Response to the "Off the Hook" GOP "Urban Campaign" or "Last Ditch at Relevance" or "Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures"

I'm out of quotation marks. Words cannot express the hilarity of GOP's...insert word, ah-impotence comes to mind, but really fails to capture the sad humor or the sheer ridiculousness of the whole idea of hip, urban, multi-ethnic?, conservative appeal.

Can the GOP make improvements in the 2010 midterm elections? No. Not at this rate.

Do I look forward to seeing Conservative Republicans working the street angle? Selling their crusty, crotchety agenda as something that is "dope"?

~This Blogger is raged!!!~

Okay, so this Amish lady, Rebbecca, goes to an airport to apply for a job as a flight attendant. Her resume is amazing. She can (and does quite frequently) cook for 80 people, she's really friendly, and is used to dealing with "the angry English."

"I have to warn you, the job is not easy, you have to know exactly what the needs of each passenger are at all times. Your job isn't being a flight attendant, really it's more like being an indentured servant," says the interviewer.

Rebbecca insists that she can handle it.

"Great" says the guy interviewing her, "we have a spot open for you, come by on Monday to start your training."

That Monday the Rebbecca shows up, and she breezes through the training -- twice as fast as anybody has ever done it. Even the simulations go great: she foils the fake would be terrorist, serves another cup of decaf, and gives little Johnny a pillow all while keeping her bonnet perfectly straight.

"Wow" says the trainer, we usually make everybody go through three weeks of training, but we all feel that you're ready. Show up tomorrow for your first flight."

"Flight? I can't fly, I'm morally opposed to airplanes and everything they stand for." says the Amish lady.

"So why did you apply for the job?" asks the trainer.

"Well I figured I could do all of the things the job requires me without getting on an airplane," Rebbecca says.

"Without getting on an airplane? But that's what the job is! It's even the title of the handbook, 'Being on the Plane: a guide to serving people on a plane!' How did you expect to do the job properly?" Says the trainer.

Rebbecca retorts "well you can't make me get on the plane. Where's my check?"

Okay we all see the problem here. We all like Rebbecca, she's talented, able to do her job, and has every intention of doing her job unless it interferes with her beliefs. But the story presented illustrates the problem with executive legislation pushed through by the lame-duck administration recently.

You see, a new rule grants medical professionals of faith to withhold medical attention if it interferes with their religious beliefs.

Says Mike Leavitt secretary of the Department Health and Human Services: Doctors and other health-care providers should not be forced to choose between good professional standing and violating their conscience

You see the problem with that thinking is that no one is being forced to choose between violating their conscience and their professional standing. This isn't Stalinist Ireland (just go with it, it makes sense). Nobody is forced into a professional career, these people spend tens of thousands of dollars to go to school in order to get into the lucrative business of providing medical care.

The far-reaching regulation cuts off federal funding for any state or local government, hospital, health plan, clinic or other entity that does not accommodate doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other employees who refuse to participate in care they find ethically, morally or religiously objectionable. It was sought by conservative groups, abortion opponents and others to safeguard workers from being fired, disciplined or penalized in other ways.

If I had gone to my job interview with Beans n' Cream and said "I will do everything except help people who arrived by car because I have the belief that cars are evil, and are destroying the earth," I wouldn't have been employed -- and rightfully so.

It's not like this shit sneaks up on you. You know exactly what you're getting into, and if you don't it's up to you to fix it by finding new employment.

My biggest problem with this sort of faith based initiative is that it always assumes people are doing good when it comes to making decisions in good faith. We live in a society that tries to level the playing field as much as possible for those that are playing the faith card. But it's bullshit. If someone is unwilling to give care based on their religious views, they are unqualified to hold the job. It's that simple.

The Freakin' (pissed) Deacon

So would that be *unt with a Big 'C' or a little 'c'?

So I was dining with my beautiful daughters tonight at some west-side chain restaurant. The place was virtually deserted, but the host inexplicably sat us next to a family of five (Mom, Dad, three tots) eating with an elderly gentleman (probably about as old as the Dad's dad, still able to get around, not decrepit, but retired). All is well and good, until eventually they started talking about someone working at Edgewood College. "It's a very liberal college, it may be a Christian school, but we're talking about a very small 'c.'"

I know this is nothing new, but this is one of those communication practices that gets me all pissy (as you may recall). So what my dear elderly friend was saying was that a good christian (notice the type case) couldn't possibly be a liberal, and a liberal has no place within Christianity (again, type case). This is no doubt the kind of guy that is going to go out and vote for McPalin (certainly his right, but I would guess he probably had his doubts before Palin was brought on board), because of his incompatible world-view. But what about his world-view? Does his narrow scope extend beyond Christianity? For instance, what about Hindus? Are the only good Hindus conservative? What about fundamentalist Muslims (using one definition from a conservative source yields us a person that adheres to strict cultural traditions with very limited Government oversight. Sounds a lot like the the theocracies of the Middle East to me), are they God's favored children because of their Conservative world view?

I know this sounds bitter, and I understand that this does nothing for discourse. But I just can't understand how these exclusionary principles help anybody. I know how it is when we get in our groups of friends, sometimes there's talk about the archetypal religious redneck that will refuse to vote for Barack Obama, but we understand that's not the majority of the people voting for McCain. Just as I hope this gentleman understands that not everyone that is voting for Barack is a gay atheist (or gaytheist).

Just a thought.

The Deacon