re: #328 Naso Tang

I get sick of this party of no BS that everyone is peddling. Well, I should clarify, I’m sure there are big R’s out there who are just all no all the time. But I feel it’s a legit position to be against many of the incarnations of this bill as wasteful and not trusting that the Democrats in Congress will do this the right way to be ok with saying no to this bill.

I look at it the same as the AGW debate. If I come to the position that cap and trade is a bad idea in the current debated form, and that maybe there is nothing specifically we can do to address AGW other than exploring alternative energy (especially nuclear energy) for the time being, then I’ve reached a conclusion about what action to take that may be similar to a denier, yet I am not a denier. Would I be on the same moral level as the denier? Would it be assumed that I was because of the position I have taken? I guess it’s doing the right thing for the right reason vs. doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Since we can’t know and can only speculate why he’s doing something, can’t we only judge the outcome and go based on whether we agree or disagree with the final outcome regardless of the reasoning used to get there?