Veritas Rex

Ginsburg's Stunning Comments

by Anonymous

On July 7, the New York Times Magazine published an interview with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg titled "The Place of Women on the Court."  It quickly became a bolster for feminism and women's right to choose.  The statements Ginsburg makes in this interview are frankly, stunning.  Had a conservative male justice like Scalia made similar comments from his viewpoint it would be all you had heard about for the past few days, but Ginsburg's comments probably won't make your evening news.

First, Ginsburg reveals some racist themes while discussing Roe v. Wade and the Hyde Amendment, upheld in a 1980 court decision, which restricts Medicaid use for abortions.  Justice Ginsburg says: "There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore…So we have a policy that affects only poor women.  Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."  In short, Ginsburg thinks that Roe is, in part, about controlling the poor population in America (Hello China?); a thought process she further reveals by saying: "I still think…that the possibility of stopping a pregnancy very early is significant.  The morning-after pill will become more accessible and easier to take." 

Next, she speaks about against state laws banning or restricting abortions—10th Amendment be damned.  "It will be, it should be, that this is a woman's decision…So I think the side that wants to take the choice away from women and give it to the state, they're fighting a losing battle.  Time is on the side of change."

Americans should be terrified of a sitting Justice who makes such bigoted statements and statements that clearly oppose the Constitution.  Furthermore, President Obama has nominated a Supreme Court Candidate who would enthusiastically endorse Ginsburg's abortion views and has made some racist statements of her own (In 2001 Sotomayor said: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”).

It's even more amazing to me that Justice Ginsburg can make these statements in a national magazine without public outcry.  They clearly reveal that she has an agenda…an agenda that will not be thwarted by the facts of the case before her or the Constitution itself.

Charity v. Socialism

Ann Coulter brings up a very good point in her recent column.  "Bleeding heart" Liberals tend to be viewed as more charitable and more willing to help the poor.  With the help the mainstream media, Conservatives tend to be viewed as greedy, with little to no concern for the poor.  However, the real difference between the philosophies is not WHO wants to help those in need.  It's HOW we should help them. 

Liberals want to forcibly redistribute wealth from taxpayers to the needy (and sometimes not so needy), through an extremely ineffective and inefficient tool for doing such work...the federal government (how's that "war on poverty" going again?...oops, low blow).  Conservatives tend to freely give their own money and urge others to freely give a portion of their wealth to charitable organizations that can more efficiently and effectively help those in need. 

Research shows that Liberals tend to give less to charity than Conservatives.  It's one thing to use other people's money to support what you believe to be a good cause.  It's quite another to use your own money.  The former is a form of socialism.  The latter is charity.  Check out the article. 

Family - the best "stimulus package" for America

In these uncertain economic times, we struggle to keep our jobs.  But it also appears that the best “stimulus package” we can get would be to either get married or stay married for the benefit of the whole family. 

Research has long shown that the family – an intact mother and father for the children – isn’t just an old notion.  It is a predictor of greater wealth, better health, less crime and higher educational attainment for the children.  

In the state of Indiana, and across the country, we’ve gone to great lengths to restructure our property tax systems.  But if we want to take an honest look at factors that affect our economy, including government spending, we must get past being “judgmental” about families and look honestly at this significant drain on both our fiscal resources and on the family as a creator of human and social capital.

As we plan for the future, new data is showing us that the family and the economy are intricately intertwined.  Where do the issues of family and the economy meet, and how do we start to talk about them?  In the “family and children’s committee” or in the “tax and fiscal committee”?  What impact do they have on our workforce, our tax base, our spending on services?  

A first-of-it’s-kind report now shows the financial cost of family breakdown (or families not forming at all, in the case of unwed childbearing) and it points to $839 million per year in Indian alone.  The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and for All Fifty States (2008) provides a breakdown for all fifty states.   The researchers admit that they took a narrow, conservative estimate in their first foray into such economic impact analysis (it didn’t include Medicaid, or the cost of alcohol and drug abuse, for example).  

If this number is, indeed, the tip of the iceberg in Indiana, then let’s look more closely at this issue to see just how deeply it hits our economy.

Indiana Family Institute will start this dialogue in the state of Indiana.

Socialism Is Not A Family Value

Stuart Shepard proves once again why charity is a good idea and socialism is not.

Helping Those In Need

Focus on the Family highlights Florida Pastor Bob and his church's success in a number of areas.  I would like to see more churches getting involved in the areas of foster care and homelessness.  Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale seems like a good model for how churches can develop some ministries that would really help their communities in these and other areas.  Government will never produce an adequate response to certain social problems because it is a cold, blunt tool.  Christians can fill the gap with the warm, loving hands of Christ.  

What churches are doing similar work in our state and how can we help them?   If our churches are not doing work similar to that of Calvary Chapel, is it possible to use them as our model to start changing lives here in Indiana?

Honoring an American Hero on MLK Day

Booker T. Washington is a hero of mine.  A freed slave and a man of God, he saw a serious need - the plight of his people both economically and socially - and addressed that need very successfully for the time in which he lived.  Booker T. Washington's Tuskegee Institute gave us a successful model for a truly community changing faith-based initiative before any of us were even born.  In a time when African American's were technically free, but still struggling through the effects of generations of slavery, Washington's Tuskegee Institute gave many hope for a brighter future through spiritual and occupational training.  Here are a couple of excerpts from Booker T. Washington's "Address on the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of Tuskegee Institute", courtesy of the University of Illinois Press (here is the full speech):

"'And Jesus said, I will make you fishers of men.'

    In the Spirit of these words, the foundation of this institution was laid in 1881, through a gift from the State of Alabama.

    For twenty-five years, then, the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute has been fishing for men.  What of it, and with what results?  In our quest we have used land, houses, henneries, shops, laundries, kitchens, class-rooms, the Bible, arithmetic, the saw, the trowel, and money - all these and more we have used in our efforts to fish for men.

    A span of five and twenty years in the life of a nation, race or institution, means little as the Great Law-giver reckons time.  This is not a sufficient lapse of time in which to conceive and execute a fundamental plan for the redemption of a people, and yet it is ample time in which to note tendencies and define possibilities...."

    "If this country is to continue to be a Republic, its task will never be completed as long as seven or eight millions of its people are in large degree regarded as aliens and are without voice or interest in the welfare of the Government.  Such a course will not merely inflict great injustice upon these millions of people, but the nation will pay the price of finding the genius and form of its government changed, not perhaps in name, but certainly in reality, and because of this the world will say that free government is a failure.

    In the relation to our government, then what is the fundamental mission and what should be the spirit of such an institution as the Tuskegee Institute?  As I conceive it, a part of the mission of this school is expressed in the purpose and determination to assist the [African-American] race in laying such a gradual and permanent foundation in right living, through the accumulation of property, industry, thrift, skill, education of all characters, moral and religious habits and all that which means our usefulness to the community in which we abide, that naturally, logically, sympathetically we shall make ourselves grow into full and rightful enjoyment and intelligent use of the privileges and rewards of citizenship."

Take a look at this full speech or even some of Booker T. Washington's books.  The principles he lived by still apply, even to modern 21st Century problems.  Hard work, hope, faith and love for God and our fellow man are still the roots that allow America to blossom. 

A Biblical Christian Response to Poverty

My friend Jay Height over at Shepherd Community asked some very interesting questions yesterday on "Jay's Journal."  He mentions that the federal government started the war on poverty almost 45 years ago and asks, "How has the battle gone?"  You should check out the Shephard Community website, but I won't keep you in suspense.  He gives it an "F." 

He goes on to ask if we need to "change the battle plan" in order to win the battle.  My answer is "Yes!"  You don't have to look far for a successful model.  Jay and his amazing staff at Shepherd have been fighting this war the right way and winning!  Perhaps the old government led model of creating and sustaining generations of government dependants (and airtight voting blocks for certain political leaders) will start to crumble and the Biblical Christian model of true liberty is the future.  Let's hope, pray and then help Jay!

FSSA: Reform doesn’t come without challenge

It looks like there has been a well-organized campaign forming in opposition to FSSA’s modernization process.  As someone with a social work background and some experience working with FSSA I take some interest.

In this article written by a local attorney in Ft. Wayne, this statement by FSSA critic John Cardwell, and this one by Senator Simpson, we see the continued misinformation spread that FSSA has eliminated case workers.  But the fact is that case workers still remain.  There are still individuals applicants can talk to about their case IN PERSON.  The new system has simply added a phone and Internet option.  They are not the only option, like Cardwell and Simpson suggest.

It’s unfortunate that this kind of misinformation has been spread because Mitch Roob and the leadership have undertaken fundamental reforms that were long overdue.  Prior to the modernization, applicants were allowed to speak with ONLY one person about their case- their individual case worker.  Records were kept on paper.  If that case worker was on vacation, out sick or simply too busy applicants could make no progress.  Applicants were very dissatisfied with the old system and,if Cardwell and others where honest, so were workers in community-based organizations that attempted to advocate on behalf of applicants.

The old system was full of fraud.  Indiana has identified over $100 million dollars worth of ill-gotten benefits in just two years.  That’s a lot of wasted taxpayer money.

And now we can do much more:  the modernized program also allowed the state to respond more effectively to the recent flooding.  They were able to deliver emergency food stamps to tens of thousands of Hoosiers -  impossible under the old system.

Now it is true that the modernization has also caused some problems.  The new system has caused some misunderstandings and some people are having problems applying for benefits.  I am certain that it’s not acceptable to anyone at FSSA or otherwise for there to be problems, but it is (unfortunately) realistic during a switchover – even toward a better system in the end.

I caution patience.  Cardwell wants FSSA to pull out of its agreement with IBM and return to paper records.  Simpson wants to return to the single point of contact methodology.  Both are the wrong way to deal with the problems.  This is a multi-billion dollar department that deals with over 1 million Hoosiers.  It was time for reform, Daniels and Roob took it on, and they should be given the time required to succeed. 

All of this hyperbole and hand-wringing is doing nobody any good- especially the applicants who are being tossed around like political toys.

The coming economic disaster has nothing to do with the bailout

The free market is under attack from both parties and both nominees.

Both Barack Obama and John McCain voted in favor of the $700 billion dollar bailout (which, btw, included $100 billion dollars in pork).  In addition, John McCain, the Republican nominee is looking to take some of this $700 billion in order to help refinance mortgages for those struggling to pay.

Really?

And other than a few free market heros in the Republican Study Committee (like Indiana's own Dan Burton, Steve Buyer and Mike Pence) Republicans failed to defend the market.  This attitude stands to deliver what may be a larger looming disaster for our country and our economy- and it has nothing to do with the stock market.

Evangelicals Unswayed by Democratic Strategy?

There’s no doubt that values voters left Democrats smarting in 2004. (Bush took 78% of evangelical voters in 2004.) And because Democrats, like most Americans, want to be winners, a change was necessitated. And so it is that Democrats have smartly set out to change the landscape. Hence, Obama has been prone to speak on religion more often than even the Republican nominee.

It’s been a flop. A recent Washington Post poll shows Obama only garnering 22% of evangelical support. Today’s Wall Street Journal reports that evangelicals haven’t jumped ship. The article points out the general strategy of the Democratic Party: broaden the agenda to include Democratic-friendly topics including global warming and poverty. One way of dodging the abortion issue, I suppose. Problem is, it hasn’t worked. The article cites the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, noting that while a majority of Americans continue to support stricter laws to protect the environment, only 54% of evangelicals do. In fact, evangelical support of regulation fell about 10 points in the past four years! And poverty is a tough sell to a group who tends to believe in the Constitutional version of limited government. It’s a good article, worth a thorough read.

There is, however, reason to doubt: while there is no shift in the polling, my demographic (20-somethings) have cell phones and are usually impossible to poll. Although an unreliable voting block, there’s a particular adrenaline in this cycle that may translate into an impact. This is the group most easily dissuaded from limited-government political principal (and therefore tending to support environmental regulation and federal welfare).