Saturday, February 2, 2013

5.1 Government Controled Media

On February 2, 2013 in an article about North Korea's recent rocket test launch, the Associated Press reported that the government controlled media in North Korea often shows the same footage of its people cheering as a rocket of theirs is launched, while reporting that it is footage of the most recent launch. There is nothing surprising or new about this to those of us in the west. We have seen countless examples of pro-government media bias in countries who's media is controlled by the government (i.e. U.S.S.R., Iran, Syria, China, North Korea, and others.) However, even more alarming is when our own free market media reports that as the result of President Obama's policies over 153,000 new jobs were created last month, without also mentioning that 169,000 jobs were lost during the same month, which is a net loss of 16,000 jobs. The CNN article that reported this was about how the economy is recovering, but they also neglected to mention that since Obama took office four years ago, the U.S. economy has had a net loss of over 8.5 million jobs in the private sector. This is a staggering reduction in the private sector economy. Let's see, 8,500,000 jobs lost since 2008 plus another 16,000 jobs lost last month for a total of 8,516,000 jobs lost during this administration., yet none of this is reported by CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS. Never mind that Obama spent over 5 trillion of ours and our children's money to bring about this so called "recovery"

I guess a Government Controlled Media by any other name stills smells.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

5.0 Ouroboros

A Republic is best served when it's people cast well informed and intelligent votes at the ballot box. To illustrate my point with an extreme example, try to imagine voting for…say…David Duke without knowing that he was the Grand Cyclopes of the KKK, or even worse (and probably more common) voting for a candidate by throwing a dart at a dart board. This is not to say that I would make such criteria a law, any more than I would propose that the act of voting itself be made a law. However, I am sorry to say that it has become increasingly unrealistic to expect such due-diligence from your average voter for the following reasons:

1.  The inherent complexities of a Government that must serve a country with over 300 million people.

2.  The self-imposed and avoidable complexities of government.

3.  The sophisticated cunning with which candidates successfully misrepresent themselves in order to get elected. In my opinion this is most prevalent on the left, but all candidates are guilty of this to varying degrees.
4.  The lack of journalistic integrity, which results in an inaccurate reporting of news events for political reasons.

5.   The cleaver mantra of "Just get out and vote." which has been successfully advanced by the left for over 40 years, under the radar of virtually all of those on the right. (By the way, The League of Women Voters is a left leaning organization and a willing accomplice of the left)

6.   What with the ever increasing demands on one's time on the job or jobs, it is hard to stay on top of things politically.

7.   But the most profound and widespread reason of all, the reason which dwarfs the significance of the other six, is that more than half of the voting electorate perceives themselves as being reliant on government in one way or another to the extent that they do not want to know anything that might challenge the wisdom of voting for those candidates who are predisposed to perpetuating that which they have become so dependent on.

Ouroboros, was a mythological serpent-like creature who unwittingly devoured himself in pursuit of pray which was running up his back.

4.9 "I Voted. See, I Have a Little Red Sticker"

In my previous Blog 3.3 I stressed the importance of not just casting a vote, but rather casting an informed, intelligent vote. Since then I have discussed this idea with three people and in all three cases they respond with something like…"You can't legally compel a voter to be informed and intelligent. " This response completely misses the point. If the left can get away with promoting the idea of just voting without making it a law to do so, then why can't conservatives promote the idea of casting a well informed and intelligent vote without making it a law to do so?

A very simple, common sense notion, but one that seems to have escaped the attention of most everybody on the Right, including think tanks, pundants, commentators and of course politicians.

Monday, November 19, 2012

4.8 Liberal, Face Thyself


Question:

As a Democrat, if you could vote for only one of the following two pieces of legislation being proposed by the Republican controlled Executive and Legislative branches of Government , which would it be?

1.  Eliminate all forms of welfare and greatly reduce everyone's income taxes to match that expenditure reduction .

2.  Maintain only half of the welfare programs, but have the cost paid by the income taxes of only Democrats.

If, as a Democrat, you chose #1, you would reveal what I have known all along, that Democrat's intentions are less about compassion, and more about control of people. If it were compassion based, then wouldn't it be better to help half as many people than nobody at all. Keep in mind that the Democrats are not paying more than they would be if all welfare programs were left in place. It's just that they are the only party that is paying.

As of the date of this blog, I have asked four Democrats this question, and in each case they have chosen answer #1. When confronted, they always say that it would be unfair to single out one party to pay for the welfare, and I respond; "You mean like 46% not paying any income taxes at all?"

Sunday, November 18, 2012

4.7 Love of Country


I've never really understood the meaning of "Love of Country" until now, because my heart is breaking.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

4.6 The Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern Tea Party Movement


The left has inaccurately portrayed the Tea Party on many occasions. Some examples are…"the extreme right wing fringe" (Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, others),  " …they are basically racists" (Jesse Jackson, David Axelrod, others), "…most of their membership are homophobe's" (I heard the quote on FOX news but forgot who said it).  I wonder why the left is so afraid of the tea party that they feel that they have to misrepresent who they are? I would say that the left has sunk to a new low, except for the fact that they seem to surpass themselves on a weekly basis.
For those who care about the facts, following are  "The Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern Tea Party Movement" taken verbatim from the Tea Party web site www. teaparty. Agree or disagree with them, but at least now your opinion will be based on the facts.
The Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern Tea Party Movement:
Preamble: The Tea Party Movement is an all-inclusive American grassroots movement with the belief that everyone is created equal and deserves an equal opportunity to thrive in these United States where they may “pursue life, liberty and happiness” as stated in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.
No one is excluded from participation in the Tea Party Movement. Everyone is welcomed to join in seeking to achieve the Tea Party Movement goals, which are as follows:
1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes - Excessively high taxes are a burden for those exercising their personal liberty to work hard and prosper as afforded by the Constitution. A fiscally responsible government protects the freedom of its citizens to enjoy the fruits of their own labor without interference from a government that has exceeded its necessary size, scope and reach into the lives of its citizens.
2. Eliminate the National Debt - By implementing fiscally conservative policies at all levels of government, progress can be made toward eliminating the U.S. National Debt. Massive increases in the National Debt have created and continue to create a huge burden for the next generation of Americans, thus imperiling the country’s short-term and long-term economic health and prosperity.
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending - All deficit spending must be eliminated immediately. We insist that government representatives at all levels maintain a fiscally responsible budget and balance the books as would be expected of any American business.
4. Protect Free Markets - America’s free enterprise system allows businesses to thrive as they compete in the open marketplace and strive toward ever better services and products. Allowing free markets to prosper unfettered by government interference is what propelled this country to greatness with an enduring belief in the industriousness and innovations of the populace.
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States - The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government. This includes the Bill of Rights and other Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and their provisions designed to protect states’ rights and individual liberties.
6. Promote Civic Responsibility - Citizen involvement at the grassroots level allows the voice of the American people to be heard and directs the political behaviors of our representatives at both the local and national level so they, in turn, may be most effective in working to preserve the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of this country’s citizens.
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government - A bloated bureaucracy creates wasteful spending that plagues our government. Reducing the overall size, scope and reach of government at both local and national levels will help to eliminate inefficiencies that result in deficit spending which adds to our country’s debt.
8. Believe in the People - The American people, given their guaranteed freedoms, will thrive in a democratic, capitalist environment which allows individuals to strive toward ever greater achievements, innovations and the efficient production of needed and valued goods and services.
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics - American politics is burdened by big money from lobbyists and special interests with an undue influence on the peoples’ representatives. The Tea Party movement is seen as a threat to the entrenched political parties and thus is the continual target of smear campaigns and misrepresentation of its ideals. We choose not to respond to these attacks except to strongly and explicitly disavow any and all hate speech, any and all violence as well as insinuations of violence, and any and all extreme and fringe elements that bring discredit to the Tea Party Movement. We are a peaceful movement and respect other's opinions and views even though they do not agree with our own. We stand by the Tea Party beliefs and goals and choose to focus our energies on ensuring that our government representatives do the same.

“I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” --Abraham Lincoln

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

4.5 What to Ask When a Political Candidate Knocks on Your Door

1.  Ask him if he would sacrifice his reelection if he were asked to compromise his ideological principals. His answer is "no" if he doesn't answer the question directly, or if you cannot understand his answer.

2.  Ask him if he thinks that our Constitution is a "living document".

3.  Ask him what he thinks "Living Document" means.

4.  Ask him if the intent of the original framers should be taken into account when interrupting the Constitution.

5.  If it's a congressional race, ask him if voting "present"  puts the interests of his constituencies first.

6.  Ask him if he considers himself liberal, progressive or conservative. If he responds with ANYTHING other than the words "Liberal" "Progressive" or "Conservative", or if he says he doesn't think you can always pigeonhole people with labels, don't vote for him.

7.  Ask him if he would support a bill that would required that ALL members of Congress be bound by the same legislation that they make law.

8.  Ask him what amount of taxation constitutes one's "Fair Share"

Sunday, December 11, 2011

4.4 The Anatomy of a Power Grab, or How Liberals Never Let the Cause of a Problem Get in the Way of a "Good" Solution

Imagine your Doctor telling you that you need a certain medication before he has even performed his diagnosis or identified the problem. Now imagine learning that he will benefit greatly by encouraging the use of that particular drug. I think most people would not only find another Doctor, but would also report him to the AMA for an ethics review. Similarly, imagine that your mechanic told you that your car isn't performing as it should because it needs a new alternator without so much as looking under the hood. Later you learn that the mechanic gets paid handsomely for each alternator that is sold. Again, I think most of us would use a different mechanic next time. Usually, most people have no problem recognizing how inappropriate and illogical it is to chose the "solution" before the cause of the problem has been identified. One big exception to this is when it happens in the political realm; be it health care, the war on poverty, or any other number of examples when government has attempted to "fix" a societal problem.

About three years ago (and many times since) FOX News featured our President addressing an audience about how to "fix" the health care problem. Obama's address started with the words, "We all know health care in this country is broken, but there is reason for hope, because we have the solution." Not a word about how it became "broken" in the first place, just that they have the "solution."

The reason why liberals disregard the relationship between cause and solution is because despite their rhetoric, the solution is not what they are after. They pander to the fears of the politically naive and promote a "solution" which best advances their liberal agenda. Let's take the so called "War on Poverty". What a brilliantly conceived liberal plan. The Government gives poor people money, those people become dependent on Government, and then they vote for those politicians who are predisposed to continue the practice. Poverty was only the symptom of a great many societal maladies, but instead of addressing those maladies and risk alienating voters, they treated the symptom instead, which establishing a voting block of government dependent people that they could count on in each and every election.

Health Care is another good example. The reasons why health care costs have risen disproportionately to most other services and commodities are too numerous to list here, but they do include such things as medical advancements, rising malpractice insurance, increased scarcity of physicians in certain specialties, the increased costs of drug development and approval, etc. However, addressing these causes has been conspicuously absent from this administrations promotion of Obama Care. That's because Obama Care was never designed by the left to solve any of these problems, let alone reduce costs. Instead, it was devised as a way to increase the number of voters who depend on government and who will therefore have a personal interest in keeping those who support such government intervention in office.

In summation, always be suspicious of any politician, regardless of political affiliation, who offers a "solution" to a problem when he or she has not first thoroughly identified the cause(s) responsible for that problem.

4.3 Same Sex Marriage

Before a pharmaceutical company can market a new effective drug, it first has to prove through extensive testing that it does not also have long term harmful effects. We spend extra time and money separating waste materials in order to recycle, which we are told, will "save the planet" in years to come. As a society, we are becoming increasingly concerned about obesity because of the impact this has on the long range health of our citizens. Educators and social scientists have been telling us for years that the development of a good self-esteem in children is critical to the later development of the adult. Without getting into the merits of the above, all have at least one thing in common, they all appropriately take the long term ramifications into account.

However, there is apparently one issue that is exempt from this common sense approach and that's the issue of same sex marriage. I have listened to many pro same sex marriage arguments over the years, and they all have two things in common 1) They are short term emotionally based. 2) They never consider the long term ramifications, good or bad. I'm sure few would disagree that we are all better served when our decision making process considers both the short and long term ramifications, especially when it affects society as a whole.

I used to be flat out opposed to the idea of same sex marriage. Then I became seduced by the misery such "discrimination" can cause homosexuals who are deeply in love. Now I realize that I have been reacting instead of evaluating the issue. Before a developer is allowed to infill and build on his swamp land property, he has to have an environmental impact study done to find out if the short term benefits out weight the possible long term harm. As a society, can we afford to do anything less when such a profound change is proposed, such as redefining marriage?

Marriage is currently defined as a partnership between a man and a women. If you remove the opposite gender requirement, what would be your argument to the ACLU lawyer who is representing two women and one man who want to get married? If the more profound aspect of the current definition can be removed (namely gender difference), how hard do you think it would be to adjust the number of individuals in the definition? This may take some time, but it would happen. Why wouldn't it? The president of redefining marriage will have been set. A future which has incrementally redefined marriage to include any combination of gender and most any number of players scares me to death for a host of reasons all having to do with child rearing and the nuclear family, to name only two. Nevertheless, I am willing to be convinced that the long range benefits of this futuristic scenario outweigh the long range problems created. However, I don't think such long range accounting will ever take place, because it is so much easier and more satisfying to call someone like me a homophobe.

4.2 My Purpose and Self-imposed Guidelines (Re-posted from 1.1)

A. Purpose

1. To promote the belief that the conservative ideology of limited government and personal liberty, though not perfect, is the most sustainable and beneficial form of government.

2. To communicate political thoughts of mine to others who are open minded and in serious search of like or opposing views. (Closed minded people are of course welcome also....but what's the point?)

3. To serve as my "jungle gym" with which to "exercise" my thought development and critical thinking skills. (I can use the exercise. It just took me five minutes to write that sentence.

4. To learn from, or be reinforced by the comments of others.

5. To get burning political issues and thoughts off my chest, so I don't have to torment my poor wife anymore.

6. To help the country I love be the best it can be.



B. Self-Imposed Guidelines

1. I will strive to keep the discussion focused on political ideology, viewpoints and sometimes events and not on personalities, personal behavior, or scandals. (All political party's and groups recruit from the same flawed human race, which means that they all have their share of "bad apples". In the discussion of which ideology has the most merit, what is gained by exchanging stories of personal scandal back and forth?)

2. I will not swear, use bad language, engage in name calling, or use any shock tactics.

3. When I quote someone, that person will be identified and given credit.

4. I will strive to be concise, well thought out, and write in everyday language. (We should not be attempting to impress, but communicate)

5. I will be candid and honest. If I discover that I am being inaccurate, inconsistent, or unresolved, I will fess up.

6. I will not be guilty of harboring hidden agendas. Agree with me or not, you can rest assured that the reasons behind my position can be taken on face value.

7. I will make a serious attempt to spell, punctuate and use grammar correctly. However, I can guaranty that if you look hard enough, you will find an occasional error. If this is what's most important to you, then please go away and find someone else who makes you feel superior.