“We start therefore with a strong presumption that
the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to
all Americans.”— Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the Supreme Court in 554 U. S. ____ (2008)
Yet another professional sports organization wants a handout
Published Wed, Feb 21 2007 9:00 AM
Technorati Tags: News and Politics, Motorsports
As most of you that visit my website regularly know, I'm a motorsports fan. I'm firmly of the opinion that racing is almost the only true sport and that the rest are just games. I've been a racer for several years and I've got a fabulous 11 second 1979 Corvette for sale.
That doesn't mean that I think we need yet another racetrack in western Washington. And it surely doesn't mean that we need to shell out another $184 million to yet another professional sports organization to have NASCAR come to visit once or twice a year.
NASCAR is one of the biggest racing organizations in the world. The amount of money flowing through NASCAR makes the NHRA look like toy cars. Why they need a public handout to build a stadium baffles me. Except of course everyone want's a piece of the public purse.
Talk about going around in circles:
OLYMPIA — Talk about going around in circles.
Supporters of a proposed NASCAR racetrack near Bremerton told lawmakers on Tuesday the 83,500-seat speedway would create thousands of jobs and — unlike other professional sports stadiums — wouldn't cost taxpayers a dime in the long run.
But opponents painted the proposal as an "obscene piece of pork-filled corporate welfare" that would sully the local environment and create massive traffic problems.
Lt. Gov. Brad Owen called the proposal the best economic-development opportunity he has seen during his 30 years in state politics. But state Treasurer Mike Murphy spoke against it, saying state-funded debt should never be used to pay for private projects.
While Bremerton's mayor called the speedway a "great fit" for his city, other local officials from Kitsap County bashed the proposal.
...
Lawmakers from other parts of the state said they were baffled by the lack of local support.
"This is about jobs," said Sen. Brian Hatfield, D-Raymond, a town that has struggled with the loss of timber jobs. "It's really hard to wrap your brain around folks that don't want economic development."
This isn't about jobs or economic development. Building a track for NASCAR at public expense in Kitsap county is a horribly bad idea. NASCAR would only be likely to hold one major race per year at the new track. The rest of the time the track would either sit idle, or be used for minor, local races.
While that might help the Bremerton economy a little, it would hurt the other racetracks in the region. Pacific Raceways for example holds road races throughout the year. How many of those racers would abandon the road course in Kent to go run the high-speed oval in Bremerton? How many of the racers that run at Evergreen Speedway in Monroe would abandon that smaller track to run in Bremerton?
Setting aside the possible effect on other tracks, there's still the traffic issue. There aren't a lot of ways to get to Bremerton from the east side of Puget Sound. The roads are narrow and I can see major traffic jams for miles getting into and out of Kitsap county whenever a major race is held.
When the NHRA comes to Pacific Raceways for the Northwest Nationals highway 18 is choked with traffic when the track closes. There's been a lot of work done to mitigate the problem, but if you live west of the track you don't want to be heading that way on highway 18 once racing is done for the day when they're here.
I know this from experience. Once, several years ago, I left the track just before the final round of racing and still didn't get to my home in Auburn for over three hours. The crowd leaving was considerably smaller than 83,000 people too. I've since moved to Covington and can get home considerably faster, but I think you get my point.
Try to imagine if you will 83,000 people jammed into cars trying to leave Kitsap county via Highway 16 and crossing the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. All at once. Especially once the bridge becomes a toll bridge.
The cost to build a track for NASCAR will go way beyond the $184 million they're asking the rest of the state to pay to put up half of the facility. It will require large-scale infrastructure improvements to handle the occasional load it will put on our roads. It's already hard enough to get transportation funding applied to highway construction here when most of the emphasis is on busses and light rail that will serve less than 10% of commuters. Putting a NASCAR track in Bremerton will just make that worse.
The State of Washington should get and keep its priorities in order. We don't need to subsidize yet another professional sports organization just to watch a bunch of grown men (and a woman) drive around in circles looking for the finish line.
Cross posted to NWBloggers.com
Trackposted to Random Dreamer, third world county, Big Dog's Weblog, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Blue Star Chronicles, Stuck On Stupid, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and Conservative Thoughts, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Comments (1) | Trackbacks (0)
Wednesday Hero -- Kara Opperman
Published Wed, Feb 21 2007 12:50 AM
Staff Sgt. Kara Opperman 332nd Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron
Staff Sgt. Kara Opperman performs a quality control check Feb. 13 on fuel coming out of a fill stand at Balad Air Base, Iraq. Sergeant Opperman ensures the fuel is safe and meets Air Force specifications before it is used for aircraft and equipment.
These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives so that others may enjoy the freedoms we get to enjoy everyday. For that, I am proud to call them Hero. We Should Not Only Mourn These Men And Women Who Died, We Should Also Thank God That Such People Lived
This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. If you would like to participate in honoring the brave men and women who serve this great country, you can find out how by going here.
Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)
OTA Wednesday
Published Wed, Feb 21 2007 12:42 AM
Technorati Tags: Open Trackbacks
This is your open trackbacks post for Wednesday, February 21, 2007.
If you have something interesting you'd like to share, feel free to link it here and leave a trackback.
Just remember the trackback policy.
For the best exposure, go to the blogger's oasis and use the linkfest chooser to choose the posts you'd like to hook up with.
Comments (0) | Trackbacks (26)
Blog @ Morewhat.com trackbacked with "Pancakes and Politics"
Conservative Cat trackbacked with "02/21/08: Rights"
Stuck On Stupid trackbacked with "Midweek OTB & Linkfest For Feb.21 & 22, 2007est"
Big Dogs Weblog trackbacked with "Legal Aliens are not Citizens"
Pirate's Cove trackbacked with "WTW: More Global Warming Idiocy"
Thoughts on Design trackbacked with "Who am I to lecture anybody about graphic design?"
The Florida Masochist trackbacked with "The Knucklehead of the Day award"
third world county trackbacked with "The Enstupiation of America"
Conservative Thoughts trackbacked with "Poll: Americans want to win in Iraq"
Diary of the Mad Pigeon trackbacked with "Hard Lessons in the Lawless Blogosphere"
Right Voices trackbacked with "Gore May Get Honorary Degree in Climatology For Being A Hypocrite"
The Florida Masochist trackbacked with "No surprises"
SpeckBlog trackbacked with "The Crucial Front In The War Is Congress"
stikNstein....has no mercy trackbacked with "Basically the worst parts of the Bible"
Planck's Constant trackbacked with "Me, On Blog Talk Radio, Live and Uncensored"
Woman Honor Thyself trackbacked with "WesterN Apologists SpewinG"
Planck's Constant trackbacked with "For God's Sake Let Anna Nicole Smith RIP"
A Blog For All trackbacked with "Yet Another Jennifer Aniston Topless Lawsuit"
The World According To Carl trackbacked with "Quality Handmade Guitar Made From $15 Endtable"
The World According To Carl trackbacked with "Civil War Part 2"
The World According To Carl trackbacked with "New Barenaked Ladies Video"
Blue Star Chronicles trackbacked with "Pieces of Anna Nicole Smith"
Woman Honor Thyself trackbacked with "Sorry, Wrong ReligioN"
Mark My Words trackbacked with "Gee, I guess I have another career..."
Blue Star Chronicles trackbacked with "Georgia Democrat Jim Marshall Opposes Anti-Surge R"
Adam's Blog trackbacked with "Truth and Hope Report: Wednesday Night Talk"
Is religion a valid issue with regard to politics?
Published Wed, Feb 21 2007 12:31 AM
Karl, at Leaning Straight Up recently suggested a topic to the bloggers at NWBloggers.com. The topic: Is religion a valid issue in regards to politics? He offered the "bonus" question: "Should" religion be an issue? So, here's my take on it.
I think that religion is a valid issue with regard to politics, and I believe it should be an issue. I don't think that it should be the primary issue by which we choose our leaders though.
Our nation was founded upon religious principles, by religious men. They declared our independence from Great Britain over two hundred years ago. A part of the justification for that act is in these words:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
In the Declaration of Independence the Continental Congress plainly acknowledged that men are created, and that our rights are given to us by our Creator. In fact, according to the Declaration of Independence, governments are instituted to defend and secure the rights granted to us by our Creator, not to grant us rights.
I think it's important to note that the very first right protected by the Bill of Rights is the freedom of religion. The first amendment begins with the words:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
A lot of argument has gone on around this first clause. A lot of people pounce upon the first half of that statement and ignore the part that says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Often people mischaracterize this as a wall of separation between church and state, but I'm sure you'll notice that that's not what the amendment says.
In any case, I think it's clear that our founding fathers believed that religion had an important place in the lives of the American people. I think it's also clear that they didn't want the government forcing people to hold to any specific religious creed, either to hold office or to enjoy the rights of man.
The Constitution forbids any kind of religious test as a qualification to office. In Article VI the last paragraph states:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
This means that a candidate's religion or lack thereof is not a bar to holding office. It means that just because Keith Ellison is a Muslim or Mitt Romney is a Mormon doesn't disqualify either of them from aspiring to or holding any office or trust, either in the United States government or in the government of any of the individual States.
That doesn't mean that the American people can't or shouldn't consider a candidate's religion or lack thereof when deciding how to vote. It's a voter's responsibility and duty to vote for the candidate that they believe will best represent their beliefs and interests. To this extent, religion has a place in politics.
I believe that a candidate for public office should be a man or woman of faith. A man or woman that does not believe in a Creator cannot honestly believe that our rights are a gift from our Creator. Instead, such a man or woman will tend to believe that whatever rights we have are granted to us by our government. Let's not forget that whatever government gives you it can also take away.
If, as the Declaration of Independence states, governments are instituted among men to secure the rights given to us by our Creator, and not to define what those rights are, we need men and women of faith serving in government to restrain government from usurping the Creator's role in granting us our rights. That's the basic "religious test" that the voter should apply when choosing someone to represent them.
Voters should choose people of faith as their representatives in government, to protect their rights. That doesn't mean that the blind faith of the religious fanatic should be acceptable to them.
The religious fanatic is likely to attempt to institute religious law. I think that most of us would agree that that's a particularly bad idea. The first amendment to the Constitution forbids it for a reason.
If a candidate for office makes an issue of his or her faith or lack thereof, then it is legitimately a valid political issue. We should question why the candidate has made it an issue. We shouldn't take the candidate's statement of faith at face value though.
If they claim faith, then we should be able to see evidence of that faith. We should also examine how that faith is expressed. We should also seek some evidence that they will be guided by their faith, but not blinded by fanaticism, when they make decisions.
If a candidate for office makes an issue of his or her opponent's faith or lack thereof, it is still a valid issue. We should question even more closely why it has been made an issue though. It is almost certainly done in an effort to paint the opponent in a negative light. What does that say about the candidate making their opponent's faith an issue?
Ultimately, I want the people that represent me to be honest, morally upright people with a firm understanding of right and wrong. I want those people to have faith in a higher authority, one that they are answerable to. I want the oaths that they swear to have meaning when they swear to them.
I want them to acknowledge that my rights come from God and not from government. I want them to know and firmly believe that they hold their office by the consent of those they govern. If they can't do those things, I can't believe they are truly representing me.
Cross posted to NWBloggers.com
Trackposted to Right Pundits, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Stuck On Stupid, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)
