Reapportionment Favors Republicans

The constitutionally-mandated reappportionment of congressional delegates (and thus electoral votes) according to the latest census is looking good for Republicans.

States gaining Congressional seats: Arizona (1), Florida (2), Georgia (1), Nevada (1), South Carolina (1), Texas (4), Utah (1), Washington (1).

States losing Congressional seats: Illinois (1), Iowa (1), Louisiana (1), Massachusetts (1), Michigan (1), Missouri (1), New Jersey (1), New York (2), Ohio (2), Pennsylvania (1).

via Pajamas Media » Reapportionment Favors the Red States.

Of those gaining representatives, only Nevada and Washington voted Democratic in the 2008 presidential election.  Of those losing representatives, only Louisiana and Missouri went for the Republican.

Why do you think the population shift and demographic changes favors Republicans?  Aren’t the progressives supposed to be the wave of the future?

Americans have gotten pessimistic

Engrained in the American character, it seemed, was optimism.  Liberals believe in progress and Conservatives believe in Ronald Reagan’s “morning in America.”  Now, though, we are seeing something very different:

Americans are deeply pessimistic about the state of the country and its future, according to a series of new national polls, a negativity that puts politicians in a difficult place as they try to woo voters and keep hold on office.

In the new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, 63 percent said the country was headed in the wrong direction, the highest number in President Obama’s term to date. A similar 67 percent said the country was headed off on the wrong track in a Washington Post/ABC News survey released earlier this week.

New Pew data paints an even darker picture of Americans’ views about our current standing — particularly in regards the economy. Nearly nine in ten Americans say the current economic conditions are either “fair” or “poor” and there is an overwhelming sense that we as a country are losing ground.

Fully 67 percent of the sample said the country was “losing ground” on the budget deficit — today’s expected House vote on the tax cut compromise won’t help there — while 64 percent say ground is being lost on “cost of living”. Two thirds (63 percent) said the country is losing ground on the “availability of good-paying jobs” and 58 percent said the same about the “rich-poor gap”.

The numbers are startling and make clear the challenge before President Obama — or any politician — hoping to convince people that better days are indeed ahead.

via The Fix – America the pessimistic.

So, are you pessimistic, or have you found some grounds for optimism?  Might this new pessimistic phase be healthy for Americans?  Or the contrary?  And what does Christianity have to say about this?

We have no cynicism

Kathleen Parker, writing about diplomatic  fallout from the Wikileak documents, includes a poignant reaction:

Writing for the center-right Le Figaro, French journalist Renaud Girard said: “What is most fascinating is that we see no cynicism in U.S. diplomacy. They really believe in human rights in Africa and China and Russia and Asia. They really believe in democracy and human rights.”

Yes, we really do.

If Americans are guilty of anything, he said, it is being a little naive. Let’s plead guilty as charged and get on with it.

via Kathleen Parker – Can we become an America WikiLeaks can’t assail?.

I guess the rest of the world doesn’t really believe in all that stuff about democracy and human rights like we do.  So in our idealism we naively try to help the world and just get beaten around for our trouble.  I know that critics of America ascribe sinister motives to our policies–they are just in Iraq for the oil, etc.–but I think our real problem has been our good intentions, which just don’t work out the way our optimistic national character expects them to.

And yet I think it’s good not to be cynical about democracy, freedom, human rights, etc.  Is there a way to keep our ideals without being naive?

Wikileaks’ head as James Bond villain

British police are reportedly closing in on Julian Assange, the man behind Wikileaks, with plans to arrrest him on Swedish sexual assault charges. But now Assange, playing the role of a James Bond villain, has devised a doomsday weapon set to go off if anyone interferes with his fiendish plans:

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has reportedly released an encrypted “poison pill” file that contains sensitive data related to Guantanamo Bay, Afghan military ops, Bank of America and the BP oil spill.

The file – known as insurance.aes256 – is locked-down with a 256-digit key deemed virtually unbreakable by even the US Department of Defense (DoD).

Assange, who is using the sensitive data to hold governments hostage, states: “We have over a long period of time distributed encrypted backups of material we have yet to release. All we have to do is release the password to that material, and it is instantly available.”

WikiLeaks threatens “poison pill” if site shut down Assange explains that if any government tries to stop WikiLeaks by downing the website or detaining him, he will disseminate the “poison pill” password, allowing anyone to access the highly-embarrassing documents.

Meanwhile, the leaks keep coming.  The latest goes far beyond diplomatic embarrassments.  It is a direct attack on U.S. national security tailor made for international terrorists:

A long list of key facilities around the world that the US describes as vital to its national security has been released by Wikileaks.

In February 2009 the State Department asked all US missions abroad to list all installations whose loss could critically affect US national security.

The list includes pipelines, communication and transport hubs.

Several UK sites are listed, including cable locations, satellite sites and BAE Systems plants.

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says this is probably the most controversial document yet from the Wikileaks organisation.

The definition of US national security revealed by the cable is broad and all embracing, he says.

There are obvious pieces of strategic infrastructure like communications hubs, gas pipelines and so on. However, other facilities on the list include:

* Cobalt mine in Congo

* Anti-snake venom factory in Australia

* Insulin plant in Denmark

In Britain, the list ranges from Cornwall to Scotland, including key satellite communications sites and the places where trans-Atlantic cables make landfall.

A number of BAE Systems plants involved in joint weapons programmes with the Americans are listed, along with a marine engineering firm in Edinburgh which is said to be “critical” for nuclear powered submarines. . . .

The geographical range of the document on installations is extraordinary, our correspondent says.

If the US sees itself as waging a “global war on terror” then this represents a global directory of the key installations and facilities – many of them medical or industrial – that are seen as being of vital importance to Washington.

Some locations are given unique billing. The Nadym gas pipeline junction in western Siberia, for example, is described as “the most critical gas facility in the world”.

It is a crucial transit point for Russian gas heading for western Europe.

In some cases, specific pharmaceutical plants or those making blood products are highlighted for their crucial importance to the global supply chain.

The critical question is whether this really is a listing of potential targets that might be of use to a terrorist.

via BBC News – List of facilities ‘vital to US security’ leaked.

The Fall of the American Empire

Foreign affairs think tanker Robert D. Kaplan argues in the Washington Post that the United States and the Soviet Union constituted, in effect, two empires that organized the world between them.  Other countries mostly aligned themselves with one side or the other.  The Soviet Empire collapsed, leaving the United States alone in the imperial role.  But now, according to Kaplan, the American empire has collapsed.

Because of our military quagmires, our economic problems, our diplomatic weakness, and our overall popularity abroad, the United States no longer carries much clout with other countries.  We can’t influence even the little ones any more to do what we want.

China is on the verge of replacing  the United States as the world empire.  But it isn’t quite ready yet.  In the meantime, Kaplan predicts global instability since “no one is in charge.”

This raises lots of questions:

(1)  Do you think he is right?

(2)  Does the United States have any business being a de facto global empire?  (The old empires, like that of the Romans and the British, at least profited from their takeover of other countries, unlike the United States with its “soft empire.”)  Wouldn’t it be better for this country if we just hunkered down behind our own borders, letting the rest of the world go its own way?  (On the other hand, didn’t Rome try that, only to find there were no more buffers to keep the Barbarians away?)

(3)  What do you think the world will be like under a de facto Chinese empire, with its free market communism, that strangely effective blend of totalitarian government with money-making enterprise?

via Where’s the American empire when we need it?.

Is America exceptional, or what?

The latest ideological buzzword is “exceptional,” as in, “America is exceptional.”  Republicans Mitt Romney, Mike Pence, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich are accusing Democrats–and President Obama in particular–of not believing in “American exceptionalism.”  See this rather biased article for an overview of the phenomenon: Conservatives’ new focus: America, the exceptional.

What does it mean to say that America is exceptional?  Does it mean, as the article says, that America is the best of all countries, or does it really mean something different?  What IS exceptional about America, and what is not?

Isn’t it true that conservatives tend to be more positively patriotic, while liberals tend to be patriotic in the sense that “it’s patriotic to criticize what is wrong”?  Why is that?

And what does all of this mean from a Christian point of view? At what point does patriotism turn into pride and idolatry?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X