Do We Really Want To Keep Senator Allen?


Virginia deserves better – the problems require better.

Divisive partisan politics are preventing the country from coming to grips with critical issues facing our nation. From the fight against radical extremist terrorists to global warming to the weakening of the middle class to our burgeoning debt and failing social security system – there are major, major problems which have all worsened over the last five years. We need, in fact require, the type of common sense, pragmatic, integrity of people like Jim Webb. People who have a broad and experienced vision, with fresh ideas, and a willingness to roll up their sleeves and get to work at bringing about constructive change.

What we don’t need is the arrogance of back room politicians who see their hold on power as some sort of legitimate birthright or who pander to the lower common denominator of the political sentiment of the moment.

Given the opportunity to get to know the character of Jim Webb – and the opportunity to really see how little George Allen has accomplished (other than to be the lap dog of the moneyed Republican special interests) -- Virginians may well make the choice in November to bring to the Senate someone who can speak to and for all Virginians and who will work for our common progress rather than for his own self interest.

Comments

Doug said…
Thank you for reading and posting on my blog. That remark about Bush was made in dealing with staunch right-wing christians who have no problem making such judgements whether it's Bill Clinton or whoever or challenging one's christianity simply because they oppose Bush, a challenge I have seen far too many times. I thought I would turn the tables on them you might say. It is relative to his political christianity and I make no judgement about Bush's personal christianity and am not one of those who question his salvation but I do have an opinion about the christian quality of his administration and that is what I'am trying to convey but it is difficult to resist giving the "Right" a taste of their own medicine.
I personally believe God strongly opposes gay relationships. I base that on his position on it in the old and new testaments. Sodomy or homosexuality was so repugmant to God that he decreed that anyone engaged in it be put to death, relevant to those old testament times. And the story of Sodom and Gomorrah should be an exclamation mark in history about the way He feels about it. In the new testament Paul states in his first chapter in his first book Romans that a man lying with a man is sin. He begins with this when preaching about the sins of men so the emphasis is clearly there.(Romans 1:26-27) But this is not about God hating people but instead God hating sin. God loves all people and would have them turn from their sin. My attitude about this in not about a facist need to control others as is exemplified by some on the right but is a desire those escape that which is pulling them down. God wants the best for all of us and that is why He forbids somethings because with all the wisdom it took to create the world He also knows with that same wisdom that certain acts or behavior will eventually destroy people He created and integreted with His creation. It is fundamentally about His love for us. Your criticism is well-taken and again, thanks for the thoughful post.
Monday, July 03, 2006 3:57:00 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Top 10 Consequences Of Voting Yes On The Virginia Marriage Amendment

The following is offered as there are opposing lists being circulated by the religious right. So, here are my Top 10 Consequences of Voting Yes on the Virginia Marriage Amendment. 1. Voting Yes is unnecessary, as marriage is already defined in Virginia by statute. 2. Voting Yes ignores the facts – ignores the accepted medicine and science on this subject. 3. Voting Yes to constitutionalize such a socially charged issue, in flux, is clearly in opposition to Jeffersonian Democracy. 4. Voting Yes is an unabashed ploy by cynical Republicans to get out their base. 5. Voting Yes is in opposition to the maintaining of a bright line between church and state. 6. Voting Yes could bring about a myriad of unintended consequences to unmarried heterosexual couples. 7. Voting Yes will continue to paint Virginia as a cultural backwater and an unfriendly place for the location of new high tech businesses. 8. Voting Yes will hardly benefit the thousands of children in gay families nor give hope to many...
Read more

I Am Ashamed That Eric Cantor Is My Congressman

I understand that most don’t have the leisure I have, as a retiree, to follow issues, to stay tuned to political debates, to spend time and become involved in local politics. However, it is appalling that those fellow citizens of my 7th District in Virginia have such a knee jerk reaction to this current financial crisis such as to swallow the political rhetoric of Congressman Cantor and to not see this partisan politician for who he is. To see Congressman Cantor spotlighted on national news holding up House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s floor remarks and using this as the reason that Republicans failed to pass their administration’s backed financial crisis bill was nauseating. Cantor was playing politics. Cantor was petty. Cantor was being used by his party handlers to try and shift this failure to reach accord onto the Democrats for political gain. Cantor was seen as a safe spokesman who is from the brightest red district of a red state with little formidable opposition to push this mal...
Read more

Yes Virginia, There Are Homosexuals – In Spite Of Mean-Spirited Marriage Amendments

You don't need to be a lawyer to write a marriage amendment apparently, but you could use some common sense. A high school student could have written a better amendment than the proposed Virginia marriage amendment. And if it weren't so poorly written, this topic wouldn't be the subject of debate and discussion all across the Commonwealth. Just using words like "approximate" and "qualities . . . of marriage" for example --- these words mean something different to every one who reads them. At least, you will have to admit that for a constitutional amendment to our Bill of Rights, this language is far from ideal. And more importantly is not easily and consistently communicated to the general populace. But why tiptoe around this. Delegate Robert Marshall has admitted in interviews and debates that he seized onto this quest after Lawrence v. Texas and his homophobia and obsession with sodomy (overlooking that oral sex within heterosexual couples is sodom...
Read more