A Weblog Dedicated to the Discussion of the Christian Faith and 21st Century Life

A Weblog Dedicated to the Discussion of the Christian Faith and 21st Century Life
___
I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, –that unless I believed, I should not understand.-- St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Quote of the Day 2008.25

Has the United States Senate Become the House of Lords?

..."The problem with Caroline Kennedy's presumption to Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated Senate seat is not lack of qualification or experience. The Senate houses lots of inexperienced rookies -- wealthy businessmen, sports stars, even the occasional actor."

"The problem is Kennedy's sense of entitlement. Given her rather modest achievements, she is trading entirely on pedigree."

"I hate to be a good government scold, but wasn't the American experiment a rather firm renunciation of government by pedigree?"

"Yes, the Founders were not democrats. They believed in aristocracy. But their idea was government by natural -- not inherited -- aristocracy, an aristocracy of 'virtue and talents,' as Jefferson put it."

"It's not the end of the world, but it is an accelerating trend that need not be encouraged. After all, we have already created another huge distortion in our politics: a plethora of plutocrats in the U.S. Senate, courtesy of our crazed campaign finance laws. If you're very very rich, you can buy your Senate seat by spending as much of your money as you want. Meanwhile, your poor plebeian opponent is running around groveling for the small contributions allowed by law. Hence the Corzines and the Kohls, who parachute into Congress seemingly out of nowhere."

"Having given this additional leg up to the rich, we should resist packing our legislatures with yet more privileged parachutists, the well-born."

"True, the Brits did it that way for centuries, but with characteristic honesty. They established a house of Parliament exclusively for highborn twits and ensconced them there for life. There they chatter away in supreme irrelevance deep into their dotage. Problem is that the U.S. Senate retains House of Commons powers even as it develops a House of Lords membership."

You can read Charles Krauthammer's entire editorial,"Camelot is Not a State," here.

+ + + + + + +

Cross-Posted at RedBlueChristian

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Krauthammer makes some good points but I think it should be noted that he is a former Democrat who seems to have a very bitter attitude toward all Democrats. A psychiatrist by training, he had the audacity to diagnose Howard Dean as mentally ill in 2003. He has dismissed Barack Obama as a dishonorable fraud, attacked John Kerry as a demagogue who betrayed his comrades in Vietnam, and once dismissed Al Gore as having "gone off his lithium again."

In sum, my point is that Krauthammer may be right about the "sense of entitlement" charge, but his hatred of Democrats is so extreme as to undermine virtually anything he says or writes.

Allan R. Bevere said...

Ad Hominem Fallacy:

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem as abusive, sexist, racist, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.

Source: Reference.com