... sort of a new entree into our Bread and Circuses atmosphere.
The MSM and the right wing blogs are all a-twitter over Blago's baldfaced corruption. Freight trains full of electrons are being spent discussing how horrible this is, speculating how far the web of scandal will go and if The One will be tainted by this.
Yawn.
While all of this is going on, the Fed is considering issuing its own debt. Now that's newsworthy. Why are they doing this? To continue their finger-in-the-dike effort to contain the financial meltdown. Why do they need to do that? We spent far more than we earned. Why did we do that?
For the same reason Blago tried to sell the senate seat, the same reason gays want to marry, the same reason GM and the UAW want a bailout and the same reason our prisons are full of young men from broken homes.
Because we want it and we want it now and we don't want to earn it.
KT, yes, the issues are moral and cultural. The current Pope so stated in 1985. See my post.
ReplyDeleteoooh, the descent into cynicism accelerates...
ReplyDelete(koilinge)
Cynicism?
ReplyDeleteFrom USA Today: The government auctioned $32 billion in four-week T-bills at 0% interest Tuesday, the lowest auction rate ever.
The credit crisis has investors so worried, they simply want the government's guarantee of safety even if they don't earn any interest.
"Clients are looking for a safe harbor from whatever terrible things may be out there," says Deborah Cunningham, chief investment officer at Federated Investments.
Fear.
"the same reason gays want to marry"
ReplyDeleteYou know, I see you regularly toss something like this into your list of people who are greedy, self-centered, and "want it now", and honestly, it strikes me as a complete non-sequitur every time.
I have friends who happen to be gay, and are in four sets of committed relationships (two pairs of lesbians, one pair of gay men, and one woman with a transsexual husband). The thing is, in each case:
1. They are looking after each other and taking responsibility for each other;
2. They are gainfully employed and are upstanding members of the community; and
3. They are not, as far as I can see, going around seducing people, asking for any special treatment, or promoting moral decay.
Maybe things are different in California, but I'm not seeing the greed, the self-centeredness, irresponsibility, the drain on society, or the ultimate destruction of civilization that you seem to be crediting them with.
This isn't to detract from a lot of your other arguments in this posting, I just think you are dragging in "the gays" to arguments where they really aren't an issue.
Tim, I agree that the inclusion of the gays in this list seems odd, but it was deliberate. Here's why I add them.
ReplyDeleteHuman civilization has never recognized gay marriage. It has never included them in the definition of the word nor in the definition of derivative words such as "illegitimate," "bastard," or "adultery." An entire lexicon exists based around the societal construct of marriage being between a man and a woman or even a man and many women.
Why are we being asked to change that? Why are global cultural groups such as Lutherans, Catholics and Moslems being asked to change the way their society views marriage? The only reason we're being told we must change is because they want it.
The societal purpose of marriage is to protect and provide for children and to a lesser extent, women. While it is true that some hetero couples do not have children, it is also true that no homosexual couples can. Marriage is being treated as just another benefit to be handed out because gays want it that way.
Everyone needs to change the way they see a crucial, foundational, societal construct because the gays want it to be so. That's why I include them in these lists.