by Art Smith | Aug 31, 2009
Many of you went the distance and participated in Town Hall events during the Congressional August Break. We are very anxious to hear about your experiences and feedback that you have about the events, Congressmen’s positions, etc. Obviously, Health Care Reform has been the predominate topic, but there have been some discussions on other crucial topics such as Cap and Trade, Economic Stimulus, Forclosures, etc. We want to hear from you on any of these topics!
You can leave a comment on this blog post by clicking here, or by sending us an email at [email protected]. Your thoughts, experiences, positions, or general opinions would be great! We will put together a montage of these comments in the next week.
by Art Smith | Aug 10, 2009
Update: word usage mentioned in comments – Ed.
This past week we were hit with what many probably thought was a a set of odd ideas. This all started when DART (Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority… that is, the local bus company) started displaying ads purchased by the Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers.
Of course, those ads could only be trouble.
Full disclosure: I am a born-again Jesus Freak of the 1st order. I don’t want any confusion on this point as we proceed.
Odd idea #1: Atheists would be so bold as to attack God (or in some minds, Christians). Today, we Christians are tending to be very sensitive to any kind of “persecution”. If only we knew what persecution really is. Personally, I was amazed that anyone actually made a fuss about these ads to begin with. I’ve seen a lot more evil on the side of a bus than this statement: “Don’t Believe in God? You are Not Alone”. Quick, Martha, hide the kids and load the guns!
No, this was not an attack on any person. I cannot even consider it an attack on God. It is certainly a very vocal expression of a group’s decision to reject God, but I think God’s pretty much accustomed to people not believing in Him, or even when believing, still rejecting His plan for them.
Personally, I thought it was refreshing to see people who hold a religious perspective that is so contrary to what I think of as the norm and Truth, to be willing to express their perspective and reach out to others who share it.
Odd idea #2: Atheists don’t have the same rights as others to publicly share their (lack of) beliefs. Although we have struggled over the past few decades to halt the erosion of our first amendment rights, it’s interesting that there was such a quick assumption that Atheists don’t deserve the same consideration as say, Christians. As soon as the outcry hit, DART reacted and pulled the ads. All kinds of excuses ensued. The ACLU jumped in. Heaven’s temple shook. Governor Chet Culver even expressed his opinion (he was “offended” by the message of the ads).
Unfortunately, the bus company has been smarting from recent pedestrian accidents that have led to policy changes and may lead to bigger problems… the media nightmare was getting worse for them now, and the apparent public sentiment was to pull the ads. Bad timing. Bad decision. It was making things worse, not better.
Odd idea #3: Bus companies don’t have the right to decide what ads they run or don’t run. Buses have limited advertising space, and I assume they sell the space on a first come first serve basis. Unless of course they don’t have as many ad clients as they’d like. Now, if they specifically targeted one group to block but allowed a competing group (say, Christians), that would probably be a problem (not sure if a legal problem, but at least a political one) . But if they decided to not allow ads for any religious group they might be okay. But I think we all know where that would go… a lot of ads on buses are for religiously affiliated organizations (many attempting to reach out to people with needs they can serve).
So, technically one might make a case that the bus company was within its rights to pull the ad. That, however, is not a case I would want to see fall in front of Sotomayer.
One caveat to that… DART, I believe, has been a beneficiary of government, especially Federal, money. Which totally kills their ability to act independently (DART may actually be government run, but I’m not clear on how that works).
Odd idea #4: Bus companies can’t change their minds. This is purely political silliness. Obviously, anyone can err and then correct themselves. The media frenzy over this has been no surprise, but people involved in trying to make a difference in the world need to focus on the real issues… and most of all the Conservative voices in our society need to stop pandering to unproductive religious polarization and accept the very facts that God himself accepts: not everyone is going to follow Jesus, and everyone begins apart from Him. Continuing to castigate DART only serves to make Christians and political/social Conservatives look petty and misguided.
Odd idea #5: The First Amendment is intended to serve the interests of God, that is, Christians. The Amendment reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I will restrain myself from entering an all-out examination of the purpose of this amendment. The point I wish to make is simple: there is no mention of God or Jesus or Christians. The same amendment that protects the rights of Christians protects the same freedom of expression for Atheists.
So, the end of the story is that the ads are back. Hopefully we can move on.
Reading assignment:
US Constitution – Amendment 1
The Letter from Paul to the Romans
by Art Smith | Jul 30, 2009
If you don’t already know, we are thoroughly Pro Life here at the The Conservative Reader. From the moment of conception, the rights of every American should extend to even those that are still in the womb, despite the inconvenience they may pose to their mother.
We are also opposed to the current effort in Congress to foist a complex, expensive, invasive and industry-busting piece of legislation in the name of saving lives and improving the health of Americans. We are not opposed to ensuring that all Americans have access to health-care, but this bill, in whatever form it has taken thus far, is not in the best interest America. More on that in the next few days.
Worse yet, is that such a bill, in the name of saving lives, may end up funneling more and more money to take lives… innocent lives at that.
The following is a piece provided by Jenifer Bowen (appeared in the Facebook group page for Iowa Right To Life):
There is a battle going on in the Congress over Health Care reform and they, meaning the U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators, are under heavy pressure to strike a deal and get it done before the summer recess in August. Our concern is a “deal” that would allow for funding and mandates in the bill.
There are millions of dollars at stake, and the abortion industry is working hard to get their hands on what they see as a gold mine of tax funding. Their goal includes mandating abortion as health care and having their mandates funded. The good news is that there are many leaders in congress with a conscience that want health care reform, but do not agree with mandating or funding abortion with taxpayer’s money.
However, the pressure from President Obama and the Democrat leadership is mounting, as they want abortion as part of Health Care Reform. This is bad news since it comes down to heavy political pressures on each representative.
This is when your voice really counts. This is a perfect example of the saying, “the squeaky wheel gets the oil,” and we need every “squeak”, every pro-life voice to sound the alarm and call congress. Literally thousands of little lives, and the lives of the elderly are depending on us to take action to stop this evil.
I am not overstating my case. This is real and its happening very quickly.
The fact is, the Health Care Reform bill says nothing about abortion, which IS the problem. Language must be added to the bill to exclude all abortion mandates and abortion funding.
It’s all in the language. Call the Congress now. If you have already called, please call again. The anti-life powers to be are working diligently to expand abortion and their profit margin on our dime. They are motivated and they are calling.
We need you to call and pass this on to your friends and family.
Note: It is critical that they do not split the difference on abortion mandates OR abortion subsidies in some compromise or “deal”. We want to make sure they exclude both abortion “mandates” and “funding.”
Please call both U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative. If you do not know who your U.S. Representative is, click here: http://www.legis.state.ia.us/FindLeg/
Here is a helpful hint on what to say:
“Hi, my name is……………….. I’m calling about the “Health Care Reform bill that they are working on, and I would like to ask ………………… to make sure that the bill EXCLUDES all abortion–both funding AND mandates. I do not think it is right that my taxes should be used to pay for abortion. Will you please give him my message? Thank you.”
Call Both U.S. Senators:
U.S. Senate-Iowa
Charles Grassley (R)
Telephone: 202.224.3744
E-mail: http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm#emailform
Tom Harkin (D)
Telephone: 202.224.3254
E-mail: [email protected]ov
U.S. House of Representatives-Iowa
Bruce Braley (D-01)
Telephone: 202.225.2911
E-mail: https://forms.house.gov/braley/webforms/issue_subscribe.html
David Loebsack (D-02)
Telephone: 202.225.6576
E-mail: http://loebsack.house.gov/contactform/
Leonard Boswell (D-03)
Telephone: 202.225.3806
E-mail: http://boswell.house.gov/messageform.htm
Tom Latham (R-04)
Telephone: 202.225.5476 or Toll Free at 866.428.5642
E-mail: [email protected]
Steve King (R-05)
Telephone: 202.225.4426
E-mail: http://www.house.gov/steveking/email.shtm
For more information on Health Care Reform, click here: http://irlc.org/what-s-new/hot-topics/health-care-reform-bill-could-force-abortion-agenda/
NRLC Fact Sheet: http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/HR3200NRLCfactsheet.pdf
Kim Lehman
C 515.202.2517
[email protected]
www.iowaRTL.org
by Art Smith | Jul 8, 2009
In full harmony with the wreckless abandon that led to two northeast Iowa communities getting a combined total $100,000 in relief money for weather related damage that never happened to them, news that Cedar Rapids residents who need relief are going to take second place to other community projects.
There are some great Des Moines Register reader comments at the story site above. Many questions, most pointed being “What is being done to ensure the next flood doesn’t cause this kind of damage?”, are being asked. And while I can certainly agree that when rebuilding from the ground up one would want to start afresh instead of just rebuilding the same structure in the same location, one can also rebuild in phases, designing facilitities to ensure that basic services and features are available while leaving additional work for later years or donations to provide additional space.
And that is all well and good for things like the Library. Museums can wait a bit. I would go so far as to say that Iowans as a whole, as generous as they are, would rather see any money going to building homes, levies, drainage systems, etc. instead of non-essentials (though desirable) such as a museum.Â
Also, in rethinking the Libraries that need to be rebuilt, I can undestand needing to provide additional space for internet workstations. But with all of the content that available digitally, how much paper-based primary sources for research are really needed? I can see liesure reading material as important, but there should be a lot of content that can be left for internet access these days, it seems.Â
All that said, this topic should be about priorities and limits. Identify the things that truly need to be fixed or replaced (like peoples homes, especially if they are living in FEMA housing), but I don’t agree with spending state money, during such hard times economically, on non-essentials. Let the private donors solve that for now, and wait for better times to fund more cultural projects.
But government won’t change their direction just because I say they should. Or even if the majority of Iowans say they should. That is, until those Iowans show up at the voting booth and find better leaders.
by Art Smith | Jul 7, 2009
My buddy Tim Albrecht at The Bean Walker sent out this exclusive update today:
In an exclusive Bean Walker interview, Senate Republican leader Paul McKinley says he will file the necessary paperwork to form a gubernatorial exploratory committee.
He says he will remain focused on his job as the Senate GOP leader, and expects to come to a decision “by early fall.”
McKinley will join Bob Vander Plaats, Rep. Chris Rants and Christian Fong, who have all filed the necessary paperwork in their potential runs for governor.
Full story by clicking here: http://www.thebeanwalker.com.
This is turning into a fairly respectable field, and not too awry from what I would have expected, although Christian Fong had only come to my attention a couple of weeks ago.
The candidates are still working through the initial “Who Am I, Really?” phase of their campaigns, from what I think I know about these candidates we can probably expect Vander Plaats to be more heavily focused on social issues than the rest of the field, while McKinley will be very focused on fiscal issues. I’ve met all of these gentlemen at least once with the exception of Fong (who my friend David Chung tried to introduce to me at the Night of The Rising Stars Iowa GOP event in June, but didn’t work out), and those that I’ve met seem to have a good personality for the job. Fact is, I still don’t know much about any of them.
Unfortunately, it’s going to be difficult to get a good read on where the candidates stand on the issues that Iowans will care about in 2010 just yet. Partly because we don’t know what those issues will be (although I strongly suspect it will be all about the state budget, spending and taxation). So, like most long campaigns (11 months to the June 8, 2010 primary), our perception of how well each of these men would serve will be formed and reformed until we get into the Spring of 2010.
A couple of comments:
- I am please to see an ethnically diverse candidate (Fong) in the mix.  It is refreshing to see more and more people from diverse cultures step up and offer their skills as leaders in our communities, and we should do all we can to encourage folks like Christian to step out and lead.
- I think it is time to see some women consider running for Governor.  For the past several years, I was represented in both the Iowa House and Senate by women (Libby Jacobs, who stepped down last year, and Pat Ward). I have know a number of other women legislators from around the state and they all provide strong leadership. While I am not advocating any specific person, it would be great to start seeing some of these women considering a run for Governor, and not to run because they are women, but because they have been gifted with the skills and vision to lead our state. I believe some of them have, and that should be reason enough.
Linda Lantor Fandel expressed similar thoughts about the presence of women on the Supreme Court yesterday in the Des Moines Register. I think, if I grasped her point correctly, that she and I both agree that the key issue in political diversity is not voting for someone or appointing someone because of their gender or ethnicity, but rather the grasping of opportunities by women and ethnically diverse individuals. No one should feel constrained or limited because they are not male or white.
And just think, before this is all over, we will be starting to look at candidates for President for 2012. We never get a break, do we?