Two Corinthians walk
into a bar.
There, that’s the funniest
line I’ve ever heard in the Political World: one short sentence,
which can get me through the rest of this bizarre campaign season.
For those who might have
missed it: Because Ted Cruz kept quoting the Bible, Donald Trump
decided he needed a Bible quote, too. So when campaigning before
students at Liberty University in January, he chose “Where the
spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty.” And he added “Two
Corinthians, 3:17, that’s the whole ballgame,” drawing laughter from
the crowd of students who knew Trump was attempting to refer to “Second
Corinthians.”
I was raised in a
small-town Catholic church that didn’t ask us to memorize Bible
verses, though we read Paul’s letters to the Corinthians. The only
reason I knew how the citation is properly given is that I have
friends in the local Jehovah’s Witnesses who quote the Bible when
they visit me.
So no matter what the
crazy political question, my answer may be ... “Two Corinthians walk
into a bar.” Simple. Says it all.
My partner Chip Ford and I
voted for Ted Cruz, thinking that a Cruz-Kasich Republican ticket
would be nicely balanced, personality and experience-wise. Winning
four states keeps him viable. If however, the eventual presidential
nominee is Donald Trump, I can live with that.
On the occasions when
Trump is imperfect, I remind myself that he’s the only one who could
create the perfect image of another candidate by referring to
“Little Marco,” which I do not consider an unfair reference merely
to appearance. Hopefully this actively social conservative will soon
disappear from the campaign scene.
The candidate most likely
to address the deficit/national debt is Ted Cruz because he already
kept his word to his Texas constituents on those subjects; he ran to
become a tea party U.S. senator then led the fight against raising
the debt ceiling. If I had run for U.S. Senate that tea party year,
I would have stood with Ted, and there would be two senators that
other senators detest.
Of course no campaign
ambitions would have made me pander to the religious right on social
issues, so I wouldn’t have had a chance to hang out with Ted at all.
Though sometimes I’ve wondered what would happen if some Republicans
just refused to pander, and instead showed refreshing honesty.
Notice how Cruz and Trump,
unlike Rubio, don’t go out of their way to bring up abortion and gay
marriage, and they are doing better even with evangelicals than
expected. Some Republican primary voters do recognize how important
this election is to the future of America and the free world. Note
how Cruz successfully opposed ethanol subsidies in Iowa: courageous.
Trump unfortunately pandered. I try to weigh the candidates, instead
of being an uncritical robot or believing all the opposition
attacks.
Now that Super Tuesday is
over, let’s move on to the rest of the primaries and then, the
general election. Let’s hope that the world economy doesn’t collapse
before then — since few Americans are paying attention to anything
but silly stuff. Example: Mitt Romney, who I envisioned standing
above the primary fray in a dignified manner, instead attacking
Trump on, of all things, Trump’s refusal to turn over all his tax
returns — though Mitt had also refused. Two Corinthians walk into a
bar ...
When Donald Trump first
mentioned making Mexico pay to build a wall, I knew he was referring
to the deal-maker’s leverage with a county to which we give
assistance. When he said he wanted to control illegal immigration, I
knew this did not refer to legal immigrants (who should learn
enough English to vote without ballots printed in Spanish).
Personally, I thought
David Duke was dead: now the Republican establishment tries to tie
him into Trump? Please. Over the years of my political activism, I
have grown accustomed to the name-calling against those who favor
limited government. The attacks often contain the word racist or
fascist, and I see similar tactics used against both Trump and Cruz,
even by other Republicans.
I “get” why so many of my
friends here voted for Donald Trump. I get why others did not. What
I don’t get is why some of them don’t understand each other.
Our country needs someone with no sense of political correctness, to
lead the way back into regard for free speech, especially on college
campuses.
I get those big truths
that liberals think we should all understand. The world has changed.
But I would argue that truth does not change. Spending more
than can be raised is bad. No matter what the other issues,
uncontrolled debt makes it impossible to responsibly address them.
Since it would do serious
damage to the economy to raise taxes enough to cover all that debt,
we must cut spending. Another truth: dependence on government is
bad, except in the face of unavoidable, unexpected travail suffered
by American citizens. And by the way, Medicaid is just another
poverty program.
Immigrants to this country
must understand and honor the U.S. Constitution: if they can’t, they
should go elsewhere to live. We don’t have an official religion; our
women are equal. As of recently, gays can marry. God bless America.
Hold the “Two Corinthians”
cynicism! I just read that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence
Thomas asked his first questions during a recent Supreme Court
hearing, apparently stepping up to fill a role of recently departed
Justice Antonin Scalia! I remember the way Thomas was treated during
his nomination to the court, and admired most of his quiet
decisions; now he has apparently decided to be a different kind of
justice. Bravo!
Europe has decided to stop
accepting unlimited refugees from the Middle East, and may be ready
to help Greece deal with those who arrive there first. Syria is
working on some kind of peace process. Is there still hope for
civilization?
My friends: Let’s get on
with the 2016 election, the most important of our lives.
Barbara Anderson of
Marblehead is a weekly columnist for the Salem News and
Eagle-Tribune Publishing Company.
