I believe that I can be wrong about things; especially about matters of faith.[1] We are all sinners; we can all be wrong. I do try to give it an honest bit of effort. The Pharisees were criticized for their law-crazy approach[2], so I try to focus less on theology than on how you live a good life.[3] I do believe that Salvation is a gift of grace and not the rigidity of the law.[4] I believe God is truthful, no part of God is deception.[5] I believe in God's Creation which was made to be seen and studied. Specifically, in the Gospel of John it says, "Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."[6] I am not challenged by science; rather I would say I see science as a discipline for those who most earnestly seek to know the truth. He who yearns for the truth comes closer to God.
History has shown the errors of Theocracy as a form of governance.[7][8] Given these abuses, I believe the Separation of Church and State to be a very good thing.[9] As this is the foundation of our form of government, I believe one should "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's"[10] To borrow a line from another holy book, "For you is your faith, and for me, my faith."[11] (Note: I must not be adequately understanding this quote. It seems to be respecting freedom of religion; but historically it seems to have only applied when the followers of Mohammad were a minority in the area and ceases to operate when they can enforce Sharia.) Essentially, I think the wall between Church and State is an idea that would be pleasing to anyone who would say, "Blessed are the peacemakers."[12] You cannot have peace when your system of belief has no sanity check.
Unfortunately, "Wide is the Gate of Error"[13] The hard-line unbending approach to religion is incompatible with peace. We should not Judge others.[14] We should turn the other cheek[15] seven time seventy times[16] and the quality of a priest should be judged by the fruit that comes therefrom[17]. If a hard nosed and inflexible interpretation of the bible yield dissension and discord, perhaps it is not the right message. Maybe it is the wide gate of error.
People like Katie Pavlich are strongly affiliated with very conservative beliefs. They have the backing of a large section of the Christian fundamentalist movement and yet they yield bitter fruit. They spread misinformation even outright lies. They foment discord and dissension among our fellow Americans through fear-mongering. They are peace killers instead of peace makers. I cannot understand how Christs' message of salvation, hope, love, peace, lovingkindness, and taking care of the poor has been twisted to support the Republican party.
The reason is that the people know that the Democratic Party is the people's party, and the Republican party is the party of special interest, and it always has been and always will be.
~~ Harry S. Truman [18]These people are all about money, wealth, privilege, mammon[19], and did not that Jesus man talk against the Rich Man getting into Heaven. Something about the eye of a needle and a camel, right? [20] How does the party that embraces the philosophies of Ayn Rand get to be called the "Religious Right?"
I have a lot of fury about that. [21]
Not so much about Operation Fast and Furious. I really would have preferred guns not enter Mexico. I think guns and serial numbers of each sale should be delivered to the Mexican Authorities. That way, when a gun turned up at a crime scene, they could try to extradite Jaime Avila[22] and extradite him to Mexico for trial.
Despite this, I understand that the people behind this "investigation" are not my friends. They don't care about me or the poor. They are the interests of those who don't need help; the rich. The fury over the Fast and Furious "scandal" seems to be, as a historical footnote, an attempt by one political party to harm another in an election year. I have the advantage of time which Katie does not. The ploy did not work. I'm glad it didn't.
See, I've read "Letters on Demonology and Witchcraft"[8] (above). And this investigation of a scandal certainly looked like a witch hunt to me. I suppose I could read up more on McCarthyism.[23] My attitude toward these sorts of things has probably been soured. I was a teenager during the Iran Contra Affair.[24] It certainly doesn't seem like these type of folks are so earnest about uncovering the truth when it is their own house in need of cleaning. Especially when pardons are being handed out.[25][26]
The Republicans like these kind of games. After all, Senator McCarthy was a Republican. It seems to me that when the Republicans get caught with their pants down, they look long and hard to find their opponents with their pants down[27] to secure revenge. They look really hard.[28] Of course, when Republicans are asked for Tax Returns...well, there's nothing to see here. Move along...[29]
My general principle is to identify a witch hunt for what it is and try not to get suckered into it. It seems like a good principle to live by. Certainly, in a world where one does unto others as you'd have done to you, [30] one should not play games like this nor dance to the tune of those who do wish to play. Especially, when they sing an entirely different song if they fall under the microscope. Good for the goose is good for the gander, fellas.
The think I got out of reading this chapter was that Eric Holder was pretty suave about choosing his words very carefully. Man has skills I wouldn't have in the hot-seat like that. I suspect he was covering things up, though. I'm just a suspicious person. Point is, however, that suspicions aren't proof. Evasiveness isn't guilt. I'm pretty sure the same sorts of evasions would echo those of good old Poindexter: "I do not recall."[31] Of course, this seems to be one of those selectively sharp matters which don't cut both ways.
I do favor investigations of wrong-doing. I want to see criminal behavior brought to light. I don't like partisan politics being a part of it. I want someone who wishes to uncover the facts and learn the truth. Not someone who would say or do anything to grill his political opponents.
Coming back to the point of this book and this chapter, we do, indeed, see Poindexter echoes pretty clearly. ON page 106, Eric Holder says, "No not that I can recall at all" and "I have no recollection of ever being told that." Those echoes remind me of evasiveness and cover-ups. I can certainly see why Morales would say, "In no way would we have allowed [this operation] because it is an attack on the safety of Mexicans." [pg 110]
If the Mexicans were pressing for answers, I certainly think they deserve some. Theirs would be a righteous fury.
No comments:
Post a Comment