Posted by timpj5 on September 23, 2009
Those of you who know me or who have ever read this blog know that I am no Progressive. I have been in many an argument/discussion with liberals on issues from health care reform to abortion, taxes to the role of government. But I can’t be silent any more and be party to the ridiculousness of what many “conservatives” are doing. Years ago I would have considered myself a conservative… I’ve since grown older and, I hope, wiser in the process. Here’s why:
While I make no bones about my frustration and ideological differences with the current administration and majority party of Congress, the “dissent” from the other side of the aisle on issues ranging from health care reform to cap and trade to government expansion lacks a modicum of credibility. I, myself, am a firm believer in the limitations of the federal government not on in size and scope, but also in authority and jurisdiction. I originally supported George W. Bush based on the platform of federalism and a humble foreign policy as well as strict constructist Supreme Court judicial nominees. But when the light of truth was shined on the policies of the former president, the platform had been replaced with something entirely different. I could no longer support the policies of the president in regards to the expansion of Medicare liabilities, the expansion of the Department of Education, the continued support for nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the inability to enact meaningful tax, tort and social security reform… 3 of the primary underpinnings of his platform.
Over the last 8 years, “conservatives” have idly sat by and watched as the “conservative” Republicans ran up the Federal deficit, nearly doubled federal spending and intervened, without respect for the constitution, in the affairs of sovereign nations on American’s dime. “Conservatives” watched as American’s civil liberties were diminished by unnecessary articles in the Patriot Act and government surveillance projects all the while condemning Democrats for “hating” America and being “weak” on defense. And at the core of the issues was the defense of the “American” way.
But now, with a Liberal Democrat in the White House, “conservatives” have decided that NOW federal spending is out of control and government is getting too intrusive. “Conservatives” now decry President Obama on every issue from health care reform to cap and trade to the foreign policy tactics with Iran and Israel to his use of a teleprompter for public address. This has to stop.
The President delivered several addresses this week, 1 to the G20 environment summit and another to the United Nations. While I disagree with many of the President’s policies, not everything he says is wrong. Conservatives continue to criticize Obama as being weak on national defense and yet he has continued many of the policies of the Bush administration in regard to foreign policy and even increased activity in the war in Afghanistan. You can’t have it both ways… either Bush was wrong or now Obama is right.
President Obama’s preference for diplomacy, even with rogue nations, rather than his affinity for military battering ram has been criticized ad nauseum by conservatives ever since he started running for President. However, Obama is not alone in his affinity for diplomacy, he is accompanied by the likes of guys named Washington and Jefferson. Not involving ourselves militarily in every conflict throughout the world is not a sign of weakness but rather of wisdom.
Those who call for American military action in Iran or North Korea would prefer to ignore the constitution and replace it with an Emperor. The American military is not tool of politicians to effect change throughout the world, but a great deterrent to anyone who wishes the American people harm. Those who criticized Bill Clinton for his interventionist policies in Bosnia and Somalia are the same ones who cheered George Bush for his interventionism in Iraq and Afghanistan and who would see us attack anyone else who doesn’t do what “we” say. Something is missing… it’s called credibility. Many conservatives now remind me of Keith Olbermann shouting down George Bush and his administration, lots of passion very little credibility. You can criticize a position, a policy or a vote, but make sure you’re not just criticizing because of the letter that follows the name in parentheses.
Democrats and Republicans seem to determine their platforms based upon what the other is for or against and then doing the opposite. Suffice to say that no political party has cornered the market on the truth. In fact, if any major political party has even a little bit of it I’d be surprised. But I’m big enough to say when those I normally would agree with are wrong. I’m not going to join the Progressive Democratic party bandwagon, but I’m also not going to criticize them for how they comb their hair or how they throw a baseball. There are very few issues I agree with modern Progressives on but when I do, I can acknowledge it. If only Republicans and Democrats could do that too…
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: cap and trade, Conservative, Democrats, federalism, george bush, health care reform, Iran, israel, left, liberal, military, north korea, obama, Patriot Act, progressive, Republicans, right | 5 Comments »
Posted by timpj5 on April 2, 2009
If you have been paying attention to the G20 Summit in London, you may have caught a glimpse of President Obama saying what he truly believes and why I completely disagree with him.
On Thursday, in answering a question regarding how local politics effect global economics, President Obama said, “I’m the President of the United States… it’s my job to make American’s lives better”. If you believe that, you have no understanding of our Constitution.
Just to clarify, the Constitution defines the role of the president… and I’ve never seen “to make American’s lives better” in the job description. The role of the President is to be a check and balance to the other branches of government (for those who don’t know… the Legislative Branch or Congress and the Judicial Branch or the Courts), to sign into law legislation passed by Congress, appoint federal judges, be the commander-in-chief of the military and be a figurehead for the government.
There really isn’t much more to the job of President as defined in the Constitution, but we’ve made the office of President much more important than it really should be. Many refer to the President of the United States as the “most powerful man on Earth”. While I can’t disagree with the present sentiment that the President has become much more powerful than originally intended and as the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth (currently) essentially becomes the most powerful man on Earth, the notion that the intent of the Founders was to create such a powerful monarch is radically incorrect.
But now you know why President Obama believes what he does. He misunderstands his job. He also believes that HE can, in his infinite wisdom and knowledge, craft such effective government machinery so as to improve the lives of those of us incapable of making our own dreams come true. Obviously he believes he is smarter than all the others before him because we all know from history that government never does anything efficiently or effectively… unless that something is striping it’s citizens of their rights and freedoms.
President Obama, if you’re reading this (and I’m sure you are), your job is not to make American’s lives better… it’s to protect the FREEDOMS of those American’s so that THEY can make THEIR OWN lives better.
Posted in Politics | Tagged: Constitution, Ecomonic Summit, economy, G20, government, job description, London, make American's lives better, President Obama | Leave a Comment »
Posted by timpj5 on March 3, 2009
Disclaimer: This blog entry contains information that some may find offensive. Parental discretion is advised.
Apparently a woman has decided that she’s going to teleport herself in time back to the 40′s or 50′s and put up a sign on her rental property that says, “white’s only”.
NIAGARA FALLS—Two days after a man was sentenced to probation and community service for putting up a sign as a “joke” in a public works garage that said “whites only” on a drinking fountain, city police were called to a home in the 600 block of 25th Street on Sunday to investigate another racially charged sign.
This one was clearly no joke.
No charges were filed Sunday, but police told the woman she must take down the handwritten sign on a fence on her property saying, “I rent three bedrooms [at her address to] white people Niagara Falls.”
The 53-year-old woman told police she put up the sign after someone tried to break into her house and added, “I can do what I want. I live in America,” according to a police report.
Police said they received complaints and she must take the sign down. An officer at the scene said the woman agreed to take down the sign under protest. The officer said the woman already had seven more signs she was planning to hang up.
Now, I find this woman to be very unintelligent, rude and down right wrong. However, I take issue with the idea that we as Americans are not allowed to be racist. The idea that a white person should limit the use of her rental property to an ever dwindling portion of the population is not a wise business decision. Furthermore her lack of understanding of the feelings of black Americans is appalling. Personally, I find this woman disgusting on many levels.
That being said, I find it more offensive that the government gets to make decisions about how she manages her rental property. If she ran a modeling agency she’d be able to discriminate with her hiring decisions. Just because a certain segment of the population doesn’t like the decision she makes about who she will and will not rent to doesn’t mean they have the right to make that decision for her.
In reality, this is similar to the woman who hung a sign out a Halloween that said no Obama supporters would get candy. Petty? Sure. Stupid? You bet. Illegal? No. The same principle applies. That woman had a product (candy) and a criteria for how she would distribute it (no Obama supporters) and there nothing wrong with that. If you don’t like a persons selection criteria, would you really want her product either? The process is the same for this moron who only wants to rent to white people. She has a product (rental property) and a selection criteria (whites only)… if the situation were reversed do you think there would be a public outcry?
Please, do not take what I’m saying to be a racist comment. I am not a racist and do not condone racism. However, racism is a problem that can’t be cured with rules, regulations and prison. Some people will be racist til the day they die and not you, me or President Obama will ever change that. Property rights guarantee certain priviledges. And I believe that the priviledge to make decisions, even really bad ones, about who, when, how and why you use your property (along as you don’t harm anyone else) is yours and yours alone.
Posted in Current Events, Society | Tagged: halloween candy, obama, property rights, racism | Leave a Comment »
Posted by timpj5 on February 15, 2009
Free Government Money?
For any of my reader(s) who try to read my blog regularly, I apologize for being away for so long. I’ve had little inspiration in light of our current political scene. However, I can be silent no more. We have ushered in the the beginning of the end of the transformation from free-market economy to statist economy.
With the provisions included in the new 2009 Obama Economic Stimulus Package the transformation that began under FDR and continued under LBJ has come to fruition. This is everything that liberals have ever wanted. With the largest government spending package ever, the government is attempting to resolve all of our financial woes and become the glue that keeps it together.
We’ve heard countless politicians say, “We need to act now”. I ask “Why?”
We’ve heard politicans say “this is the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression” and yet when I went to the movie theatre last weekend there was a line of people standing outside to get tickets. If things are so bad, why are people still going to the movies? I’m not trying to downplay the difficulty some are going through, yet obviously this recession isn’t as widespread as Congress and the media are making it out to be.
More on point: After reading thru the measures of this bill (highlights of the bill only as no one, not even Congress, has actually read thru this entire bill prior to passing it, because they “had to act”) it provides tax incentives for those who don’t currently pay taxes, money for schools, and aid for state budgets among other things. This bill was nothing more than a way to make the masses more dependent than ever on government.
The idea that ACTION was so necessary that Congress couldn’t even take the time to READ the entire proposed bill before pushing it thru is ridiculous. Very few of the provisions in this bill will even be enacted this year. I find it contemptuous that members of Congress think we are naive enough not to understand that this is a pork project thru and thru.
This same idea of ACTION for the sake of appearance is akin to our involvement in Vietnam. We could not stand idly by and watch Communist North Vietnam invade South Vietnam so we took action and lost thousands upon thousands of good men in the process. And in the end, when we withdrew from South Vietnam, the result was the same as if we’d never involved ourselves in the first place.
Sometimes ACTION isn’t what’s needed. Sometimes patience and perseverence are what’s required.
Posted in Current Events, Politics, taxes | Tagged: Congress, Great Depression, movie tickets, pork project, statist economy, Stimulus package, vietnam | 3 Comments »
Posted by timpj5 on October 8, 2008
I believe we are in serious trouble. Because of the failures and subsequent bailouts of several large banks? No. Because there is a lot of fear going around. Fear that the economy is collapsing. Fear that millions of businesses will close their doors putting millions out of work. Fear that Islamic terrorist are still bent on destroying us. Fear that we are ruining the Earth because of fossil fuel emissions. Fear that we will run out of energy. And most importantly, fear that our government isn’t doing anything about it (frankly, I’m more afraid of them trying to do something… but I digress).
You’d think, reading the newspaper, watching the news and listening to the presidential candidates that everyone was being laid off from work. You’d think there were bread lines everywhere and that people couldn’t afford food for their families. You’d think that the oceans were engulfing the US and the planet was melting. Fortunately, none of those things are happening.
Has anyone you know been turned down for a home loan who isn’t completely broke? Have you lost your job in the last month? Have you had to choose between buying food and keeping the lights on? Probably not. In fact, if we are in such a financial crisis why did Beverly Hill Chihuaha, quite possibly the dumbest premise for a movie to hit the bigscreen since Pee-wee’s Big Adventure, gross $30 million dollars on its opening weekend. Apparently someone still has money out there.
Here’s where I’m going… we are being fed a bill of goods to scare us into going along with all the bad decisions being made in Washington. Congress has a vested interest in scaring us. How many of you, when you’re not worried about losing your house, job, or retirement, would allow Congress to get away with a trillion dollar spending spree?
Remember how you felt after 9/11? We were scared and indignant. Every single American was behind President Bush and wanted to get those responsible, no matter the cost. A year and half later, enough politicians were still afraid enough to authorize President Bush to invade Iraq, even though politically they were on opposite side of the aisle. It was fear of a nuclear Iraq and a suitcase nuke that made that decision, not Democrat good-will toward the president. How many of those same Democrats are kicking themselves for the decision they made in 2003?
Fear makes us all do things we shouldn’t do. It causes us to make bad decisions. We are being prepared to go along with some really bad ideas because we are afraid. Should we be afraid? I don’t know. Should we be upset and indignant? You betcha. And who’s responsible? Banks? Wall Street? Home owners? No, Congress is. Congress is trying to scare us into allowing them to make terrible decisions because of a “crisis” all the while hoping you forget that the same people promising to take care of you are the ones who caused the “crisis” in the first place.
I’m sure there are some very good people in Congress… ok, at least 1 or 2. But on the whole, their purpose for each vote they pass is nothing more than an audition for the same job every 2 or 6 years. They have a vested interest in obfuscating the reasons for and implications of their votes: they want to keep their jobs. If Congress were a company they’d be… well, Fannie Mae… poorly run and a drain on the economy. (Imagine that)
Despite what McCain and Obama, Biden and Palin, Larry King or Hank Paulson say, get the facts before you start buying into all the Chicken Little rhetoric. Fear will cause you get make poor decisions. Are we going to have some economic problems? Probably. Should we let Congress spend trillions of our dollars trying to fix their own problem all the while trying to claim credit for trying to “solve the problem”? Certainly not. Congress created this mess, hold THEIR feet to the fire to clean it up by getting out of the way, without more of our money.
If the sky IS falling, then we would be much better off with Congress hiding under the desk than passing legislation. Every time our government tries to solve an economic problem, they create a bigger problem. And if you think Congress has YOUR best interest at heart, then we’ve probably got bigger problems coming down the road.
Posted in Current Events, Politics | Tagged: 700 billion, bailout, beverly hills chihuaha, biden, bread lines, chicken little, Congress, economic crisis, economy, global warming, home loan, lost your job, mccain, obama, palin, scare tactics, trillion, washington | 2 Comments »
Posted by timpj5 on October 1, 2008
The more of John McCain I hear the less I like. John McCain likes to talk about leadership in the context of Commander in Chief. He’s good in that context because of his service in the Navy and his time spent in a Vietnamese prison camp. But leadership is much more than just ordering troops around. In fact, the test of a true leader is whether or not people follow him when he CAN’T order them around at all.
We are suffering from a lack of leadership in America. Both candidates of the two major parties are coming up with the same awful ideas to the most serious of situations regarding our economy since the Great Depression. The problem is that they have failed to learn from the Great Depression. I can understand why Barack Obama would want to give billions of dollars in taxpayer money to failing banks that mismanaged their own funds. He’s a big government statist. I expect that from him.
Government will be there for you... I promise
Republicans, however, are supposed to be the “conservative” party; the “free market” party. And yet, the supposed head of the “free market” party is all in favor of a government bailout that most certainly will do more damage than good. Not only do I believe it won’t help and will further damage our wounded economy, but it will establish a precedent that says, “When times get tough government will be there to bail you out.” I picture Darrell Hammond as Bill Clinton when he says, “I’m bulletproof”.
John McCain is not leading on this issue and it’s going to cost him the election. If McCain really were a maverick, he’d be out there dowsing the flames of this bailout with gasoline and rallying the Republicans around an economic plan that would actually work. But he’s not a real maverick. He’s only a maverick when it comes to issues when he differs from the Republican status quo. His leadership is off-course at best and a complete farce at worst.
A true maverick would be espousing the belief that the market will adjust itself much more appropriately and quicker than any government program and that government intervention, as in the Great Depression, will only make things worse than they already will be. A true maverick would be telling people that we’re in for some tough times but that it’s the right thing to do, just like he did with the Iraq war, only this time, it’d be with some real intelligence behind him. A true maverick would not compromise the principles of free market economics and liberty to save his political skin.
If you want a true maverick, you’ve got the wrong candidate. The one you want is here:
The Real Maverick
Posted in Current Events, election 2008, Politics, taxes | Tagged: bailout bill, Barack Obama, bill clinton, commander in chief, Conservative, darrell hammond, Democrat, failed economic policies, failing banks, failure of leadership, free market economics, Great Depression, John McCain, leadership, maverick, Republican, rescue package, Ron Paul, troops, true maverick, vietnamese prison camp | Leave a Comment »
Posted by timpj5 on September 13, 2008
There is a notion in today’s political landscape and in the media that democracy is the highest human ideal. The United States current foreign policy doctrine is that of spreading democracy around the world… as though democracy were somehow morally superior to other forms of rule. It has become a common “Americanism”. That to be an American you must support the idea of democracy, the form of government this country were founded on (well, technically we’re a democratic Republic… but I don’t want comments stressing the details).
The Founding Fathers, however, did not audaciously aspouse the tenants of democracy as the bedrock of society. For how can democracy be the bedrock of society. It is no more righteous a form of government as socialism, fascism or dictatorship. Government, by nature, is the means to forcibly coerce its subjects into submission in some form or fashion and the merits of any form of government are related very distinctly to the character of those directing that same government. So, in effect, the form of government isn’t as critical as those who rule it. Democracy, to the Founding Fathers, was merely the least problematic.
The Los Angeles Times (this may be the only time I ever quote the LA Times by the way) editorial in 1992 said this:
“Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote. Those rights are spelled out in the Bill of Rights and in our California Constitution. Voters and politicians alike would do well to take a look at the rights we each hold, which must never be chipped away by the whim of the majority.”
True and unfettered democracy is not the bedrock of American society and we would do well not to spread that same democratic ideal around the globe. “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” (Thomas Jefferson) Democracy determines the fate of a few by the whim of many; contrasted starkly with dictatorship, the fate of many determined by the whim of few (or one). The merit of both is held firmly with the character of those determining the fates of others. For, you see, a democracy can be just as harsh a ruler as a dictatorship and much more difficultly overthrown because the Head is the mob.
Liberty, though forgotten by some, IS the bedrock of the United States Constitution and the foundation of our society. Carefully crafted by the Founding Fathers was the document that conspired to limit the powers of the mob (ie. Government) and protect the Liberty of the individual. Liberty is the only unwavering political platform. All others shift and sway at the whims of the crowd and to the delight of the puppet masters. Just read the Democrat and Republican Party platforms from 70 – 80 years ago contrasted with those same platforms today. Liberty is the only “doctrine” worth spreading around the globe.
To the chagrin of our career politicians in Washington, however, Liberty cannot be spread around the world thru war. Liberty is a consciousness of one’s God-given rights and can only be taken, never bestowed. For any government gracious enough to bestow one with his Liberty is also powerful enough to take that Liberty away. Liberty is the highest of strictly Human ideals. Thomas Jefferson said it best, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent”
If every politician stood for Liberty today, how much different would our nation, our world be?
Posted in Individual Liberties | Tagged: American foreign policy, bush doctrine, career politicians, democracy, democratic republic, Founding Fathers, liberty, mob rule, Natural Rights, Thomas Jefferson, tyranny, washington | 2 Comments »
Posted by timpj5 on September 5, 2008
EU Parliamentary representatives want to ban “sexist” advertisements throughout Europe.
MEPs want TV regulators in the EU to set guidelines which would see the end of anything deemed to portray women as sex objects or reinforce gender stereotypes.
This could potentially mean an end to attractive women advertising perfume, housewives in the kitchen or men doing DIY.
Such classic adverts as the Diet Coke commercial featuring the bare-chested builder, or Wonderbra’s “Hello Boys” featuring model Eva Herzigova would have been banned.
The new rules come in a report by the EU’s women’s rights committee.
I think it’s a fantastic idea. Don’t let corporate America tell you what the ideal roles are for yourself or your family… let the Government decide for you.
The interesting thing is that this attempt to ban “sexist” ads in support of women’s rights is in direct violation of those same rights for those women who choose and desire to make those ads as a means of income.
The fact is that this is not about women’s rights at all. It’s about power. The power to tell others what they can and cannot say. The litmus test regarding “rights” is whether or not you must deprive someone else of rights to obtain your own. If the former is true, then what you are seeking is not truly a right. True supporters of women’s rights would never seek to trample on one woman’s rights to provide rights for another. The same goes for all people groups and minorities.
While this is in the EU currently, it won’t be long before politicians and lobbyists are clamoring for the same “regulation” in America. Just remember, you were warned.
Posted in Current Events, Individual Liberties, Society | Tagged: attractive women, ban sexist ads, EU, Eva Herzigova, housewives, Natural Rights, sexism, women's rights | 1 Comment »
Posted by timpj5 on September 2, 2008
Is that a'pit stain I see?
Barack Obama is most certainly nervous. He made the biggest mistake of his life not selecting Hillary Clinton as his VP running mate and now he knows that John McCain capitalized on it big-time. Why else would he be taking pot shots at her record of experience?
“My understanding is that Gov. Palin’s town, Wassilla, has I think 50 employees. We’ve got 2500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe 12 million dollars a year – we have a budget of about three times that just for the month,” Obama responded
First of all, he’s obscuring the facts. Governor Palin presides over the state of Alaska, not just her hometown of Wassilla. That’s akin to the argument, “My town’s bigger than your town”. Childish and below the office of the president.
Secondly, does the size of a person’s budget determine his ability to manage and lead? If so, then he’s denigrating all of those “less fortunate” people he’s so commonly “fighting for”. I’m more familiar with the saying, “He who is faithful in little is faithful in much”. The size of one’s budget doesn’t determine the character with which he manages it.
Finally, is Sarah Palin running for President? I don’t hear John McCain comparing his records with Joe Biden, he’s comparing himself to Obama. So why is Obama comparing his record with Sarah Palin’s? Because that’s the best he’s got.
Barack Obama’s biggest gun is shooting blanks. This is the best he can do. He know’s McCain’s got him licked by choosing a competent, consistent conservative… and she also just happens to be what Obama needs, a woman. Obama’s primary voting demographic needs to be women if he’s going to win in November and they are no longer a sure thing.
It’ll be interesting to see how long before he starts really laying into her the further and further he drops in the polls. I wonder if the women who currently intend to vote for him will agree with the way he’s comparing himself to her… kinda snooty.
Posted in election 2008 | Tagged: alaska governor, Barack Obama, budget for campaign, elitist, Joe Biden, John McCain, natural disaster response, obama is nervous, sarah palin, vice president, wassilla, women voting | 2 Comments »