Equally Corrupt: Reds and Blues

The meat of this post comes from here:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007

So, I've got some fessing up to do.

I have no earthly idea who I want to gain the Presidency. I know who I don't want: None of the Republicans (save perhaps McCain), and most of the Democrats (save Edwards, Clinton, Kucinich).

Yeah, I named a Republican... because it's fair to do so. I suppose I could deal with McCain.

By the way, folks... those Iowa results mean nothing.

Back to my original thoughts...

Okay, we know Dennis Kucinich isn't going to win. But, I like the man, and he has the nuts to stand up to Cheney. He's also more left than folks can deal with.

I'm also not jumping on the Obama bandwagon. I think the Republicans could eat him for lunch, because of his lack of experience. But guess what? His lack of experience, as I've said before, is a good thing... fewer voting records to hold against him.

So, Hillary or John?

I'm more of a fan of John Edwards, to be honest... because of his aggressive stances against poverty. I hear about the voices for the middle class... but what about the voice for the poor? I'm poor, and I'm very happy Edwards is speaking out for folks in similar situations as myself. I could care less if he spends $1,000 on a haircut. It makes him weird and funny. Now, if that $1,000 was spent illegally... I'd be the first to rip him apart.

I like Hillary because she's tough as nails, and has the political clout to undo much of the mess the 2008 winner will inherit. But I really don't know.

Most likely: it'll be Hillary or Barack. The Republican race is wide-freaking open.


So, corruption and bigotry.

We'll start with the corruption of Mike Huckabee, a surprise candidate coming to us under the guise of wholesome Christian values. Make no mistake: he's just like the rest of them... only he uses Christianity as a weapon.

So, this guy destroys state government files and has questionable management of his campaign funding. Nothing new. The kicker? He sued the "state ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down." Hmmm... he sues the guys who uphold moral principals. That's like saying: I stole your car, but it's ok. Jesus told me to do it.

He does exploit the "religion thing," and he does it well. Check this out:

“Let every one of us make it our priority to bring reconciliation, not so much that we can force it or legislate it, because we cannot, but that we begin in each of our own lives to purpose in our hearts that we will not harbor anger, hostility, prejudice, bigotry and racism toward any person," Arkansas State of the State, 1997.

That was meant in the context of race relations, and I commend him on that. But he said "any person."

So why does he say this...

"There’s never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived," GQ.

Okay... we know he's not a fan of marriage equality. That's questionable, but that doesn't make him a bigot, right?

"Homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk," 1992.

Ummm... would you like to rethink your statements, some 15 years later?

"Saturday in North Carolina, Huckabee stood his ground and said he believed that homosexuality is sinful and is not normal behavior; that it "is outside the boundaries of man/woman relationship and its tradition of marriage." http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=3974249&page=2

Guess not. So, how to twist it for his supporters? Huckabee's statements were meant in the context of AIDS. After all, it was in the same questionnaire. Well, if so, why is Huckabee mentioning homosexuality in the same vein as HIV?

Because that's what good Christians do. They hide behind the mask of virtue. But they're not bigots, they're just misunderstood.

While we're pondering that, here's a couple of Huckabee gems:

"And the ultimate thing is, I may not be the expert that some people are on foreign policy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night." What exactly does that mean? Holiday Inn Express... foreign policy. The connection? Hmmm... what label is Huckabee mentally applying, if any?

“I was very sick the day of the debate. I had all of the problems with the flu and bronchitis that you have, including running to the bathroom. I was just hanging on. I could not wait until the debate got off so I could go to the bathroom.” –on why he said at a GOP presidential debate that an employer should be allowed to fire gay workers, after previously having blamed a faulty hearing aid for his answer.

Let's be real here: if this guy gets elected, and you aren't a heterosexual Christian...


...you're fucked.



That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we separate church and state.

Hypocritical? Or misunderstood?

Let's set some facts straight before I ask this question.

I am a Christian, but I do not belong to any denomination. My father is Jewish, as are a lot of my ancestors (my great-grandfather was a rabbi). As such, I abhore religious persecution and feel religious freedom is a good idea. Why the apparent discrepancy?

Let's just say: having someone discriminate against you for your parents' religion... isn't fun. I learned my lesson, and I try like hell to keep from hating folks. I'm not a fan of the institution of church, because it has become more of a business and political atmosphere than a place of worship.

I also don't know the answer to this next question, as it can be argued both directions. I'm asking it because it struck me as topical.

I didn't write this quote, but it came from a blog I frequent.

..........................................

"Christianity is a hypocritical idea, they preach love and practice hate. How can anyone babble on and on about "love thy neighbor" and bash someone just because they love another member of the same sex?"

..........................................

Let's look at some Bible verses I found, to see if there is any validity to this point.

Romans 1:26-27

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. "

Leviticus 18:22

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination."

I Corinthians 6:9

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind."

End of story, right? Well, I don't think so. All right, I'm going to possibly step on some toes. However, I really don't care... I'm more curious of getting the answer.

Is the Bible 100% inerrant?

It was indeed written in a pre-scientific age, where slavery, genocide, mass murder, and the oppression of women were completely acceptable. Also, the authors may or may not have awareness of sexual orientation, since its scientific study didn't begin until 1950 CE. Furthermore, how many translations of the Bible are there? What about the Book of Enoch? Are we really sure everything's the same... and what's real and what's not?

However, Christianity was a revolutionary idea in its peace and way of life. It set a standard. Why change that standard? Aren't those who preach the word spreading a better way of life? It seems to work so far... why mess with a good thing?

Here's the deal. There are thousands of passages about love. My question is: if God's love is infinite, limitless, and so encompassing... why the big deal against homosexuals? Can't they go to heaven and be treated equal?

Does me being Christian force me to become a bigot? I don't think so, because I'm far from it. Does my pro-gay rights stance mean I'm going to hell? I don't think so, either, because that would imply God's love has limits.

So, here's the question again:

"Christianity is a hypocritical idea, they preach love and practice hate. How can anyone babble on and on about "love thy neighbor" and bash someone just because they love another member of the same sex?

I'm certain that someone (POKE) will answer this question in detail. I am not answering this question, because I know not the answer. I'm fishing for responses. I'd also like to hear some responses from those who agree from this quote, as not to be one-sided.