I wish Nuns on the Bus would come to Connecticut. If they did, I would go throw flowers.
Take a look at the Faithful Budget, an answer to Rep. Paul Ryan’s faithless one.
I stand with Sis. Simone Campbell (no relation, and that’s my loss) on her interpretation of Catholic social teaching. (You can see her here on “The Colbert Report.”)
Interestingly, go here to read what Al Jazeera has to say about nuns’ political influence in America.
Dating Jesus 
I applaud the nuns for taking on The Inquisition.
And I understand their commitment to social justice.
And while the “Faithful Budget” sounds good and reads good, it’s still mighty vague as to how these lofty goals are to be accomplished, as well as sounding a little exclusive to that part of the nation that is “under God.”
If I am to be critical of the Dolan and the USCCB for crossing boundaries and electioneering, I must apply those same standards to these nuns.
For instance…these particular nuns, a “social justice lobby,” have made a (media) point of singling out Paul Ryan and the GOP, but they have been noticeably quiet on the Simpson-Bowles Zombie and Kent Conrad’s plan to reanimate it in Congress.
Why?
And what is keeping them from signing up to endorse HR 676 if they truly support universal access to healthcare. (I notice they like to preface healthcare with “affordable.”)
Are these nuns promoting social justice…or Catholicism?
Are the Faithful Budget folks campaigning for the poor and middle class. or for organized religion?
It’s getting harder for me to tell the difference. But I’m kinda creepy that way.
The video clip above was taken at my parish last week here in Des Moines. The sister made reference to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO says Mr. Obama’s proposed spending increases are “unsustainable.” Even more, they warn that the president’s approach increases the probability of a sudden fiscal crisis. Mr. Obama’s budget jeopardizes our nation’s safety net. As things stand now, our nations spends over $23,000 PER person living under the poverty level at the federal, state, and local level. I come up with a different analysis of Mr. Ryan’s budget than the sisters. His is bold, compassionate, and most importantly: sustainable.
Really? How do you figure, “bold, compassionate?”
Thanks for asking. Read my post for more details: http://quinersdiner.com/2012/06/23/a-response-to-the-nuns-on-the-bus-tour/
Thank you. I couldn’t disagree more with your characterizations of Ryan’s budget. Happy day!
Tom, you’ve strung together a nice load of talking points there. The “credibility” theme is half your argument. Despite your opinion on that, wether it’s Ryan and the Republicans’ Voodoo Economics or Conrad and the Democrats’ Zombie Economics, these are the people that will be deciding the budget. And with a neoliberal President holding the pen, it’s difficult to see any more than minor differences between the two.
As it is with most of the differences between the two corporate parties and their politicians, cosmetics and dog whistle rhetoric rule over substance.
But if “credibility” is to be a factor, perhaps turning to an actual economist would be of some help.
Dean Baker is a well educated, experienced and respected economist. (And a capitalist, too…Keynesian.) He predicted our current dilemma back in 2002 and spends a good deal of time debunking myths deployed by both parties to keep the public misinformed. He blogs at Beat the Press.
His article “Budget Bunk” from back in April is a fair summary, I think, of the current state of the corporatists’ approach to a “Budget Crisis” recycled and remanufactured to distract attention from the very real social crisis their policies and practices, up to this point, have caused. The propaganda that calls for increased austerity while putting even more of our country’s wealth into the pockets of an elite few could be called bold, (as most capitalist economists agree it will only make matters worse), but nobody has shown how The Ryan Budget or the Simpson-Bowles Plan or Obama’s combination of the two could in any way be called compassionate.
Funneling even more money into the pockets of an already bloated and self-serving aristocracy is not only illogical from an capitalist economic standpoint, and foolhardy from a capitalist political standpoint, it is undeniably cruel from a social standpoint.
More suggested reading:
How Much Inequality?
Long-Run Deficit is Entirely Due to Health Care Costs
Inequalities Are Unhealthy (A Socialist publication, in case you want to avoid that perspective.)
Back towards a US double-dip