And a tea party the Dish can finally get behind:
(Photo: Marc Gasol of the Memphis Grizzlies enjoys a tea party during a visit with children on March 15, 2012 at Memphis Grizzlies House – St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee. By Joe Murphy/NBAE via Getty Images. More photos here.)
Bruce Bartlett runs the numbers. Ryan says nothing specific about the abolition of tax deductions his plan requires. But it would have to be at least as dramatic as Reagan's in 1986 (something devoutly to be wished but requiring a huge political force). On top of which:
Every governmental function one can think of would be virtually abolished except for Medicare, Social Security and defense.
All because tax rates have to be cut even further. If the GOP could get past that, they'd have an opening. But they can't.
Why else is Obama surging in Virginia polling?
A reader responds to the question:
Yep. I was a seminary student during the run-up to the Iraq war and was shattered by the way that the majority of the body of Christ failed to challenge the unnecessary, destructive, world-shattering battle. Those theologians who attempted to justify the war did so with flimsy "just war" reasoning that fell apart under close scrutiny. I was sad, angry, and disillusioned wondering if those who professed to follow Christ and be guided by the Holy Spirit were delusional. Shouldn't followers of Christ, who preached radical non-violence, have approached the war with more scrutiny? If the Church didn't challenge its followers and the world, was it worth my time or devotion?
Another writes:
Your comment – about finding a Christianity that is both modern and transcendent – struck a chord with me. I was raised Catholic. But I haven't practiced for several years. As a woman, I feel that I cannot participate in a faith that systematically treats women as second-class citizens.
When it comes to real influence in the Church, we simply are not invited to the table, and I don't see how any organization that claims to value the dignity of every human being can continue to do that to half of its participants. Also, as the sister of a gay man, I cannot participate in a church that refuses to recognize the beauty and dignity of his loving relationship with his partner.
I am grateful for my Catholic education. It gave me a solid spiritual and moral foundation. But I don't want to raise my son in the Church; there's just too much ugliness. In some ways I feel the Church left me. The Church I was raised in (post-Vatican II, SF Bay Area) was inclusive, progressive, concerned with poverty and social justice. We were challenged to see the humanity in the poor, the refugee, the other … and to DO something about it. My values haven't changed, but it seems the Church's have. It has disappointed me again and again by choosing patriarchy over compassion, power over justice, contempt over humility, self-deceiving lies over truth.
But other churches just don't do it for me. They lack the sense of gravitas and mystery that I experienced at Mass. They feel more like wholesome social clubs with inspirational speakers – which is great, but doesn't fill the gap. I suppose I could seek out a more progressive parish, but those are becoming fewer and farther between, and subject to the dictates of increasingly conservative bishops.
There are times when I consider turning to Buddhism, as my brother has. But I do want to belong to a church, and I do want to raise my son as an enlightened Christian. Perhaps I haven't looked hard enough, and there is a church out there that is both modern and transcendent. Perhaps some of your readers will offer suggestions?
One does:
"The Episcopal Church follows the via media or "middle way" between Protestant and Roman Catholic doctrine and practices: that is both Catholic and Reformed." (From Wiki)
I know you've had readers try to convert you to Episcopal in the past (I've seen your response) so I won't try to do so. However, the middle way does already exist in this country, and unfortunately it is doing anything BUT growing (even under the strong leadership of Jefferts-Schori). Perhaps in the long run, the "nones" you mention will find their way to such a middle way or work to create their own, but for now when I try to explain to my friends and acquaintances, or many other people that it is possible to be both Christian AND progressive, they look at me as if I am some wild hermit living off locusts and wild honey (and many of my "Christian" friends wouldn't even understand the reference).
It seems people are choosing the non-middle ways in greater numbers than ever before. I can only hope we don't reach Santorum levels before the trend begins to reverse and the pendulum swings back the other way. I hope the millennials and newer generations help with this.
It was a fantastic victory – and a conservative one on both counts. Firstly because marriage is an ancient institution and bringing the last two percent of the population into it cannot but encourage more mutual responsibility, and less government. But secondly, because in states where marriage equality now exists, it has fast become part of the social fabric, which it is the responsibility of conservatives to conserve. And since gay couples have been living together for ever, it didn't create something brand new, it just folded an emerging and more visible reality into the fabric of the polity.
But this fall, five states will face challenges. They are Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Washington. Winning in one of the ballot initiatives or getting a veto-proof majority in New Jersey will be critical to maintaining the momentum for equality and crucial backdrop to any future Supreme Court decision. I don't do this often, but the Freedom To Marry has just launched a Win More States campaign to raise money to help advance the cause of equality. If you want to donate, you can here.
Betsy Stevenson and Justin Wolfers review some new studies based on what the weather was like on the major launch day of April 15, 2009:
Their research demonstrates that in politics, success begets success. The initial boost from the weather generated substantial momentum. Counties that enjoyed better weather on tax day had more people sign up to become Tea Party organizers, greater donations to an affiliated political action committee, and larger rallies a year later. …
What’s more, the Tea Party experiment shows that the activism catalyzed by those sunny days translates into real political influence. Politicians whose districts were sunny on tax day voted in a more reliably conservative fashion throughout 2009 and 2010. Indeed, the absence of rain in a congressional district on April 15, 2009, made its representative 8.7 percentage points more likely to vote against the Affordable Care Act. Had the weather at those early rallies been sunnier, it’s possible that Obama’s signature legislation wouldn’t have passed.
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Marc Tracy weighs in on Beinart's settlement boycott:
The problem I have with a partial boycott is it strikes me as the worst of both worlds: a rather shallow, largely symbolic statement—since it implies that in-Green-Line Israel has very little to do with the settlement enterprise—that at the same time moves down the slippery slope to an out-and-out boycott, which is the sort of thing that ought to be reserved for truly atrocious regimes (Iran, apartheid South Africa, etc.), which Israel’s is not … Does Beinart not see how short the leap is to simply denying that liberal Zionism can exist?
TNC calls Obama's comment "pitch perfect":
Geraldo, on the other hand, claims Martin's hoodie "is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman." Ed Morrissey is taken aback:
I do get what Rivera is saying; I had this conversation with my nephew when he was a teenager, explaining that clothes are a statement of values that get communicated instantly to the people around him, especially to those who don’t know him. That doesn’t mean that baggy pants or a hoodie makes you complicit in your own death when someone shoots you for no other reason, however, and it’s a blame-the-victim impulse to make that argument.
Sam Harris insists it’s rather ugly:
[T]he Ahmadis are at least disposed to make the sorts of conciliatory sounds that the religious must make in order to live peacefully in a pluralistic world where most people do not share their favorite superstitions.
But the Ahmadis are by no means the “true” face of Islam, and their mosques are regularly bombed in Pakistan. It is only decent to observe that these atrocities have nothing to do with Israel’s occupation of Palestine, or U.S. foreign policy, or any other terrestrial concern. Why do Ahmadis suffer and die in this way? The reason is as easily discerned as reasons generally are among religious lunatics: Sunni Muslims consider Ahmadis to be heretics—in fact, the government of Pakistan officially deems them so.
Portland, Oregon, 7.30 am
The Dish 