|
A Problem of Logic
House GOP Declares War on Planned Parenthood and
Republicans Hug Big Brother in Abortion Fight: Ann Woolner
Sponsored by New Jersey Republican Representative Chris Smith, it would void tax breaks given to companies and the self- employed for insurance premiums on policies that cover abortion. The idea is that by leaving more of your money in your pocket, the government is giving you some of its cash. Nor could a woman pay premiums for such a policy with pretax, flexible-spending accounts. True, she earned every penny of that money, but if she’s not paying taxes on it, she can’t spend it on something anti-abortionists don’t like.
Hyperbolic headlines aside, the House Republican logic is: A tax break is tantamount to a subsidy. Now follow that to its logical next point...
Who else doesn't pay taxes, in this case property tax...
Why churches, that's who.
So, House Republicans, it seems this is one of your have your cake and eat it too moments. If tax breaks are tantamount to subsidy, and we can't allow tax breaks for things we can't subsidize... take your pick.
Personally, I'm for the system in place, but hey, it would be interesting to get property valuations on all those churches. I wonder how many could afford it.
What are US interests in the Middle East (a quick rant)
In Egyptian Uprising, A Tale Of Two Risks For U.S. On one side are those who say the U.S. should stick with the Mubarak government and not be swayed by all of the people demonstrating for democracy. Among them are John Bolton, who served as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under President George W. Bush. "We have a profound interest in the stability of the Israeli-Egyptian peace relationship," Bolton said, speaking on Fox News in the early days of the uprising. "We've got an enormously strong relationship with the Egyptian military. Mubarak ... has been an American ally for 30 years. "These are not things you toss away lightly against the promise, the hope, the aspiration for sweetness and light and democratic government."
Ok. Here is the problem. If we're saying "Fuck democracy in the Middle East, we need to focus on vital US interests," then what about Israel? How is the survival of Israel a vital US interest? I have no desire to see Israel fall, but if the US doesn't give two shits about democratic protests in Cairo, why does the US give two shits about Israel. The Suez is a vital interest. Saudi oil is US interest. Egyptian air space and Air Force basing is a US interest. A Jewish (as opposed to Arab) government in charge of Jerusalem tourism? Not a US interest.
I think we're generally doing the right thing in regards to Israel, but let's not lie to ourselves and say that Israeli interests are US interests. If we're going to write off Egyptian protesters and back Mubarak (and I don't think we will) because Mubarak encourages peace with Israel, we're hypocrites, perhaps even to ourselves.
|
