This and That

Sometimes I think I should try and understand the craziness from the religious right. Other times I think trying to understand it is useless. There is no logic and what there is instead is a religious viewpoint of life that boggles my mind. Having just finished A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini, I am well aware it's not unique to this country.

Here is a link explaining a religious group calling itself The Family. There is a lot online if you want to know more about them. They organized in 1935 to fight against the New Deal and Roosevelt. They are the ones organizing today's Washington prayer breakfasts. Is it a religious cult? They would say not since they base their group on Christianity.

Evidently they feel all they have to do is confess their sins to each other, hide them from the world and work to keep themselves secret. They are only accountable to each other-- which means through each other to God. There was a book out about them awhile back, but until the latest scandals from Ensign and Sanford, it got very little attention. I had no idea it existed. If you didn't either, read up on it.

There is nothing unusual about church groups and men or women belonging to them. Promise Keepers is one of those, but this one is more than that. It gives these men a cheap accommodation while they are in Washington, and it forms a network that is secretive, powerful-- and purposely hidden. What would they hide from the world? Did they condone Ensign paying bribes to keep his mistress hidden? What kind of sins would they tell others about or are they above any other authority?

Whether you think it's a good idea probably totally relates to how much power you think religion should have where it comes to governing. If you believe in a theocracy, you like it. If you are an unbeliever, you most decidedly do not. The Family by Jeff Sharlet.

Then there is this bizarre (to the left) story that has been unfolding about the colonel who was being sent to Afghanistan, decided he wouldn't go, and used Obama's birth certificate as his excuse. His lawyer in the lawsuit, claimed Obama was not president. Supposedly after he sued to stop his detachment, the military backed off and enabled him to stay home. It is portrayed as a major victory for the conspiracy people:From World Net Daily.

As there usually is, there is more. The colonel actually volunteered recently to go to Afghanistan-- obviously with one purpose in mind, making it into a lawsuit around Obama's birth certificate. He didn't have to sue the military to stop his deployment. When you volunteer, you can just say you changed your mind. Although it is being portrayed by World Net Daily and the lawyer who represented the colonel as a significant victory proving that Obama is illegitimate, actually it was simply following the rules to release him.

There is evidently more. The soldier was a contract employee who dealt with the military. It turns out that if you sue the military, you are no longer welcome to work there. He was fired. Doubtless another birth certificate conspiracy? *s*

I would like to understand why it would matter where Obama was born or that McCain was not born in the United States. Both grew up Americans and wasn't that the point of the original law. They were babies then born to American citizens. In Obama's case it would be a technicality that Hawaii was a possession, not yet a state until two years before he was born and that his mother was so young. What is this whole charade about? Why take up court time with such things? You know what it's about and none of it is for the best of this country.

After three days of hearings, I am even more pleased to see someone like Sonia Sotomayor nominated for the Supreme Court. If I was a Republican, I'd be ashamed of how those senators revealed their racism and bias against a woman.

Excuse me, Lindsy Graham, but you worry about a temper in a Supreme Court justice, but it was no concern in a president? That is amazing or would be if someone operated on logic. It would also be amazing for a logic based person to find fault with a female for asking tough questions as a judge but find it okay in a male. Haven't we gotten past that? Clearly not. And logic was no part of the harassment I heard in the questioning from the right wing. But then those senators were only playing to their base who wanted them to do all they could to destroy her. If you cheered them on, you are in the right wing, whatever you like calling yourself.

I have understood something that Republicans currently seem to want to forget-- when you win a presidential election, if you hold the majority in the Senate, the Supreme Court picks might be part of that victory. It is one of the most important reasons that elections do matter. Obama should not appoint middle of the road judges. He has the right to replace people with those who follow his (and his supporter's) political agenda.

I was upset with Alito and Roberts being added to the court, but I understood Bush had that privilege and he definitely used it. When O'Connor, a centrist conservative was replaced by a far right neo-con, I wasn't happy but to the winner go the spoils.

We, who believe this country has been going the wrong direction, have to hope we see more Obama picks like Sotomayor. It still leaves the right with a 5 vote advantage which isn't likely to change in my lifetime given the age of those 5-- and they make the most of it every chance they get..