Hating Politics

I see more and more that people "hate" politics (It's the art and science of running a government. Is that what they hate? The way the government is run?).

Wrong call.

I believe that some of this "hating politics" is more of the same smartphone game, just labeled as a different app. 

It starts with the pervasive heralding of Thomas Jefferson's letter about separation of church and state. This app is ALL OVER THE PLACE (it must be a free one).

It is now somehow affecting those people who are not even IN a church or working FOR the government.  For example, a solid, long-standing organization with "American Revolution" in its title sent out a letter recently telling its members about this tenet of separating church and state.  It had been reported erroneously that they were getting rid of any mention of God or Jesus in their membership materials, and they had issued a letter refuting that.  In that letter, however, they still wrote it's important to separate religion out.  What?

I have YET to figure out in which category this organization would fit.  The test is simple - are they church?  No.  Are they state?  No.  So why are THEY taking up this banner, which isn't even part of the Constitution in the first place?

You can hate what you want. I won't question your heart. I just don't want people hating politics because it makes them appear above the fray: as if their hearts are separated from their brains.  This should not be the newest app out there, based on app 1.0.

Let's get this straight.  If you love Thomas Jefferson, I get it (I have a TJ of my own whom I adore). But he truly did just write about separation of church and state, not separation of hearts and brains. 

Please do not adopt this as your own banner.  Please, pick up a banner, any banner, and be active.  If the last ten years have taught us anything, it is that politicians DO have control over our lives, and very dear, monetary control, and so we must exercise our representative right to express our desires!!!!!!! 

And I'll give a little.  I'll let you hate politics, in one case.  Hear me out.

If you do mean, by hating politics, you hate the way the government runs, then try to affect change.  Exercise your right to be a part of this government by applying for a job in it, or running for office, or voting, or all three.  Better yet, affect more change by becoming a lobbyist.  I am not sarcastic here: it is true they hold power.  So go where there is power.  Or become a lawyer, then judge, and change society from the bench.  That looks to me like the easiest route to bigger power. [Religious interlude: I answer to an even higher power, but I don't think even He wants us to roll over and play dead]

But even after all these attempts, if you have tried and tried and tried, and finally, on your death bed, can do no more, you hate it, you can.  But then and only then give up! 

Don't fall for this "I hate politics" mantra [because my heart is separated from my brain and therefore I am above it all] - affect change within this amorphous mass.  I believe that is the most effective, safest, most peaceful way.

If you hate politics, you won't want to be involved.  If you aren't involved, you can't affect change, or affect status quo, whichever you prefer. 

Some politicians would love that fewer people are involved - from whom they tax and for whom they legislate.

If you are a citizen of the United States, you are part of the government (since a government cannot conduct its business without citizens....)... and because politics is the art and science of that government, you are in it. 

You can't hate politics, until you are dead and have no use for it (as you cease to be ruled over by people, and governments on earth).

And you shouldn't stay out of politics, unless you ignore your pay stub.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. Find the letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 here (Library of Congress weblink below). He was adding his own words to the Amendment as an explanation. Taken out of context, it's gone crazy.  http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

P.P.S. Incidentally, if you are going to extol this separation idea as a virtue of Thomas Jefferson, can we talk about how he wrote exhaustively about the dangers of a country in debt (yes, even as he died a debtor)? Why do we hear about separation of church and state from his ONE letter and not about getting out of debt from his COUNTLESS letters?  Why is that not our rally cry?  Surely we can all agree about that?  Let's not rob from Peter to pay Paul.  Or rob from Hu Jintao to pay America.

Pork - the Other Fiscal Meat

We were served a bit of pork in the fiscal cliff deal and I can't stomach it.

Well, that's not all true.  I like some of it! [The following are taken from a FOX News report.  Don't judge me.] 

I like the $59 million tax credit for algae growers to develop biofuel out of that abudant energy source.

I like the $7 million for electric motorcycle developers (but keep in mind, in my world, I would just buy an electric motorcycle!  I wouldn't make someone else pay for what I want!).

I know a lot of people who will ADORE the $78 million tax break for a racetrack for NASCAR.  While I am not one of them, oh well. 

In the wake of Sandy Hook, though, I especially have indigestion when it comes to the special expensing rule allowing and extra $222 million for Hollywood.

Why?  First, because these leaders proclaim to want to redistribute wealth with their power.  Uh, don't know if you have noticed, but Hollywood already has quite a bit of wealth. 

So, first because they are being hypocritical according to their own tenets.

Secondly, because I do believe the things on TV are influencing little brains that turn into big brains, and I'd rather not finance that with my family's tax money.  I pay Netflix every month.  And even that plan varies by our home budget allowance each month. I don't want to pay taxes for the films I choose not to watch! Come on!!

But since I sit in my home, and Congress sits in, well, CONGRESS, I guess, sure, take more of my family's money for your special projects.  I guess that is how it works.

The hard truth is that is THE way Congress can get things passed.  Just do your own research on how Republicans voted in favor of passing the Democrats' health care bill.  One would ask how Republicans voted for something so obviously big government.  The answer is pork, and it will shock you.

So, cheers!  Pork's for dinner tonight, somewhere.  And tomorrow night, and the next night, and the next...  While my family is frugally eating mac 'n cheese, some will be dining on their choice of meat.  Enjoy!

Avoided-Fiscal-Cliff Hangover

It's January 2.  The country is still on a path to live beyond our means as a nation.  Many politicians besides Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles still are afraid to express what needs to be expressed.  STAND OUT for speaking truth, rather than being cowered under fear.  The bill that got passed last night was silly, not to mention a can kicked down the road.  More chillingly, the House and Senate and President waited till the eleventh hour.  Why?  I am not pointing fingers.  This indecision and insecurity is on everyone's shoulders.

Anyway, let's do some dictionary dancing.  I was inspired by listening to the Professor talk down to his students last night.
1) Define "balanced."  As of this month, it has two different meanings.  Obama last night expressed very clearly that he would like a balance between more spending and investment.  That's hilarious!  Both mean to spend more!  The other side believes it means having somewhat equal income with what we spend - so when one side goes up, the other side must also.  But to bring down one side, the other side must go down as well.  That definition is dying.

2) Define "rich."  As of this month, it means those earning over $400,000 or $450,000 as a couple.  What's to say that won't change?  It can easily be adjusted downward, until suddenly, those who voted to "tax the rich! tax the rich!" ARE the rich.  That 2%? It will shrink, don't worry.  It won't exist.  And then who can the government tax more to pay for its appetite?  You.  This is how it happens, folks.  Do not covet from (or hate) those who have more than you.  Truly.  It is dangerous.

Please understand.  I love the government.  I love to study it, it's fascinating.  But also having studied organizations at length (yes, for a master's degree, but also because they have so much impact on my life), I can tell you the single most driving force of any organization, but especially one so large, is to sustain itself and grow.  The problem is, this government has a check and balance among its different arms but not on the greater entity itself.  I no longer think "the public" is as powerful as it likes to think it is.

If you would like to pray for our leaders - yes, all of them - try this link.  It is helping me a great deal.  Prayer changes things (including us!):
http://www.2heartsnetwork.org/politics.htm

It's Whose Fault?

Pointed Fingers

On the off chance something gets passed today, what will we have to show for it?

Republicans will get the blame, yes, we all know this.  Whether it's true or not makes no difference.  It will be what is recorded by those who write history, despite the fact that the other party controls the White House AND one house of Congress (AND apparently, has favor in the Supreme Court).  An injustice and wrong attribution?  Perhaps. 

But we will all share the burden for a bill that won't have enough spending cuts or enough taxes to make any dent in our debt.  It's one of many times this has happened.  This is just the only time it's had a cool name.  Fiscal cliff.  Cute.

The problem is that we are all starting from different mission sets, and any combo thereof.

Mission Set 1: avoid fiscal cliff at all costs, perhaps for the sake of the CURRENT, "fragile" American economy.  This leads to accepting shoddy work, not to mention kicking the can of debt down the road.  It also makes our economy more fragile, since debt will not have been paid down.

Mission Set 2: avoid compromise at all costs.  This leads to the production of no work, shoddy or otherwise.

Mission Set 3: avoid spending cuts at all costs.  This leads to only taxes being raised and kicked can down road.

Mission Set 4: avoid raising taxes at all costs.  This leads to disharmony within the Republican Party and its [perhaps misattributed] subset of Tea Party, and to being called "rich."  Ouch.  Also leads to Kicked Can Down Road.

So the fact is all we lose if we allow any one mission set.  All of us meaning, we who would like a solution to Social Security before we actually get to our sixties, we who have children to whom we teach good budgeting skills, and we who have never looked up to Europe as more than a great place to tour and take pictures of deserted cathedrals.  Don't get me wrong: it's still a great place to do mission work.

The Divide

Many have waxed on about the divide in America.  America just continues to splinter.  They say it's like the Grand Canyon, one side on the North Rim and the other on the South (I can't resist, but there are a whole lot of people just enjoying the ride down the Colorado River in between.  Oh, to be a fun-loving American who cares less about the future, or trusts that somehow everything will end like a Disney movie!  Truly!).

Let's wax off that though, shall we?  It's no longer the Grand Canyon.  It's the medieval times map of England.  Hard-working serfs in the red mainland work hard to produce food and wages that serve the appetites and programs of blue castles of cities.  Serfs' values are dramatically different, yet they are being called on to support those with whom they do not agree... some on very deep (dare I say religious?) levels.

We are spending too much, and taxing too little.  Meanwhile, freedoms are being assaulted, and in one very tangible way.

The Call

Government has always taxed what is sees as bad behavior and rewarded what is sees as good behavior.  Today is no different.  And politicians can do much to further their beliefs behind the scenes.  But some aren't even trying to keep their objectives under wraps.  The new tactic in old sheep's clothing is to tax success (old news) and freedom (the new news).  That way, there is no obvious constitutional violation - yet certain freedoms become harder to exercise. 

And it's being done in the name of "law," "order," and "tolerance."  But only for some people.

Wrong call.