Thursday, October 02, 2008

POLITICALLY USEFUL FEEDBACK

Most of us who frequent the Internet with some regularity are constantly bombarded with forwards, political opinion, adinfinitum. I get really tired of it and have been discussing it with a religious email group in which I participate. One of the members recently chided us for our lack of response. What follows is some of our discussion.

Comment. Thanks for calling this to our attention. We've been remiss. I think for me, it has been a general feeling that our group is so locked in on rigid positions and are spending most of their time watching Fox News, plus forwarding ideas of what a great choice Sarah Palin was that my psyche didn't want to deal with it. I am pulling our chains somewhat. The weird thing about where we are in our country is that if you look at the Republican President, he has gotten every single thing he has asked for, i. e., a gigantic defense bill, not a single word in it about bringing home the troops

Comment. What concerns me, however, are the somewhat useless emails that fly continuously, mostly forwards, many time we don't even know if they are true. And, why anybody would think they are going to sway opinion with some ranting is beyond me.

Comment, replying to a forward. I don't doubt any of this is true; but this is precisely what I'm talking about; forwards like this are not helpful. All politicians are inherently corrupt and or if not quite as bad, are self serving--of both parties: it is simply the way it is. A biased forward has about as much chance of reaching me as flying to the moon. Plus, with the web, it is so easy to find something to reinforce your point. Why not search for areas where we can discuss, i.e., the bailout/rescue of Wall Street. You and I discussing abortion (His comments on terminating a pregnancy--the reasons I can’t support a Democratic candidate for President is because of abortion. It troubles me that the most dangerous place in America for a child is in its mother’s womb). It is like agreeing on the idea of Eternal Security (A Christian Religious term which means that once a person has committed him/herself to Christianity, it is forever sealed), a waste of our time to discuss as well as abortion.

Comment. I believe in soul assignment. This is not original with me but makes sense. When a fetus can live outside the womb, then God assigns a soul and the fetus becomes a person. I could never believe a teenager and his girlfriend in the back seat of a 49 Ford can make an instant baby. Makes no sense to me.

Comment. Here is what I think is helpful: a discussion of the financial mess and what brought us to this point.

Comment. OK, here's a stab at something for us to discuss: In a word, greed! And, for us Calvinists, we should get this with certainty. Man is sorry, good for nothing. Worthless, only through the Lord Jesus is he brought to any sense of redemption. And, even in that, redemption still possesses the rudiment of a sinful nature.

Comment: On a practical basis, through deregulation of the stock market, greedy traders and other worthless pieces of humanity lined their own pockets by lying, creating worthless assets, which they were able to put a value on, uninhibited without anybody minding the store. Then, of course, greedy bankers, many pillars of the church (although they probably didn't tithe) and, of course, the father of derivatives (which is anything that a Wall Street shyster thinks it is) is none other than former Congressman, Phil Gramm, who authored the bill creating derivatives (helped along by Dems and Repubs who lined their pockets): during this heyday, many preachers were preaching the "prosperity gospel. "

Comment. Demos and Repubs alike turned a blind eye while greedy Mortgage bankers let those who follow the late night TV shows on house
flipping think they could make a fortune like the bankers, etc. And, of course there were those poor folks who wanted a piece of the American dream and were greedy too. But, for these poor folks, we can be forgiving as for them they merely want what many of us have.

Comment. Now, this is useful and let's have another side, not some Internet posting, bashing some candidate or putting forth a Rush Limbaugh ranting.

Comment. The flip side of the coin is that I would like to hear some logical views sans the party line why we should put the Republicans back in again based on where the country is.

Comment. My take on the financial mess after reading and trying to understand is off the wall: we need the 700 billion rescue even though we are rewarding those who have caused the mess. If we don't, who is going to be hurt are the poor people. They are surviving on credit cards, etc; it is their safety net; our country is built on credit, at least our economy. We have to continue it although philosophically it may not be the best: it is what we have. For many of us, we can say "let's go to cash, tighten the belt" but the poor folks will fall through the cracks. I feel somewhat the same way about immigration; Lou Dobbs, aside, we can't solve it, let's continue what we are doing which is the best we can. Maybe a new Prez might funnel some bucks to help corruption and drug trafficking and maybe the Mexicans wouldn't want to come here. OK, I am out of hull defoliate.

No comments: