Over the weekend, a couple of my colleagues discussed matters they thought worthy of note. And, as occasionally happens, I happen to disagree with them — and intend to say so publicly.
Publicly, but civilly. We’re colleagues, after all. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
First up, Rick discussed New York becoming the latest state to approve of gay marriage. In what should come as no surprise to anyone who has ever read anything he’s ever written, he’s against it.
I like Rick. I respect him. I enjoy reading his pieces. But I have to disagree with him here.
As I’ve said many times before, I support gay marriage — as long as it’s implemented the right way. By some way that reflects the wishes of the people. A bill going through the legislature and then being signed into law certainly fits the bill.
Rick’s objections seem to be primarily theological, and I respect that. As a pronounced agnostic, I respect the Bible as a good source of wisdom, but I don’t accept it as authoritative. And I think that it’s OK for our laws to use the Bible as one source for inspiration (Several of the Ten Commandments are also enforced by law), it in no way should be used as the sole basis. Rick’s absolutely entitled to his beliefs, and the law should never be imposed on any religious body where it conflicts with their tenets, but personally, I’m glad New York has followed the lead of such states as…. well, New Hampshire.
Secondly, John Stansbury took on the Chris Wallace – Michelle Bachmann “flake” controversy. And I have to admit, I, too, was offended when I heard the question.
But not for the same reasons. I couldn’t believe that Wallace, of all people, was giving Bachmann such a softball question.
That kind of question is the kind that really good politicians routinely knock out of the park. Instead, Bachmann seriously fluffed the question.
Here’s how Bachmann should have answered the question:
“Am I a flake, Chris? I’m called that by some because I have some very strong, very serious beliefs, and I don’t sugar-coat them or softpedal them or deny them. And that bothers some people, so they try to discredit me.
But you want to know what’s really ‘flakey,’ Chris? President Obama saying that his war in Libya isn’t really a war, because he says it isn’t. President Obama and his staff not knowing who he’s presented the Medal of Honor to directly, and whose awards were received by their next of kin. President Obama running up literally trilliions of dollars of debt in two years, and then arguing that the problem is that the government needs even more money. President Obama appointing a confessed tax cheat as Secretary of the Treasury. The ATF coercing law-abiding gun dealers to make illegal sales to get guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Suing Arizona for enforcing the laws the federal government refuses to enforce. I could go on and on, Chris, but I think you get the point.”
(Feel free to append your own “flakey” Obama policies.)
Wallace served her up a nice, hanging fastball, and Bachmann just let it slide. I don’t know which of the two I’m more disappointed in.
But my colleagues? Am I disappointed in them, for getting the stories “wrong?”
Hardly. They’ve got their opinions, I’ve got mine, and we get along just fine. I disagree with them here. I agree with them on other matters. And I look forward to more of the same in the future.
But if a single one of them disses the duck, it’s war.
(Note to Chone: Mr. Duckie is NOT rubber, he’s a counterfeit beanie baby. Call him “rubber” again, and his lawyers will be in touch for defamation.)