The New Pharisees

[I'm pleased to report that this one appeared in The Kitsap Sun on September 1, setting off a firestorm of response.  As I always say, if you can't be insightful, at least be inciteful. Here is a link to the letter in the Sun:   The Return of the Pharisees
................................................................................
I am amazed that Glenn Beck’s disciples are O.K. with his criticism of President Obama’s Christianity (at Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally on Aug.  27)   For one thing, I don’t recall that Obama ever made anything but a general profession of faith, asserting merely that he is a Christian.   But more importantly, Beck doesn’t seem to have paid any attention to the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector (Luke 18:  9-14).   Nor does he seem to hold with the injunction to “judge not that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:  1).   Finally, Beck is a Mormon.  Are his disciples aware that many Protestant denominations and the Roman Catholic Church alike consider Beck’s beliefs to be outside the Christian mainstream?  It would seem that the Pharisees are back and that they are being led by Glenn Beck. --EFP

Palm's Progress (toward running and identifying squirrels)

[Douglas squirrel, my backyard, March 22, 2010 (No need to belabor the connection to today's comment.)]

Weighed in today at 183.8 and ran 3 miles out of 6.62.  For the first time, I felt fairly comfortable and didn't have to strain to make three miles.  I'm making progress. 

        Last night, when I was channel surfing, I caught a few minutes of Glenn Beck.  I was surprised--at first--to discover that Beck was not ranting about health care,  His topic was immigration, and I found myself agreeing with much of what he said.
        Beck said that he loves and welcomes immigrants because they believe in what America stands for and they are excited to be here.  Ok, I can go with that.
        Beck was quick to add that he was talking about legal immigation.  He is very much opposed to illegal immigration, which he considers to be immoral.  OK, I can go with that too.
        Beck added that, when they come here, immigrants need to be willing to respect and adjust to our culture.  I'm fine with that as well.
        Then he stressed that immigrants need to learn English.  I agree.  Even though I'm not especially a "language, culture, and borders guy," I think that learning English is a practical necessity for anyone who would live and thrive in this country.  We liberals do tend to subscribe to some notions of cultural relativism that aren't always in our best interests as a nation.
         Beck went on to stress that becoming really proficient in our own language is the work of a lifetime and that we all need to keep working at it.  Otherwise, we won't fully understand the issues and won't be able to contribute to the debate.  I'm definitely down with that--since I teach English.  Beck, however, was clearly implying that conservatives need to be better prepared to counter liberal rhetoric.   
         But then Beck revealed his real agenda.  He implied that the so-called "progressives" are welcoming immigrants with limited English skills because they are easy to dupe and will therefore support liberal causes. 
         That's where I part company with Beck and his paranoia.  There is no liberal conspiracy to overwhelm conservatives with people who don't know enough English to understand what is really going on and who will therefore support the liberal agenda.
          I should have known that the man who would accuse Obama of "hating white people" would put such a spin on the immigration issue.  Glenn Beck is a demagogue through and through.  --EFP

Palm's Progress

[In February, 2006, I was part of an educator's trip to China.  We visited a number of Chinese educational institutions, including a medical school, where we were introduced to this high-tech resuscitation simulator named "Medi-Man."]

Weighed in today at 185.7.  I'm pleased to report that I ran 3 miles, covering 6.55, and I caught up on my grading.
      The big news today is that 14 states, including mine, have filed suit against the federal government, charging that the new health care plan is unconstitutional.  The principal argument seems to be that the federal government cannot compel people to purchase anything from a private company, much less health insurance.  
       By extension of that logic, is it not unconstitutional for the states to compel drivers to purchase automobile insurance from private companies?   Of course, one could argue that requiring drivers to be insured serves a compelling public interest.  Uninsured drivers who have accidents drive up insurance rates for the rest of us.  But the fact of the matter is that people with no health insurance drive up health insurance rates by receiving emergency medical care they can't pay for,
       Of course, one could argue that the analogy doesn't hold because driving is a privilege and not a right.  I still remember that the Delaware state driver's manual of my youth made that point most emphatically.  I have to wonder, therefore, if the people so upset about the new legislation hold health care to be a privilege and not a right.  If so, what sort of comment would that be about America? 
        Also, I  have to wonder just what we've become when the opponents of health care reform engage in ad hominem attacks grounded in race and sexual orientation instead of the issues.  The demagogues and hate mongers have whipped their followers into a frenzy.  I keep hearing Obama and his administration called fascists and Communists both.  (The people mouthing this rhetoric don't seem to understand that these two political philosophies are antithetical.) The irony is that the Tea Baggers and Obama's other populist opponents have more in common with the mobs that helped Hitler to power than Obama and his supporters.  Yet Obama is the one we see caricatured as Hitler.  I humbly submit that either Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh's image would make a better caricature of Mussolini than Oama does of Hitler. 
       It's time for people to get a grip.  --EFP

Me and Michael Steele

[A Patriotic Caddy, Smyrna, DE, 2003]

Michael Steele, the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, recently wrote to me by name. I don’t know how he got my name. I’ve never registered as a Republican, but somehow, Steele seems to feel that I’m a kindred spirit. He wants me to fill out a survey form—which, again, is registered to me by name and by a “verification” number.  
     Just to be a contrarian, I was tempted to fill out this form—until I read the questions closely. Most of the questions exhibit the logical fallacy those of us who have had the pleasure of teaching freshman composition call “begging the question.” To “beg the question” is to ground a question on a premise explicitly or implicitly assumed to be true but which is unproven or still very much at issue. Here is an example from Steele’s survey:

Are you in favor of creating a government-funded “Citizen Volunteer Corps” that would pay young people to do work now done by churches and charities, earning Corps Members the same pay and benefits given to military veterans?

Only three answers are possible:  "yes,” “no,” “no opinion.” The strategy here is especially insidious. Whichever box I checked, I would in fact be lending credence to not one but four dubious premises: First, that the approval and formation of such a Corps may be imminent; second, that our charitable and service needs are already being adequately met in the private sector; third, that this Corps would push aside the churches and charities that have been meeting the need; fourth, that the stay-at-home members of this Corps would be given the same benefits and entitlements that military veterans receive—a real hot-button, emotional issue.
     Other questions raise the specter of a 23.1 trillion dollar national deficit, amnesty for illegal immigrants, retroactive Social Security benefits for illegal immigrants granted amnesty, unlimited eligibility for welfare, and increased educational funding without accountability.
     Predictably, at the bottom of the survey instrument was a place to enter my credit card information and to specify the amount of my donation. The Republican National Committee, Steele explains in his cover letter, very much needs donations in order to head off this brave new socialist world the Democrats are trying to impose on all of us.
     The funding, of course, is needed to put out more fear-mongering demagoguery. Steele’s rhetoric reminds me of the sort of hysteria I’ve been hearing lately from Glenn Beck and his disciples. These people are convinced that we’re losing our liberties and being oppressed. The other day, I actually heard one of Beck’s callers wondering how much more “the people can take” before “law enforcement and the military” begin to rebel. While Beck said he could not “yet” envision such a day, he agreed that the people are indeed angry and right to feel that way.
      Bizarre, and more than a little scary that conservative pundits are trafficking in such agitprop! Once again, I’m reminded of that rhetorical question my friend used to pose whenever he heard a politician make some disingenuous claim: “How goddamned dumb do they think we are?” Pretty damned dumb, I guess. We can only hope that not too many of us are all that dumb.
     Some of us are sort of smart. --EFP