Ground Zero mosque debate is about common sense, sensitivity to 9/11 vics, not religious freedom

Religious freedom is enshrined in our constitution.  I believe that all may believe what they would believe and should worship as they please.

This being said, however, it is a bad idea to put a Mosque near ground zero. After all, it was Jihadist Islamists that committed the horrendous act of plowing airplanes into the twin towers, destroying them and in the process killing themselves and nearly three thousand others.   To build a mosque on this site would be seen by many in the Arab world as a victory for the terrorists.

To build this mosque is a slap in the face of the victims families.

Let the mosque be built, but not at ground zero.

Ground Zero mosque debate is about common sense, sensitivity to 9/11 vics, not religious freedom.

My Problem with the Republicans

I recently had a comment in the  About Me page of  this blog regarding the statement that I hoped for “the formation of a political party that can speak to something other than the extremes.”   I was asked to “Define extremes” and relate that definition to the Republican Party.  I made several extensive, yet general remarks that were unsatisfactory to my reader.  I will attempt to rectify that here.

The title of this blog should not be construed to mean that I only have a problem with Republicans.  I don’t like the Democrats either.  They are, both of them, Republicrats.  But I will leave the Democrats for another day in a “My Problem with the Democrats” post.

First let me describe my fundamental political/economic beliefs.

• I am a capitalist. I believe that capitalism meets best what Thomas Hobbes in The Leviathan described as man’s appetitive nature. Capitalism has made us the wealthiest  country in the world.
• I believe in Free Markets
• I believe that a man, or woman, should be able to keep the fruits of their labor.   I believe in low taxes.
• I believe in what the founders of this country described as Republican government, and that this government derives its power from the consent of the governed.
• I believe in limited government, for as Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense, Government is, at best, a necessary evil.
• I believe that the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness extends to All citizens.
• I believe in the separation of Church and State
• I believe that government interests are:
  • the protection of myself and my property.
  • Education (As a people, we have a great interest in an informed and educated citizenry, and a poor child should have the same educational opportunity as does a child born to wealth).
  • Infrastructure i.e. : roads, bridges, ports.  (this enables business growth… read job growth)
  • Creating an environment where business can prosper (limited and enforceable regulation)
• I believe that communities are best suited to care for the indigent and infirm (read this as as non-redistributive).
• I believe in a small and effective standing army.  (The founders believed, and we have proven this in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, that standing armies lead to adventurism)

In a nutshell, these are my beliefs.  Now, If I look at the Republican Party Platform, my ideology is quite similar.  However, what one says is very often quite different from what one does, and I am not interested in party platitudes.  I would state that the actions of a party are those that denote it.

1. Limited Government:  The republicans have supported the expansion of government for the last forty or fifty years.  Witness most recently the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act. Republicans voted overwhelmingly for this (207-19) and  George Jr. signed it into law.  The expected costs over ten years are 534 Billion to the taxpayer.  This ain’t small potatoes.
2. Low Taxes:  The Democrats are a Tax and Spend party.  The Republicans are a Don’t tax, but still spend party.
3. Free Markets:  one example… Milk pricing supports.
4. The Republicans believe in a unique set of individual rights… as long as you are not a gay or lesbian, black or hispanic.  Their belief in individual rights seems to extend only to people like themselves…  Those that have the same moral code.  If you doubt this, listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, self appointed Republican spokesmen.  Or take a look at the Republican National Convention.  You will see a sea of white faces.  The Republican’s umbrella is neither large nor inclusive, at least not at the national level.
5. In their platform, under “The Armed Forces Protect and Defend our Democracy”  they say they are “committed to preserving our national strength while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.”    How about working on peace, freedom and human rights here at home?  The extension of force to bring about democracy elsewhere is a bad idea… it doesn’t work, and it is terribly expensive in terms of money, lives, and our reputation throughout the world, witness recent examples Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.
6. Witness the Patriot Act…  In his book 1984 George Orwell called this Newspeak, where language has no bearing on reality (war becomes peace… hate becomes love).   The Patriot Act gives Big Brother the right to spy on you…  This is patriotic?   This extends our personal liberty?  Republicans voted overwhelmingly for this act, and George Jr. signed off on it.
7. TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program)… The largest transfer of wealth in government history.  God Bless the Republicans on this one, except for then President Bush, who signed the bill into law.

So I cannot sleep with the Republicans.  It is easy to say that one believes in something.  It is much more difficult to live by those principles.   I could go on and on with this.  Examples of the National Republican Party’s failure to adhere to its basic beliefs are endless.  They talk the talk, but they do not walk the walk.  That is my problem with the Republican Party.

Nidal Hasan… Traitor, Murdererer, Muslim

The United States military forces currently have thousands of Muslim Americans that serve with distinction.  Nidal Hasan is not one of them.

Reviewing the most up to date reports, it appears that Major Nidal Hasan acted alone.  It appears that his actions were not orchestrated by others.   It appears that there were many hints as to his  conflicted  state of mind regarding his religion and his military service.  It appears that his superiors missed those hints… much to the detriment of the service.

My heart goes out to the victims of this carnage, and they are many.  Beyond the dead and wounded, and the families of those victims, there are many good Muslim-Americans that will suffer for his misdeeds.

Hasan’s actions may not have been the actions of a terrorist, but he certainly did not “snap”, as I have read reported.  His actions were calculated and rational within his warped and twisted religious mindset.

I read in one report that a cousin of Hasan said Hasan once shed tears when discussing the psychological difficulties of some of the returning soldiers that were under his care.  I wonder, were there tears in his eyes as his bullets struck the thirteen separate soldiers that he murdered, and the twenty-nine that he wounded?

I long for the days of the gibbet.