel sorry for the oil industry, because that "profit per gallon" figure omits the true profit once tax advantages are calculated. The facts:   in 2011, the big five oil companies made $133 billion in profits, the Federal government 's tax share generated $24 billion to the highway trust fund. Remember, this is a resource under the ground we all live on.

12.  Needs no explanation every woman has those rights, and she also has the right to reject any or all of them, but not for FRs, many of whose female leaders do some or all of those things while criticizing others. Can you say Phyllis Schlafly? Of course she did have the good sense to reject her gay  son when he came out to her. I mean, what mom wouldn't? A secondary interest is that the woman shown has no makeup, lipstick, nuthin'. apparently attempting to make her seem clean cut, down to earth, homey, etc. My problem is that almost all the Republican woman candidates I've  seen (Bachmann, Palin, etc. are "tarted up" like Tammy Faye Baker on Saturday night at the poolroom! 

Summary: In all these "comparison" picture sets there is the constant underlying theme that seems to separate the far rightists from the rest of us, and that is the apparent  self assurance that  the rest of us should simply "accept what we're told because they're smarter."  Accompanying this is a sense of moral superiority. This stems not only from a strong sense of spiritual goodness, but also from the Xenophobic  smugness that their (FR's) moral guidepost is the only one that should be allowed.

The Far Rightist manifesto goes something like this:

"It's not sufficient simply for me to live by my standards, but it's essential for the general welfare that you do too. Your spirituality, no matter of  how it guides your moral behavior is inferior to mine  because it's different.  There is no belief system that you may have, if it isn't like mine, that we should allow in public venues, but you should be forced to observe , listen to, and have your children influenced by mine."

"No behavior of which I don't approve, for whatever reason, should be allowed to others, even if they don't agree with me. I get to decide which Science is good and which is bad, I get to force my superstitions, biases and  emotional scars upon you. Because I believe that some book or scroll, has some supernatural portent for my life, you must share in the illusion."

"And over the years, based on the above belief set, I,  and those like me, have burned, maimed, killed and disfigured at least a billion world  wide for the sin of disagreeing with me. Then we called it jihad or crusade, later we called it "The final solution" and even later "ethnic cleansing."  Today, in the form of the Limbaughs,  Fred Phelps's, Michelle Bachmanns, we complain that we're the ones harmed by restrictions on our actions. God has told us that Liberals, Blacks, Gays,  and,  people who value the analytical capability of that marvelous machine, the human mind, and its tools, science technology, critical thinking  and freedom of the human spirit,  are the enemy. "

How do they look in a mirror?