When the Left is right and the Right is wrong

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…

Economy Rebounds Despite Obama’s Criticism

Apparently with all the campaigning, Barack Obama hasn’t been able to read the news.  On a night where Obama attacked John McCain for his support of the “failed economic policies of the Bush Administration” the Washington Post reported that the economy grew faster than expected this quarter.

U.S. economic growth accelerated from April to June as taxpayers spent their federal rebate checks and a weakened dollar boosted exports, the government reported yesterday.

According to new data from the Commerce Department, gross domestic product grew at an annualized rate of 3.3 percent in the second quarter of the year, the fastest rate since mid-2007. The department had initially estimated annualized growth for the period to be 1.9 percent, but more complete data — particularly on exports by U.S. companies — showed the economy to be growing faster.

I’m not saying that all is well with this economy, one in which the government continues to inflate the supply of money and borrow money to pay for a war and too many social programs.  But apparently we don’t live in Zimbabwe like the Democrats are trying to convince us with examples of people without health insurance, jobs or food.  There are worse things than life without health insurance… like life with government health insurance and a 2 year wait for health care.  Just ask the British.

The Illusion of Freedom of the Press

Life Under the Fairness Doctrine

In a society instituted on freedom, the most important concept of freedom to uphold is that of individual ownership of person and property, without which there is no freedom.  Freedom of speech and of the press, logical outgrowths of the ownership of person and property, are expressly protected from government inhibition by the First Amendment.

Unfortunately, since the Radio Act of 1927 the federal government has been violating the First Amendment, in which the government seized control of radio frequencies and began “licensing” them at its convenience.  In 1978 the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could infringe on the right of free press in regard to content regulation.

So are the radio and television media not a form of the press?  Are radio, and now more prominently television, not the primary information outlets of the 21st century?  When did it become ok for the government to change its contract (the Constitution) with the American people for the sake of propriety or the public’s “best interest”?  Who gave them that authority?

It wasn’t the American people.  We most certainly wouldn’t have given the government that right.  No, the Federal Government’s Supreme Court confiscated that right by judicial fiat.  And yet, distracted by the craziness of every day life, the latest movie, American Idol winner and hit song we have allowed ourselves to become so indoctrinated to the idea that the government has our best interests at heart that we, without much thought or revolt, have allowed our primary sources of information to be controlled by the thing we were supposed to be protected from by the Constitution:  Government.

The Founding Fathers believed that a free press was essential to democracy.  They had learned, thru experience, that when the primary information outlets are controlled by the government only the messages conducive to eliciting submission to that government are allowed.  The result thereof was the propagation of the “party line”.  You can see that we’re bloated with the party line by looking at our current political climate.  Anyone advocating something other than the status quo is labeled a “radical”, a “freak” or worse.

Attempting to diminish opposing viewpoints is the opposite of liberty and democracy, it is the ideology of statism, that we live to support the state.  Implied in statism is that we are owned, at least partially, by and find our true purpose thru the State.

Many on the “right” believe that censorship is necessary to elicit propriety in the public’s “best interest”.  However, in a free society in which there are a plethora of options, the free will of individuals to determine what is and is not appropriate to listen to or watch should not be infringed upon.

Those on the “left” believe that censorship is necessary to elicit “fairness” and equality.  You may have heard of the Fairness Doctrine or the more recent nomenclature, the Media Responsibility Act.  In a nutshell, they would like to control all content on radio, television and the Internet so that they can ensure a modicum of “fairness” in the political discourse of both sides.

Who then is the arbiter of “fairness”?  The Government.  A person or body of unelected bureaucrats with the power to censor your internet content, your favorite TV shows and radio programs.  Can you imagine how much larger the FCC (as if it weren’t big and powerful enough already) would need to be to handle all of that?  How much more tax revenue will be required to fund the expansion?  How much corruption would be ready and waiting to determine what is “acceptable” on both sides (as if there were only two)?

Fact is that we haven’t had a truly free press since 1927 and yet the American people don’t seem to care or even be aware.  Although, how would we know… we’re all watching the same channels.  I wonder how many channels would broadcast Keith Olbermann once the Fairness Doctrine is back in play.  It would be reminiscent perhaps of Chancellor Sutler’s television broadcasts in “V for Vendetta”.  Food for thought…

Test Blog

This is a test of the emergency blogcast system… This is only a test.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!