The Texas Rainmaker is an openly conservative and fairly critical blog, and as a young person trying to find identity, I think it is important to expose myself to what both the Republicans and the Democrats are up to and how they view issues. I do this not only to compare myself to the views to see where I really stand because I feel like I lean a little left, especially socially, and want to really know, but also because I want to see how absurd some opinions, from both sides, can be. For instance, one of Texas Rainmaker’s posts was titled “Barack Obama Hates White People” Come on. Really?
I think if we were all calm, rational citizens that we would be able to consider two sides of an argument without throwing names, but we are all very immaturely human. I know that the left side is just as guilty as the right, as an extreme is, well, extreme, but I was very surprised to find a post of Rainmaker’s that I agreed with and found to be an interesting point of view.
Two posts on the same issue are a little old,"Friday the 13th" and "Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Partial Birth Abortion" posted on July 14th, 2007 and April 18th, 2007, respectivley. One refers to abortion and specifically the Supreme Court upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban that Bush signed into office in 2003 and the other is about a Louisiana Gov. signing legislation that would penalize doctors who prefom late-term abortions. This interesting comment makes a very good point on a prime example of political hypocrisy:
“I still find it ironic that many of the same liberals that defend this procedure that involves “partially removing the fetus intact from a woman’s uterus, then puncturing or crushing the skull” also argue that lethal injection of a convicted murderer is ‘cruel and unusual’.”
A post following that post is also mentions abortion in the context of people fighting for the “human” rights of a chimpanzee. Now I know nothing about this monkey, or why lawyers had to fight for the “right to life” for him, but found it interesting people were fighting to have “Hiasl” declared a ‘person’. Rainmaker comments, “Now if only liberals would fight as hard for unborn human beings”. I think this is a very good point. Rainmaker is obviously a bible-thumpin’ hard core Republican, and I generally don’t like those extremely religious people, not being religious myself, because they can be even more nasty and evil than the nasty, evil people they complain about.
My own view on the abortion issue is that the compromise that came out of Roe vs. Wade is fantastic. I believe in a woman’s right to control her body, to limit the size of her family, and have the ability to get out of a really bad mistake, etc. I think that limiting in abortions to the 1st trimester is wonderful. I don’t believe in limiting the time frame because you’re killing unborn children, because, in reality, the children cannot support themselves out side of the womb. I mainly believe limiting it is safer and more ethical (when it does come down to 3rd trimester and partial birth abortions). A fetus is not a child. A fetus is egg and sperm mush that is growing. The question of when a fetus becomes a child, and then a self-sustaining child, will forever be in question, so why not eliminate the possibility of that argument and keep it to 1st trimester. That keeps both sides relatively happy. The ONLY option in a situation like this IS compromise. We can’t have it either or because there will always be people extremely passionate about their cause on both sides. And this goes for any issue, especially largely controversial issues that deal directly or indirectly with religion.
As for Rainmakers comment, I do think it is hypocritical for liberals to fight against lethal injection on the basis of “cruel and unusual punishment” and not think that late term, partial birth abortions aren’t cruel and unusual punishment. Also, if we are gonna fight for a monkey’s “human rights” we damn sure better be fighting for unborn children. That would be hypocrisy to ridiculous to even fathom. Knowing how conservative he is, I’m sure he considers any abortion “cruel and unusual” and evil and against God’s will, but as for me, I am only against the very gruesome practice of partial birth abortions. Thought it was an interesting point and worth mentioning. (Worth noting that most liberals are against this practice unlike his comment states)
If anyone is really interested in seeing an Obama slam that seems really distorted and mislead, but worth checking out none the less, see Rainmakers blog post “Obama Supports the Right to Abort Children Born Alive”, posted this day a year ago. It’s a pretty horrific claim, which I hope has just been taken out of context.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Red Line Rebuke
Last week the Capital Metro Board, Austin’s public transit system, approved a $164.7 million operating budget for 2009-2010. $2.6 million of that budget will be taken directly from $26 million of federal stimulus money, dollars targeted for long-term improvements and projects for Austin current and future needs, to post-pone inevitable fare increases. Fare hikes were planned for August 2010, but earlier this year staff members said increases should be moved up to January 2010 drawing much opposition. The solution was to take $2.6 million, 10% of the stimulus money, needed to create a better, more comprehensive metro and rail system, and use “one-time money for continuing expenses,” said Chairwoman Margaret Gomez.
In the opinion section of today's Austin American Statesman one writer shined light on the new budget proposal and the "is-it-ever-going-to-run Red Line rail service. In The delay that makes no sense, the anonymous author was subtly critical of this “short-sighted” approach and also of the Red Line rail service that is almost two years behind opening schedule. His argument was very logical. Why would we want to briefly post-pone fare increases, which are twenty years over due, when the Red Line needs money for development and enhancement for success when it does finally open? He describes it as “a fix that isn’t going to last long enough to deserve the label of ‘temporary’.” That right there nails it on the head. Although this author did not cite any of his facts, he writes with journalistic creditability, including data and quotes, and refrains from being overly opinionated to the point of rudeness. While he does claim that the Red Line delay is “unacceptable”, he does advise patience “until Cap Metro can deliver a system that runs as smoothly and safely as possible”.
When it comes to his disdain for using stimulus money to delay fare increases I agree 100 and 10 percent. Inflation and price hikes for anything is inevitable and Cap Metro has delayed fare increases for 20 years. If we don’t pay the price here, we will just have to pay it else where. I would even go so far as to say that the increases should be substantial enough to cover the twenty years of inflation and then we would have the money to open new rail systems on time. If we had gradual increases in fares over the years, we would have an even better bus system and rail line right now.
Thankfully, the January fare increase will be discussed again later, due to a provision in the budget vote at the urging of Gomez. It seems that the author is hoping he can sway enough folks to “weigh in on the folly” and I hope he can. It would be a shame to see this political budgeting disaster go through.
In the opinion section of today's Austin American Statesman one writer shined light on the new budget proposal and the "is-it-ever-going-to-run Red Line rail service. In The delay that makes no sense, the anonymous author was subtly critical of this “short-sighted” approach and also of the Red Line rail service that is almost two years behind opening schedule. His argument was very logical. Why would we want to briefly post-pone fare increases, which are twenty years over due, when the Red Line needs money for development and enhancement for success when it does finally open? He describes it as “a fix that isn’t going to last long enough to deserve the label of ‘temporary’.” That right there nails it on the head. Although this author did not cite any of his facts, he writes with journalistic creditability, including data and quotes, and refrains from being overly opinionated to the point of rudeness. While he does claim that the Red Line delay is “unacceptable”, he does advise patience “until Cap Metro can deliver a system that runs as smoothly and safely as possible”.
When it comes to his disdain for using stimulus money to delay fare increases I agree 100 and 10 percent. Inflation and price hikes for anything is inevitable and Cap Metro has delayed fare increases for 20 years. If we don’t pay the price here, we will just have to pay it else where. I would even go so far as to say that the increases should be substantial enough to cover the twenty years of inflation and then we would have the money to open new rail systems on time. If we had gradual increases in fares over the years, we would have an even better bus system and rail line right now.
Thankfully, the January fare increase will be discussed again later, due to a provision in the budget vote at the urging of Gomez. It seems that the author is hoping he can sway enough folks to “weigh in on the folly” and I hope he can. It would be a shame to see this political budgeting disaster go through.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
