Thursday, November 20, 2008

Is McCain's Loss Conservative's Gain?

I said from the get go that McCain was not electable as a Republican and I actually have doubts if he was even electable as a Democrat. I do not know why people thought he was. Ever since he's been around as a political candidate for the job, he has been the same in his expressionless expressions and his non-convincing stands which proved to be the most obvious problem during his current run. The question as to who or where he was on the political map constantly remained. In many ways he is a Socialist yet he also fits the definition of a Pluralist as well as a Moral Relativist but a Conservative he is not and he's too wishy-washy for Liberals' to like.

That he was not a Republican or a Conservative came out loud and clear when he broke his own claim to be a entitlement watchdog as he assisted the Liberals and Democrats in endorsing and voting for the biggest entitlement program via the bailout package in history. I was actually surprised that the media did not clobber him with that one. The only reason why I think he was spared is because he was also the past darling of the media and his action on the bailout was very much in line with the Democrat wishes in Congress. Also perhaps because the media knew that given enough leeway, McCain would sabotage himself; and sabotage he did.

When many of the electorate does and did not know which party was in charge of Congress the last two years, whose fault is that? Who is not speaking up? Who is not educating? One can blame the media for a lot but not for everything. It is precisely because the harder battle is for the ones less publicized that Republicans need to start speaking up with more energy and they need to learn how to focus their communication to the future of the country, not rely solely on their past glories. It's bad enough that history is being rewritten to favor the liberals alarmingly fast, and that education in our schools have been suppressed, but that is exactly why education has to be taken up by the party and calling out the opposition should not be held at bay.

Every chance the Democrats had to debunk the Republicans they've used; McCain did not. The next candidates better learn fast if they are to have any leadership hopes. They need to be more energized and more communicative and more outspoken. They need to learn and be comfortable with the new media because they cannot and have not been able to rely on the old one. TV is almost pointless to rely on for them; the newspapers and magazines are almost dead, except for photographs. It's the radio and computer communications that are the most widely heard. Pod casting especially will be more popular.

So the question remains about whether Conservatives gain. What current politicians lack and lacked the past 6 years is the fact that they cannot bring into the foreground any youthful energy perhaps because they're afraid to let go. The instant energy that was created when McCain introduced Gov. Palin was an unmistakable signal that this is what the party needs and wants yet the message seems to be lost on the leadership. I can't believe that there isn't anyone in the House or the Senate with a younger and different voice that can and is willing to take the reigns but I seem to be wrong because they both re-elected the same leaders that have basically led them to losses in both houses. Not a great start for the future I'm afraid and it's too bad because this time in the next two years is when the greatest opportunity happens; when you have nothing to loose because you have lost it all. Will the Conservatives be able to recognize the opportunity?

Thanks for Reading

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Change, I Dare You!

"As above, so below" works the other way especially in the USA; so ponder: "As below, So above" because that's where the answer may be. Examine the lies you tell yourself as well as your lies to others, are there any you can correct? Change yourself, Change Society. Greater change comes from within than from idolizing some "Great Guru". Perhaps if we realized it years ago, we may not be facing what we are faced with today; waiting breathlessly for politicians to decide our future in: finance, health, education, security, and even our love of life today.

That what we are doing is for the "global good" is and has been obvious of America. Yet, you've been told that we should be punished for numerous affronts to this world and the injustice we have supposedly done to the many who have fought for your freedom. It is scary that you feel guilty for what we haven't done, yet scarier still is that you are made to feel undeserving because of what we have built, shared and consumed. It perpetuates even further our lack of confidence allowing even more lies to be excused.

Obama was elected on such thoughts and I feel sorry for all those who bought into it because if ever there was a cause to be proud of, it's this one: We helped the Iraqi people into freedom, out of and from under a dictatorship that killed in the hundreds of thousands, in less than 1 year and helped them rebuild since then. That was under the leadership of Bush and that's faster and with far less casualties and costs endured than we have helped Germany, France, Belgium, Italy, England, Japan, Phillipines, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria, and the rest of the satellites of the Soviet Union.. Georgia and Ukraine, Latvia being amongst them; the countries of Yugoslavia, South Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Somalia individually!!! There are so many more, but I think you get the point. Yes, I've included those we have yet to succeed with and yes, the ones also we were indirectly involved with because they are all deserving of our help. Because you, wonderful people you, who so willingly wish for the best, and follow hope and change, should not deny those that are also wishing for the same under terrible dictatorships. So it makes no sense to me that you think we should be out of Iraq until they are ready for us to leave.

Now, for most of you, I imagine that is not easily identified with and for you I'm glad. I'm glad because you have not suffered the horrors of a dictatorship.. yet. For those that have fought over there, however, I feel sad and glad. Sad because you can't relay to us the horrors that you've seen and glad because you have been assured under the current administration that you and your children are safe at home and don't have to witness such as you've seen. Yes, you have taken the horrors onto yourselves so we don't have to suffer such. Sound familiar? It should, because the veterans of WWII also did the same and because of them, you exist in a free society.

This society that so many of you are ready to forgo, to give up and of which you are ashamed only because you are ignorant of its history and of what people can do to and with each other, has done wonderous things for many. You believe the stories that the USA is horrible and does atrocious acts from the likes of Ayers and your late night entertainers yet you have been starved of the stories of such heroes as these because of a media with a negative USA agenda:

So I say unto you: You don't know half the truth and are ready to condemn us all. It's sad for the USA and it's sad for the World that from such ignorance so many will suffer.

Thank You Veterans and Thanks for Reading

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Is Conservatism Dead?

I can't help this creepy feeling that these G20 meetings will come out to be nothing but Global Socialism agreements. As the heads of the world continue to meet, argue and theorize, what strikes me as unusual is that there are no real conservatives among them. The real conservatives of the world, that forged the greatest economies are out of power or dead. Reagan, on whose coattails and wise tax cuts, Clinton became a success leading to a 1 year government tax surplus with a Republican Congress, Bush who led us out of a recession, not of his own making and with further tax cuts, is too late with free market speeches and not long from being totally out of power with thoughts of good riddance from many. Thatcher and Blair whose platforms unraveled fast under Brown. Australia's John Howard whose wise leadership and conservative know how, led them into a surplus out of a deficit helped along with a tax cuts and now is helping Australia weather this storm but for how long? Spain too turned to a socialist leader a few years back and now facing harder times along with many European Nations.

Where to from here, when most of the G20 nations are Socialist or Communist? Regulations upon regulations which will lead to more because once started, we can never regulate enough to encompass all? We all need a good lesson in free markets again because it works beautifully when left alone. Governments need to learn to keep hands off private business and financial institutions because when in a crisis it is revealed that they know nothing of how to run one, especially profitably. I hear some analysis that we are well on our way to owing 70% our GDP that means trillions that we'll pass onto the future and many criticized the cost in $$ of the Iraq war yet are well on board to all bailouts. It's insanity.

Governments should not regulate welfare via businesses and businesses should not lobby governments for favored status and regulation to save themselves the extra trouble of sticking with good business practices. Yes many corporations and banks will fail and for good reason: they did not keep to the fundamentals of good business. It's also true that many were too far interfered with by government wanting to administer welfare via the businesses. A trap that all businesses should remember when lobbying governments: somewhere both sides have to pay back. Debts have to be paid and unfortunately this time it was the entire world economy that is going to be left with the debt; yet no one is talking about less spending and less government.

Businesses that do not run themselves well should and will fail that is built into life; governments should be the same way as many are, via elections when and where elections are free. Try and mix it together and you have bureaucracies upon regulations upon more of the same forevermore, creating a convoluted, confused and miserable system which is certainly not fair to anyone except onto themselves.

Conservatism lets natural evolution weed out the bad from the good via attrition, whereas Socialism lets it all stew and mix allowing for more concealment and corruption.

Thanks for Reading

Thursday, November 6, 2008

What's In A Speech?

Watching President-elect Obama's acceptance speech I wanted to find something I am wrong about to hang my hope on, but alas, I could not. Instead I found further signs to justify my trepidation when he said that "we are not a nation of individuals" and that "we will come together as one", as well as when he said "we need to sacrifice" and that the job may not be done in four years. All subtle they are the kind of messages that I will be shrugged off as a fool for hearing and argued with that I read too much into such things. I hope so, I hope so.

I have not heard a President before ask for the people to sacrifice themselves to a cause vaguely named; but I heard dictators do it. What I saw on the various faces in the audience was elated worship, and yes elated hope too and it was clear to me that these people would probably sacrifice themselves for him and that scared me rather than give me hope.

What has driven this nation to greatness and to great achievements was individual thinking, individual innovation and individual sacrifice and not a melding of people into one. Melding brings out the average, the mediocrity and a susceptibility to be controlled.

I have not heard a President speak before, about expanding his term so soon, nor have I heard one say that this Nation needed to meld into one mind before it can be "OK" again; a one people before we can present ourselves to the world again. What does that mean? Why does he say we're not "OK" the way we are? What does he want to "fix" in us and why do we think we need "fixing" I keep having more questions then answers whenever he speaks.

Obama is an excellent speaker and his delivery is well timed, soothing and engrossing almost to the point of hypnotism. But over many of his speeches I have been wondering what is his really talking about, what is he not saying, where is the specifics and substance? Is he talking: Socialism, Communism, Capitalism, Moral Relativism, Pluralism or is it Humanism? All need sacrifice from yourself or of yourself but not all lets you keep your: self.

One thing is for certain, there will be change because there always is change; so with that word he's saying the obvious and the inevitable and he always has. Question is will President Obama lead us to the kind of change we'll all embrace or we'll all regret, or both?

As I said, only more questions and no real direction yet; just hope and change and on that, he has so far, delivered.

Thanks for Reading.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Congratulations Americans: a Message and Observation

I wish to congratulate President-elect Obama and I congratulate all African-Americans for this historic election and long sought victory. I rejoice with you and for you because now you have come into your own and now you'll be able to present yourselves to the world as you wish to be viewed. Gone are the barriers of media, of disinterest and suppression; gone is discrimination. You now bear the sole responsibility of how you project yourselves into the world and how you wish to be perceived by the world. It is a challenge which needs pondering because your presentation will reflect on President Obama.

President Obama will also have an extra burden not experienced by other Presidents; besides representing the nation and its people, he will be also looked upon to represent black people to the world.

His attempts and successes will be largely dependent on a supporting or suppressing media. A couple of other African-Americans learned that the media does not necessarily favor on skin color. Both Gen. Colin Powell and Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice, by all definitions should have been given the same accolades that Barack Obama received for being first, yet they were ignored not only by the media but also by their own kind; the very same brother and sisterhood that Barack Obama brought together with pride.

As to our Nation, this too is about you. I'm glad that this Nation let go of its inhibitions to vote for a black American but I will let you all judge yourselves and your choices as time unfolds whether you chose the right man to lead this land,because he's first, a man; and voting for him because he's black does not encourage confidence in me.

I, for myself have hope, a hope that I am wrong about what is to unfold in the USA the next few years because I cannot rejoice about an election where the vision of "hope and change" pushed for a future of Socialist utopia. I will face it openly and with commentary as usual. I am forever an optimist so I doubt if my attitude will change about the good in us all. There are things that, when all is said and done, we have to leave up to the Universe to handle because the Universe, by its own nature and beyond our view, balances it all.

Thanks for reading.

Monday, November 3, 2008

It Was Ours To Lose

Discussing with a friend the two Presidential campaigns, he noted that the Obama campaign was masterfully planned and executed while the McCain campaign was disheveled and found wanting planned direction. I noted that although it's true, I don't see how the Republicans will ever have a masterfully planned and executed campaign. I think that because the members of the Republican Party are more private, whilst the Democratic Party members are more social and by that premise, we have to consider that it's easier to change the thinking of one individual in a group as opposed to changing many individual ideals into thinking like a group, so I'm not sure that the comparison of campaigns is what we need to do.

Democrats seem to discuss things in groups because they are more the social thinkers and they come more easily to a group agreement; the Republicans are more private individuals who tend to come to their own conclusions before engaging in discussion. Therefore, I believe it's easier to convince Democrats to follow; in other words, both parties each given a talented, charismatic, strong leader to follow, it would take longer for the Republicans to champion theirs.

By it's very definition of Democracy or Democratic means majority rule, thereby given the whim of the majority of the people, so shall laws be enacted. This also means social justice, social agreement, social good. and that the one man one vote given above 50% should rule the land. The trouble is that this does not take into account that many can be influenced on the whim, or on the long run with repeated information (true or not) and therefore many can be made to drink the "cool aid" quite easily.

In contrast I believe there are many Libertarian thinkers in the Republican Party that believe that government should stay out of private business and should be minimized. Coupled with the Republicans who believe in representative government which means a governing body that represents the way it's voters think thereby giving the governing body several ways to ponder an issue before it comes to writing law. This is a more diverse group therefore less easily corralled into thinking alike.

One can see by these definitions why the anarchists, fascists, communists, prefer a group of social thinkers to infiltrate with their ideas. Hence the Socialists infiltrated the Democrats and used them to weaken the USA to the point where the real Democrats themselves felt lost and unwelcome within their own party and were soon pushed out. It didn't happen overnight it happened slowly, methodically, through education and propaganda. Like a disease that does it's worst underneath the skin for a long time before it's detected and by that time it's diagnosed, it has done it's worst and to most it feels so natural that they do not realise the danger of it's mutation.

It's such mutations that allow neighbor to turn in neighbor, colleague tell on colleague, friend distrust friend and society to fragment. Normalization comes with syrupy promises and favouritism doled out to those that do fascism's bidding; not realizing that we are all losers in this game and the winners are yet to show their true identities.

Our forefathers knew that balance was needed and therefore could not support a one party system. It is a fine balance and one that needs to be preserved yet we are faced with the possibility of a one party rule; and it will rule in all situations for this next presidential term. Something that our forefathers feared and, those of us who know from experience what it can mean, dread. But don't believe just me, believe those that have lived it then ask yourself, who do you wish this upon?

Your children??? Naivete is funny in the movies but not in real life. Please pass this on.

Thanks for Reading!