Constant Inconsistencies In Our Politics
The one thing I know is that we have constant inconsistencies in our politics.
Is President Joe Biden a liberal Democrat, a democratic Socialist, or (as some believe) a Communist? I think I would eliminate the Communist handle immediately. Some of his policies, such as paid family leave, are hallmarks of social democracies. Biden believes in a market economy with strong input from the guiding hand of government. I haven’t heard him say the government should own industries which would rule out his being a Socialist.
Biden and most Democrats would place restrictions on the availability of guns. For example, certain ones (such as assault-type weapons) would be banned, but is that an infringement of American’s 2nd Amendment rights? I am sure that most Republicans would state emphatically that the answer is yes. More and more, the carrying of arms anywhere and everywhere is sacrosanct.
Yet, the parents of the Oxford High School shooter earlier in December not only allowed their underage child to have a gun, but they also bought it for him and apparently had no restrictions on when he could have access to it. The parents were arrested, and it is considered controversial to try and hold them criminally responsible for their child’s actions. If they had knowingly allowed him to drink alcohol or use drugs, Michigan’s Child Protective Services would have stepped in, and no one would have thought that wrong.
I am not against guns or having children learning to use them under supervision. Mine were shooting at targets from when they were in grade school. Before shooting every time, they repeated to me a litany of safety protocols they needed to follow. Only then could they take the weapon from me. They also knew never to handle any gun without me being with them.
I believe I instilled in my children the responsibility and privilege about having and using a weapon. The parents in Michigan were all about rights and freedom. There was nothing taught about what responsible gun ownership meant.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky railed against sending federal money to the Northeast after devastating weather brought significant damage. Yet the tornadoes that ripped through Kentucky in December had Paul calling for swift federal intervention.
Perhaps Paul also is unaware that his state is the largest recipient per capita of federal tax dollars year after year. In 2019, it had a net inflow of $63 billion more than Kentuckians paid in federal taxes.
Paul has made a career out of preaching self-reliance to states such as New York who tax their citizens at a considerably higher rate than Kentucky. Even with the higher taxes, New York is the center of commerce in the country. Kentucky is the state that is on the dole and reliant on taxes from place like New York.
The largest source of jobs in Kentucky are not the 6000 coal miners or 5000 distillery workers but the 250,000-health care and social services employees. Those jobs are highly dependent on federal tax dollars. I do not hear Rand exhorting his constituents to not accept government money. This is a hypocritical and inconsistent philosophy if I ever heard one.
While the “defund the police” movement never went anywhere, liberal district attorneys came up with the idea of not prosecuting crimes they thought were too petty. We give much discretion to prosecutors on who to prosecute. We did not give them ultimate authority to pick and choose which laws to enforce. Passing bills is the job of the legislature and if the executive signs those bills, they become law. It is not up to D.A.s to decide which laws to prosecute.
Sure, discretion should be theirs to manage within reason. Once prosecutors decide that anyone stealing merchandise from CVS will suffer no consequences then stores decide not to be in those areas where thefts occur. Why would a police officer arrest someone if the arrest is void? Law abiding citizens are the real victims. These are the same residents that the D.A.s swore to serve.
The surest way for petty crime to become felonies are for the bad guys to realize it is open season. Any D.A. that refuses to prosecute any category of crime for whatever reason should be removed from office. I lived through the 1960s, 70s, and 80s and saw what happened when cops, prosecutors, and judges did not do their jobs. It was chaos and a breakdown of urban society.
Abortion is another matter that defies political consistency. Red state America is the most likely to have enacted restrictions. Those states also have fewer contraceptive alternatives available for women. According to The New York Times, the typical abortion patient is already a mother in her late 20s who has a low income, is unmarried, has some college, and lives in a blue state.
Contrary to what most believe, we have half the number of abortions as thirty years ago and 96% happen before the 16th week. It is not something that most women use as a form of birth control. One of the most common reasons given by women choosing abortion is that they want to be a better parent to the child or children they already have.
There are many more providers in blue states so that may account for why more blue state women have abortions. With access more restricted in red states (in some states, there is only one provider available), poor women have no choice but to have the child. In 2018, a Journal of American Medicine Pediatrics article noted that the child born to those unable to abort the fetus reported a lack of bonding with the child, feeling trapped, and having less income to support the child.
If the reason that abortion is restricted is to promote life, then why do the same states then consider social service spending for the child to provide a better quality of life not compatible with the role of government? Apparently, there is no right for a woman to choose, in this instance, citing the state’s authority to step in to preserve every human being. Interestingly the right to be armed should be unrestricted no matter how many human deaths it causes according to the same politicians.
Vaccine mandates and who can impose them is a hot topic in red states. It would seem to me a very Republican view would be to be against all mandates imposed by government. However, if you believe in the freedom of individuals (especially individual private business owners), then it is inconsistent to stop private business from imposing mandates on employees.
Again, some red states have taken the position that if an employee refuses to follow an employer’s requirement to be vaccinated, then the employee would be eligible to collect unemployment insurance. Of course, if an employee refused to wear close-toed shoes and was fired, no governor is saying that the employee could collect unemployment.
States like Florida have carved out an exception when it comes to vaccine mandates and unemployment. If an employee is fired or quits because of it, then the employee can collect unemployment. These are the same states that stopped unemployment benefit distribution early for millions of people last year. Many of those people were afraid to go back because of fear of catching Covid.
Not having a consistent political philosophy allows for sloppy government. Government that has rules created for political expediency and not good governance is a failure. For the past 5 years, we have lived in a nation that is more and more devoid of political principal. This has led to the illogical taking hold of our lives. Our nation is very brittle and will shatter because of the constant of inconsistencies.
