Email letters, March 20, 2012
Our liberties have already been ceded
I need to respond to Dr. James Schroeder’s passionate letter. There are those of us who accept the reality that our personal liberties always have been and always will be restricted. I don’t know where this idealized place of glorified freedom ever existed. I believe it is a cherished fable.
The fact is we will either lose our liberty to the government or to the corporations. I accept the government because I can, theoretically, throw the bums out with my vote. To change a corporate president I would need to buy voting shares of stock in the company. That is oligarchy in its purest form. I prefer democracy.
To be specific, I am a cancer survivor who cannot qualify for any health insurance policy without ridiculous premiums and restrictions. This means I must stay with the company policy. I’m chained to it. This does not feel very liberated. I have already lost that precious gift.
When I have a medical problem I must deal with a layer of bureaucracy that is tasked to earning the highest possible return for its shareholders rather than looking out for my interests. That is a travesty.
Dr. Schroeder speaks of ceding personal decision making to the government. It was already ceded to the insurance companies, I want it back.
Parker was patronizing and mocking
How about Kathleen Parker writing an essay about politicians “patronizing or mocking people from the south” and then in the second and third paragraphs she drinks her very own Kool-Aid. She defines rednecks as folks who drive trucks, hunt deer (and even varmints) and put cheese in their grits. But not to worry cheese grits lovers, she provides you a measure of absolution because now “the swankiest restaurants” also serve them.
Maybe those of us who only drive trucks merely need to drive very expensive trucks to be similarly absolved. I don’t know how hunters of deer and varmints can be excused. It’s hard to hunt only “swanky” varmints. Reckon we’ll just have to keep on being dumb ole rednecks. Nor do I know how Parker can be excused for patronizing and mocking us in a column purporting to criticize such behaviors. Check out your mirror, Ms Parker, if you’re looking for condescension.
Pitting one group against another keeps people in line
I have heard from some friends and relatives things like “there is too much hate” or “where did all of the hate come from?” Joe Gandelman’s column in The Daily Sentinel says, “Much of talk radio is hate radio.” We have hate speech. We have hate crimes. One does hear a lot about it these days.
Personally, I don’t run into much of it myself. I find my fellow Americans to often be frustrated, but not hateful. Yet, there are certain elements in society who promote divisiveness. Do men hate women? Do whites hate minorities Do heterosexuals hate homosexuals? Do women hate men?And so on and so on, leading nowhere.
As I see it the Democrat Party is busy at work to divide the country to promote its own goals. It parades out environmentalists, unions, gays, women, minorities and other groups to show their victimhood. The party wants to protect and extend a helping hand to all of their downtrodden groups. Of course this is impossible, as the Keystone pipeline demonstrates when it comes to pitting labor unions against environmentalists.
Siding with a certain group, when members of the group are encouraged to believe that the rest of America hates them, helps keep these folks in line, even when they cannot be accommodated in other ways.
My Democrat friends will say this is total nonsense and I hope they prove me wrong.
Let’s return to pre-Reagan Republican Party
I am a pre-Reagan Republican female, equating my political belief system with Eisenhower/Goldwater-type conservatisms. Not all Republicans are far-right religious zealots who profess anti-contraception, anti-female attitudes. This is a relatively openly new development in the Republican arena.
In 1920, the Republican platform was the first party to invite the newly allowed voters called women, into a legitimate party to ensure they had a voice.
In 1940, the Republican platform had the first statement to support working women receiving equal pay for equal work. Sound familiar? The first major piece of legislation signed by Obama was the “Ledbetter” equal pay law that had that legal guarantee.
In 1960, the Republican platform unequivocally supported the United Nations “instrument of peace … for the advancement … of the humane interests of mankind.” Republicans “firmly support(s) the right of employers and unions … to enter into agreements … as authorized by the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947.” Republican natural resource consideration “requires vigorous and persistent attention to wise conservation and sound development of all our resources … It has resulted in sustained conservation and resource development programs.”
In 1980, under Reagan, the Republican platform’s tone changed dramatically to negative and regressive. Repeated statements are made about what is “bad” in our country and no focus on any advancing ideas. “Our country moves agonizingly, aimlessly, almost helplessly into one of the most dangerous and disorderly periods in history.” An anti-abortion statement appears for the first time …”we affirm our support of a constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children.”
Alzheimer’s disease begins decades before symptoms. Reagan had Alzheimer’s. He was a victim of a disease horrendous enough his wife supported aborted fetal-cell research for a cure after he left office. Republicans, let’s stop being Reagan’s victim and be the progressive party again.