FV is thrilled that we have a very good chance of getting health care reform this year. I am interested that President Obama has now said he is open to requiring individuals to purchase health insurance unless they can't afford it. It kind of begs the question, don't those folks need insurance too? Perhaps they would be covered by Medicaid.
Here's a different idea, though. Instead of requiring people to purchase insurance, why don't we just create a fair tax system such as a value added tax and then just cover everyone? It sounds so simple. But, alas, so European, that we would never do it.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Nation of laws? Part II
Memorial Day weekend.
Today's NY Times headline (print version): "Obama Detention Plan Poses Fundamental Test / Lack of Trials a Challenge to Tradition".
Oh, "Challenge to Tradition" must be the new euphemism for subverting due process.
FV was obviously a big supporter of candidate Obama, who never proposed anything like "preventive detention," being that he was a constitutional law professor and everything. And I can't sit here at my keyboard and tell you what I would do if I saw these detainees dossiers. But I do think our country is strong enough to uphold due process even for suspected terrorists.
As I understand it, no Western democracy, even those with much more experience with terrorism than ours, allows for indefinite detention without charges or trial. This has gone on long enough. Just because you "create a legal framework" for something doesn't make it Constitutional. Or right.
What are we becoming? Is this the country our fathers and mothers fought and died for?
Today's NY Times headline (print version): "Obama Detention Plan Poses Fundamental Test / Lack of Trials a Challenge to Tradition".
Oh, "Challenge to Tradition" must be the new euphemism for subverting due process.
FV was obviously a big supporter of candidate Obama, who never proposed anything like "preventive detention," being that he was a constitutional law professor and everything. And I can't sit here at my keyboard and tell you what I would do if I saw these detainees dossiers. But I do think our country is strong enough to uphold due process even for suspected terrorists.
As I understand it, no Western democracy, even those with much more experience with terrorism than ours, allows for indefinite detention without charges or trial. This has gone on long enough. Just because you "create a legal framework" for something doesn't make it Constitutional. Or right.
What are we becoming? Is this the country our fathers and mothers fought and died for?
Nation of laws?
I don't know the legal definition of treason, but perhaps torturing prisoners in order to extract false confessions to justify an invasion might fall somewhere in there...
Just a thought.
Mr. Holder, appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the torture regime. It's not looking backwards; it is called upholding the rule of law. And in our democracy nobody is above the law. Or are they?
Just a thought.
Mr. Holder, appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the torture regime. It's not looking backwards; it is called upholding the rule of law. And in our democracy nobody is above the law. Or are they?
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Bless us and bless our new president
The Rt Rev Gene Robinson's invocation from Sunday's festivities. Full text here.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Reverend Rick
Since I'm updating the blog so sporadically these days, this is going to look strange coming right after my election night post but here goes.
I've been trying to figure out how much slack to cut President-elect Obama in his choice to have Rev. Rick Warren deliver the invocation at the inauguration. At first blush it seems to me a massive slap in the face to the GLBT folk (and their friends and family) who helped to elect him.
Yes, it is merely symbolic. It is not policy related. And maybe I can cut him some slack on this.
Then I read Warren's comments equating homosexuality with incest and pedophilia, and I read that until recently he had a message on his church's web site that an "unrepentant" homosexual could not be a member of his church.
And I think - couldn't we have found someone else?
The GLBT community is accustomed to being thrown under the bus at the first sign of friction, but it is almost as if the incoming administration is going out of their way to slight them with this decision. Make no mistake about it, Obama has been consistently against marriage rights for homosexuals, so perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised. But Warren has become a lightening rod to advocates of gay rights because of his disturbing statements linked above and because of his strong support for California Proposition 8.
To invite Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inaugural is not to encourage unity with religious conservatives - they are upset that he accepted the invitation. No, to invite Rick Warren is to say to gays and lesbians and their families, at the outset of this administration we're putting politics above civil rights and equality and there will be a powerful reminder on an otherwise joyous day that there are still second class citizens in this country.
I've been trying to figure out how much slack to cut President-elect Obama in his choice to have Rev. Rick Warren deliver the invocation at the inauguration. At first blush it seems to me a massive slap in the face to the GLBT folk (and their friends and family) who helped to elect him.
Yes, it is merely symbolic. It is not policy related. And maybe I can cut him some slack on this.
Then I read Warren's comments equating homosexuality with incest and pedophilia, and I read that until recently he had a message on his church's web site that an "unrepentant" homosexual could not be a member of his church.
And I think - couldn't we have found someone else?
The GLBT community is accustomed to being thrown under the bus at the first sign of friction, but it is almost as if the incoming administration is going out of their way to slight them with this decision. Make no mistake about it, Obama has been consistently against marriage rights for homosexuals, so perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised. But Warren has become a lightening rod to advocates of gay rights because of his disturbing statements linked above and because of his strong support for California Proposition 8.
To invite Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inaugural is not to encourage unity with religious conservatives - they are upset that he accepted the invitation. No, to invite Rick Warren is to say to gays and lesbians and their families, at the outset of this administration we're putting politics above civil rights and equality and there will be a powerful reminder on an otherwise joyous day that there are still second class citizens in this country.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Speechless
Champagne and a few tears flowing at the FV household.
America has made a choice and I am elated at this historic moment.
We have a chance now to get our country back to where it needs to be. To be a beacon of democracy, equality, prosperity, brotherhood and hope to the world.
"A government of the people, by the people, and for the people has not perished from the earth." ~President-elect Barack Obama
America has made a choice and I am elated at this historic moment.
We have a chance now to get our country back to where it needs to be. To be a beacon of democracy, equality, prosperity, brotherhood and hope to the world.
"A government of the people, by the people, and for the people has not perished from the earth." ~President-elect Barack Obama
Monday, November 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
