 |
| Rep. Paul Anderson |
I no longer have the standing to communicate directly with someone like Anderson. I left the Morris newspaper 16 years ago. I wonder if Anderson is now being challenged on the issue of abortion. Shall we use the "pretzel" expression to consider Dr. Scott Jensen? As in, "tying himself into a pretzel." Johnson is in the same political party as Anderson.
Jensen's "brand" as he moved up the ranks politically seemed to be pro-life. Something apparently happened to him, though, when he noticed he was 18 points down in the polls.
Republicans everywhere always need to try to "win" to achieve their real objectives which are less taxes/regulations. Abortion is basically window dressing though they'd demur on that. Jensen began running ads crowing about how abortion was a women's constitutional right in Minnesota. So he's a pro-choice flag-waver?
Let us be clear: Although State Representative Paul Anderson might seem like a steady and sane person by the standards of his own party - for sure he's a "nice guy" - he has total pro-life creds. It's a black and white thing. So if you vote for Mr. Anderson of Starbuck, a nice guy and not only that a UMM graduate, you are on the pro-life side.
Anderson has a grade of "F" from Pro-Choice Minnesota. He has taken specific actions in St. Paul to try and puff up his pro-life creds. So, if you're comfortable with that, as many of you no doubt are, fine, vote for him. I take no joy in abortion but I do support women's reproductive health rights. Paul Anderson cannot get pregnant and neither can yours truly.
 |
| Edie Barrett |
For sure I would find Anderson agreeable if I were to meet him. He is a farmer. Farming today is a no-risk profession. We in Morris are weighing him as an election candidate for the first time. No longer is it Backer/Westrom. Westrom does remain on the ballot for us - not Backer, who comes off as being on the extreme end of the Republican Party. It's a relief to no longer be represented by Backer.
Westrom like Anderson seems basically agreeable. Unfortunately we need to put aside these personal qualities somehow.
All the cheerleaders for Trump who just seemed enthralled by him: I don't think they realized the real world consequences of having him as president. Like, watching him nominate Federalist Society members for Supreme Court and judge positions. The Supreme Court's standing with the public has gone down. Samuel Alito began giving speeches that seemed like political speeches. From the right of course.
So then we got Roe vs. Wade overturned.
Maybe there was a time when "pro-life" seemed fairly innocuous. Women had the protection of Roe vs. Wade. "Pro-life" might have seemed defensible on simple philosophical grounds. Now? As they say, the playing field has changed. Pro-life pols need to be grilled now.
Republicans led by Trump are losing the basic human impulse of wanting to tell the truth. Jensen the gubernatorial candidate has tried to sell himself as receptive to abortion rights, which certainly seems to contradict his longstanding image.
What would Paul Anderson say? Is he still a total flag-waver for pro-life? It would be nice everywhere to see women get elected to more positions. Women are nurturers by nature. Men play football and get brain injuries. The men of Stevens County drive pickups with Trump stickers. Are you getting tired of all this? Are you getting tired of the daily barrage of news stories that center on Trump? This has gone on for so long, it's "Groundhog Day."
Why do we as Americans acquiesce to this? Trump lost the popular vote back in 2016. Hillary Clinton would have been a centrist in her governing. Were the eight years of Bill Clinton so terrible? Didn't the stock market go up by leaps and bounds? Weren't those years relatively peaceful?
Just think if January 6 had never happened. Just think how the news media would have focused on more things really germane to our lives. Merrick Garland would be on the Supreme Court. Roe vs. Wade would still be in effect.
It is condescending toward women to even have such a high-profile discussion on abortion. The idea of Roe vs. Wade is that women with their doctors can decide. Not Lindsay Graham or Mitch McConnell.
Oh, Paul Anderson would proclaim "I'm my own person." Sigh. Well then, Mr. Anderson, why not declare yourself an independent? Attention Republican men: the Supreme Court may soon start coming after your condoms.
Psychologists have a popular explanation for all the over-60 white men who show fealty to Trump: They didn't get enough love when they were growing up.
On education
Rep. Anderson wants to "empower parents in education." Fine and dandy. So why, then, does the state legislature need to be involved? We have local school boards that listen to parents, don't we? Does the state legislature want veto power over that? Do Republicans like Anderson want that?
Anderson says he wants to push "academic achievement." Not so simple, really. You see, our digital age has created so many shortcuts, conveniences and efficiencies, I really don't think "academic achievement" as traditionally understood is really all that important.
Oh, and Anderson is sort of a bomb-thrower (metaphorically) when he suggests we reject "controversial, divisive materials." Hey, that's in the eye of the beholder. Shall we excise "slavery" in history studies in favor of "involuntary relocation?" That has been bandied about from Anderson's side of the political aisle. I think that has faded, but it tells you something.
School boards with parents can show the needed wisdom without having legislators in St. Paul coming down with their heavy-handed approach.
To hell with "rigorous academics," let's just have more fun with co-curricular!
Anderson talks about "core curriculum." All that stuff is difficult, stressful and boring. It would just make more kids want to drop out. I would. The so-called "divisive" stuff is "soft" by comparison, gentle. Kids don't have to buy into all these ideas, just be exposed to them some, and then as adults they can decide for themselves. I just think Rep. Anderson and his ilk are scared that "divisive" materials might nudge more kids toward listening to the Democratic side of things. And that might mean a little more taxes which the GOP avoids like the plague.
But what's worse? A plague or a violent overthrow of the U.S. government which is apparently what Backer and others like him want. Be careful what you wish for. Christian nationalism? Where would that leave the Jewish people? Pay attention to the history of Germany. Or forget it, you won't.
My companion blog
On the same day I'm putting up this post, I share further on these topics on "Morris of Course." That's my companion blog. I invite you to read:
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment