Category: politics

Was an Arkansas waitress fired for supporting Hillary Clinton?

And now for something completely different…

I got a call from a friend of the person who is the subject of this post. Micah Qualls is a praise singer, and former waitress at an airport in Little Rock. Seems Ms. Qualls, while on break, held up a Clinton for prez sign when John McCain flew into the airport where Ms. Qualls was a waitress at the airport restaurant. For her advocacy, she was fired. I would normally not post on the firing of a waitress in Little Rock (Grove City maybe, but nowhere in Arkansas) but this one interested me because of the detail reported by blogger, Max Brantley, as well as the possible role (?) of former Republican prez candidate, Mike Huckabee.

The tipster says the footage which about to be aired will shed a different light on some of the accounts reported in the blog. Well, you heard it here second…

T-shirt case decided: “Be happy, not gay” allowed in school

We may see more of these t-shirts around on Monday since the

7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals instructed the district court to order the Neuqua Valley High School to suspend its ban on the “Be Happy, Not Gay” T-shirt while a civil rights lawsuit in the case proceeds.

Given the ingenuity of adolescents, we will see this envelope pushed further and further (“Be smart, not Christian” is sure to come).

I have seen this issue less of a free-speech matter (you can go outside and say, “Be happy, not gay” and no one will arrest you), but how much school administrators can limit speech in the service of school order. I have not seen this as a religious free speech issue since there is nothing inherently religious about that t-shirt. I think schools will have more of these kind of issues to adjudicate and some may just throw up their hands and let anything in. Some will perhaps let nothing in. I don’t know but as much as I am a defender of free speech and religious liberty, I am not happy about this outcome. I figured the court might decide that the boy had a right to wear the shirt, but I do not believe it would be right to wear it.

I think our Golden Rulers should keep passing out the cards on Monday.

Obama, Clinton spar over bitterness in PA

In last night’s Clinton-Obama debate in Philadelphia, moderator Charlie Gibson asked Obama to clarify his remarks regarding Pennsylvanians bitterness with government and their gravitation toward guns and God. The entire transcript is here. I am reproducing the crux of the answers from Obama and Clinton. I don’t think he appreciably changed the basic meaning of his earlier comments.

Obama said:

And so the point I was making was that when people feel like Washington’s not listening to them, when they’re promised year after year, decade after decade, that their economic situation is going to change, and it doesn’t, then politically they end up focusing on those things that are constant, like religion.

They end up feeling “This is a place where I can find some refuge. This is something that I can count on.” They end up being much more concerned about votes around things like guns, where traditions have been passed on from generation to generation. And those are incredibly important to them.

And yes, what is also true is that wedge issues, hot-button issues, end up taking prominence in our –in our politics. And part of the problem is that when those issues are exploited, we never get to solve the issues that people really have to get some relief on, whether it’s health care or education or jobs.

Is he really saying that people become single issue or ideological voters because they feel government is insensitive to their economic plight? He clearly believes there is some causal relationship – he uses the phrase, “end up” four times in this short narrative to cast interest in religion, guns, social issues as the result of frustration with government. I think this seriously misunderstands those on the other end of the spectrum from him on social issues.

I think Clinton made a pretty accurate statement in response:

I don’t believe that my grandfather or my father, or the many people whom I have had the privilege of knowing and meeting across Pennsylvania over many years, cling to religion when Washington is not listening to them. I think that is a fundamental, sort of, misunderstanding of the role of religion and faith in times that are good and times that are bad.

And I similarly don’t think that people cling to their traditions, like hunting and guns, either when they are frustrated with the government. I just don’t believe that’s how people live their lives.

At any rate, perhaps the most troubling thing I heard in the debate was the promise of both Democratic candidates to bring the troops home from Iraq, no matter what military leaders advised. Even if they advise the country will destabilize and our interests will be harmed, they said they would bring the troops home. They also promised no new taxes on people making 250k or less. Shades of George Bush I…

Religion and the 2008 election: A conversation with Paul Kengor, Fred Barnes and Michael Medved

Currently, here at Grove City College, the Center for Vision and Values is hosting our annual conference. Titled, “Church and State: 2008 – A history of church-state relations and and a look at where the values voter will turn in 2008,” the schedule is filled with scholarly papers regarding church-state relations with special emphasis on how these issues impact politics and policy.

Earlier this evening, I attended a panel discussion that was billed as an interview of the Beltway Boys (Fred Barnes and Mort Kondracke) with Center Director, Paul Kengor as host. Unfortunately, Mort Kondracke could not attend due to some health concerns. Filling in ably was conservative talk show host, Michael Medved, who earlier in the day broadcast live from the atrium of our academic building, not far from my office.

In fact, it was Medved who provided some of the more newsworthy comments of the evening. For instance, he disclosed the rumor that Barack Obama is looking at New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as a running mate. Mayor Bloomberg has switched his party affiliation to Independent from Republican (which was a switch from an earlier Democratic affiliation). This “fusion ticket” might be quite appealing to the middle.  Medved also predicted that Joe Lieberman, while a great friend of John McCain, would not take the Veep spot, even if offered.

Much of the conversation focused on how the religious vote might impact the election. Each candidate was examined in this regard. Specifically, Hillary Clinton is well known to occupy an Evangelical left position on most issues (which we have covered here in the past), McCain has Episcopal roots but has attended a Baptist church for quite awhile up to the present. Regarding social issues, all panelists agreed that McCain would chose conservative judges favorable to social and religious conservatives. This fact will help consolidate religious conservatives behind McCain. However, much conversation focused on Barack Obama’s political problems with his pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

Both Barnes and Medved believe that this issue will dog Obama into the general election should he be the Democratic nominee. Listening to a cursory review of Wright’s actions and positions, I believe they are right. Obama has said his Christianity has been directly influenced by Rev. Wright. Obama is not unaware of his statements and activities. For instance, as Medved noted, Wright has lauded Louis Farrakhan and even traveled with him to meet with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi when Gadhafi was engaged in terrorism. This is the mentor and church Obama chose to join just 4 years after the Libyan trip and then remained for 20 years, calling Rev. Wright his spiritual advisor.  Medved predicted an Obama candidacy could move the Jewish vote toward the Republicans for the first time in decades.

For political junkies, it was a intriguing evening provided by three astute social conservatives.