Until just a short while ago, I had no idea who Ben Sasse was. None. I didn’t even know if his name was pronounced “sass” or “sassy.” Sadly, it’s the former. How great would it have been to hear “From the great state of Nebraska, it’s Senator Sassy!”
Senator Sassy is flipping us off in that pic, right? Okay, maybe not “us” but at least me.
As is the way of my liberal friends, I
sat back and waited for the liberal media to brainwash me as to my opinion did some research to figure out what Sasse is all about. Let me tell you what I found:
Sasse served in various capacities in George W. Bush’s administration, starting as chief of staff in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy. He consulted for the Department of Homeland Security and was a counselor to the Secretary of Health and Human Services until December 2007, when the Senate confirmed him unanimously as Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
Sasse served as chief of staff to Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) for six months in 2005, right after Fortenberry took office. From 1996 to 1998, he worked as a tutor for the House page program.
Here’s the thing: I’m good with that. The ridiculous idea that the best people to run the government are people who hate the government and have never spent time in government is like appointing a vegan to run McDonalds. Except, the GOP (especially here in Nebraska) has to run for office on that stance. They have to be an outsider. In fact, to win the primary, you have to be THE REAL outsider. See the 20 second mark:
So the guy who has served as Chief of Staff in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy, consulted for the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services, tutored pages in the House of Representatives and was Representative Fortenberry’s Chief of Staff is a “Washington outsider.” THE REAL Washington outsider in fact.
2.) He really, really, really hates Obamcare. Really. – As you read this from the gutted out remains of your former home that was lit ablaze during the violent apocalypse sparked by Obamacare implementation, you can only agree with statements from Sasse like “if Obamacare survives, America won’t.” It’s that sort of reasonable, savvy rhetoric that will truly make bipartisan progress possible. Hooray! It would take a full post to discount all the myths of Obamacare, so I’ll probably do that on a day I’m feeling particularly energetic and wonk-like. But let me just say a few quick things…
There’s a reason most GOP politicians are slowly backing away from this fight. Obamacare is, you know, working… The uninsured rate is at it’s lowest point in recorded history. Health care costs are down. Stories of horrible things involving Obamacare are routinely proven to be made up. In other words, it’s pretty much the end of the United States, like Sasse said!
The funniest example of what’s happening with Obamacare comes from the New York Times. It’s just hilarious. Republicans in Congress, as they are wont to do, summoned a panel to criticize and blast Obamacare. They called half a dozen health care bigwigs in to talk about how disastrous the law is and how damaging it will be. Except…that’s not what the INSURANCE PEOPLE BROUGHT THERE BY REPUBLICANS TO TRASH OBAMACARE said.
Insurers, appearing before a panel of the Energy and Commerce Committee, testified that the law had not led to a government takeover of their industry, as some Republicans had predicted. Indeed, several insurers said their stock prices had increased in the last few years.
The executives also declined to endorse Republican predictions of a sharp increase in insurance premiums next year, saying they did not have enough data or experience to forecast prices. And they said they were already receiving federal subsidy payments intended to make insurance more affordable for low- and middle-income people.
Bahahahahaha! Listen, if anyone was going to bitch if the law wasn’t working, it’s the business people who make money off of health care. Instead, all they did was swat down claims of government “running” your healthcare, financial collapses, and premium increases.
So while Sasse’s buddies have moved on to Benghazi-mania, Berdahl-conjecture, and IRS accusations, Sasse is sticking to his “Obamacare will kill us all” routine. No wonder Ted Cruz likes this guy so much!
3.) He likes God more than he hates Obamacare – Sometimes politicians say things that just whiz by our heads. On the day that I was reading up on Sasse, I came across an absolutely, unequivocally CHILLING statement. You have to follow the statement to its logical conclusion, so it takes a bit of work, but let’s unpack this shit, analytical style! From his website:
“Ben Sasse believes that our right to the free exercise of religion is co-equal to our right to life. This is not a negotiable issue. Government cannot force citizens to violate their religious beliefs under any circumstances. He will fight for the right of all Americans to act in accordance with their conscience.”
I say this as a Christian myself: How adorable is Christian oppression panic? I mean, the pearl-clutching, vapor-having “Oh mah gawd!” exclaiming reactions are just the best. You know who is absolutely NEVER religiously persecuted in the United States? Christians. Anyway, not the point. It’s just amusing.
Okay, so “free exercise of religion is co-equal to our right to life.” That may be a bit of an overstatement, but whatever, it’s still not that bad. I agree. Nobody should ever prevent you from practicing your religion…so long as practicing your religion doesn’t hurt anybody. See, that’s the implication that’s initially troubling. The assumption is that by religion, you mean Christianity. In fact, the assumption by Sasse is that by religion he means KIND Christianity.
See, because if I have a religious belief that requires me to, I don’t know, sacrifice babies to the dark lord Cthulu, the government should prevent that. Right? We would all as reasonable people assume that murdering toddlers to summon a tentacled demon is bad. The problem is what Sasse is suggesting with that last phrase, “act in accordance with their conscience” pretty directly means violating law. It means that as opposed to acting in accordance with the law, your primary responsibility is acting in accordance with your religious beliefs. Are you seeing where this is going? That means that your religious beliefs trump the governmental structure and law. That means Sasse feels that the actual edicts that society should follow are HIS religious beliefs.
Sasse is basically supporting the same concept as Sharia law.
Don’t believe me? Well, I wasn’t the first one to notice this comparison. In an article on the day after his primary win, Morgan Whitaker wrote the following:
The phrasing of his support for religious freedom on the website has some questioning if Sasse believes it is acceptable to commit a crime as long as it is in accordance with one’s religious beliefs. Such a belief could indicate a support for Sharia law, an issue many conservatives have warned about in recent years.
Still, that’s an MSNBC article, so a lot of folks don’t find it credible enough. So let’s go straight to the source. The Council on Foreign Relations has a few articles on what the philosophy behind Sharia law is:
Also meaning “path” in Arabic, sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna—the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.
Hmmm… so if we replaced 1-1 the references to Muslim life…
“Sasse Law guides all aspects of Christian life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Bible—the sayings, practices, and teachings of Jesus Christ. Precedents and analogy applied by Christian scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Christian community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.”
If I posted this on his Web site, would it look out of place? Would most conservatives object to any of that, especially here in Nebraska?
Experts say many Muslims view sharia as a means to be liberated from government corruption and believe it can exist within a democratic and inclusive framework.
Sasse, the REAL outsider believes that Washington is corrupt and that Christian-faith-first doctrines can exist within a democratic framework.
Now, understand, I’m not suggesting that Sasse wants “Sasse Law,” or the Christian equivalent of Sharia law, to be our actual legal framework in the United States. What I’m saying is that our extremely likely next US Senator has a world view that mirrors Muslim extremism and advocates ignoring secular rules and laws in the name of Allah…sorry, God.
It’s enough to make one long for the fictional Senator Sassy instead of the somewhat scary Senator Sasse.