Election Afterglow

December 27th, 2008 by beerme

I haven’t posted an article since October. As anyone who read the last article will know, I was particularly upset at the so-called conservative chosen to run as the Republican nominee for President. I was unhappy for a myriad number of reasons, some of which I detailed in some of my other articles but mostly because of the fact that John McCain is not a conservative. Now, the problem with running a non-conservative for a conservative party is two-fold: First, he can’t win because the conservatives won’t vote for him and can’t get excited about getting out a vote for him, and second, he dilutes the electorate and changes the public’s perception of what a conservative is, ruining future conservative political victories.

Sarah Palin helped to energize the party faithful (sorry, that’s not me) but failed to make enough of a difference due to a successful Democrat attack strategy that made her look like a complete idiot and a McCain strategy that assisted the Democrats in that effort. Those conservatives that believe in principles and not party stayed home or voted third party in November. I hate to say I told ya so…

Of course the conservative blogs and magazines are filled to the brim with prescriptions for the revival of the Republican Party. Move to the center, move to the right, return to conservative principles, etc. The truth is that only the principles matter. Parties are corrupting influences and they will always promote the accumulation of power rather than the enhancement of freedom for the electorate. You are seeing the rise of the Liberal Party’s accumulation of power, now. It will be very disturbing because it is more committed to group-think than the Conservative version (think Contract with America).

Expect the green revolution to drive much of Obama’s agenda and Global Warning to be the catalyst for much of the “change” we see in the next four years. Expect government giveaways to become the norm and inventive methods of extracting the revenue from the citizens of this country to expand exponentially. Bad driver fees, licensing fees, speed cameras and their automatic ticketing, enhanced police traffic enforcement and many other revenue-raising tactics will dominate the scene over the next few years. Remember, “buzzed driving is drunk driving“. Yes, and texting while driving is the same as driving dangerously.

What all of this means to me is increased government presence in my life and less individual freedom. Both parties are signing up for this prescription, not just the Democrats. John McCain would have happily signed the same bills you will watch a beaming Obama sign. I don’t want a party that changes its principles to get me into the fold. I want a party that changes its principles because the principles are the right ones to hold for a free and prosperous citizenry. When the Republicans pay more attention to that prescription, they might gain a member.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in political corruption | No Comments »

Talk Versus Action

October 12th, 2008 by beerme

Almost eight years ago, we elected a President who said he was going to reform the big government policies of the Clinton administration, keep us out of foreign entanglements, reform schools to improve performance, act as a uniter between the two major political parties and restore integrity to the office of the President. How’s that been workin’ out for ya?

In reality, George W. Bush did almost exactly the opposite on all of these promises, didn’t he? Acknowledging  that the attacks of 9/11 (because I certainly realize <i>that</i> was a game changer) made foreign entanglements a bit of a necessity, he still failed miserably in all of his other aims. And it wasn’t simply because of the partisan stooges that opposed him at every turn in the Congress, either. This President ran as a conservative. He said he was going to govern as a conservative. He quite simply did nothing of the sort. Leaving aside his partnering with Ted Kennedy on the No Child Left Behind Act as well as his inablity to veto the many wasteful, government-growing bills Congress sent him over the first six years of his two-term Presidency, look at his behavior recently. He pushed for the panic-driven, mortgage bailout in spite of the people’s opposition. He continues to present big government solutions to problems created by big government every day!

Now, in response to a President (and a Party) that has been nearly indistinguishable from the liberal Democrats, the GOP has presented John McCain as their candidate. In the face of a financial crisis that was caused by liberal Democrats, in spite of warnings from regulators and Republicans (who were demonized as racists, at the time), McCain proposes to buy up “those bad mortgages” with our tax dollars! This is his proud liberal, er, conservative solution! Leaving aside the question of what is a bad mortgage, why would a conservative pose a big government solution to a problem cause by big government? And, why doesn’t McCain tell the people the truth about this “crisis”? Well, partly because he wouldn’t know the  truth if it slapped him upside the head, but that’s another story.

Franklin Raines, Maxine Waters, Barney Franks and several other liberal Democrats, Leftist community organizations (ACORN, anyone?), and Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae employees caused this crisis over the past ten years or so, while calling anyone who opposed their schemes (to give bad loans to bad credit risks) racists. It is the banks that bought up these risky investments that are also to blame. They don’t have a thing to worry about, though, because McCain and the Republicans are just as willing to bail them out as their friends the Democrats. They want to follow the example of the European countries, (who, by the way, are in the same trouble as this country, despite much more stringent regulation-how could that be? I thought it was the Republicans pushing deregulation that caused this mess!) and slide this great nation towards socialism. Barack Obama is a perfect candidate for this position but McCain is a close second!

Imagine a candidate that told the truth. Imagine a candidate that, when faced with the obvious lies of the opposition, did not side-step towards the muddy middle, but attacked the wrong-headed ideologies of the Left with facts and figures. Imagine a party that had the best interests of this country at heart, instead of gaining or consolidating Power. Imagine a conservative candidate running for the Republicans. Now, realize that it won’t be happening any time soon.

As clearly dangerous as it seems, perhaps the best thing for this nation is a four year term for Barack Hussein Obama. Maybe after that debacle-if there is a nation left-we can elect the type of government we need.

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »

Influence and ABC

August 28th, 2008 by beerme

ABC News-yeah, the same one that many conservatives have taken to calling the All Barack Channel-has some very interesting investigative journalism going on right now in the environs of the DNC. Yesterday an ABC News producer was arrested on the street in front of a hotel where big money lobbyists were wooing Democrat politicians. I guess somebody in the hotel didn’t want the TV crew taking photos of who was there with whom. Cameras were rolling when a police officer from the Boulder County Sheriff’s Department ordered Asa Eslocker off the sidewalk in front of the Brown Palace Hotel in Denver. When Eslocker didn’t leave quickly enough, the officer pushes him out to the street and then tells him he’s blocking traffic! Two hours later he was arrested by a cigar chomping sergeant from the Denver Police Department. One of the officers is seen grabbing him by the throat just before they cuff him and stuff him into a police car. The link has video of this trampling of the freedom of the press. It appears that Brian Ross and the ABC News Investigative Team has been doing a little digging around during the DNC and some of the politicos don’t like that a bit!

A check of the webpage linked to above will show many more items of interest, as well. It also appears that the recording industry tradegroup, the RIAA, has decided to pamper the Democrat politicians with their very own free Kanye West concert! Tickets that can go for as much as $1000 were provided gratis to the visiting Dems (the Senate ethics committee had no problem with this but the House ethics committee required a $90 payment). Why does the music industry give away millions every year to Congress? Influence, why else? The recording industry is begging for Congress to pass even more stringent and punishing legislation against music downloading and copyright infringement. They figure some free tix to a hot hip-hop concert will help. Man, I sure hope none of those congresscritters has a tape recorder or a video camera in there!  The house has already passed one of these bills and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has introduced a companion bill in the Senate. That’s the same Leahy who was given a small speaking role recently in the blockbuster film, The Dark Knight…Oh, it’s OK, he donated his pay from Warner Brothers to charity. According to ABC News, the West concert capped a week of lavish parties and entertainment put on by corporate lobbyists who push legislation and regulatory issues in Washington.

The fact that ABC News is reporting this, especially as damaging as it is to the Democratic Party, whose nominee for President has pinned a lot of his appeal on a reputation for honesty and a promise to end lobbying and reliance on PAC money, really is astonishing. They even have a piece about Charles Schumer’s (D-NY) creation “The Legacy Circle“. This is an elite group of donors, designed to finance the campaigns of Democrat senatorial candidates. “Membership requires that individuals – or couples – give the legal maximum (which is adjusted for inflation) to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) five years in a row or have donated $500,000 over a life time.” There are about 60 couples or 120 people in the group, so far. Member benefits include invitations to special events throughout the year.

Bravo to the one television news organization that seems to be interested in real reporting! Go ABC!

Tags: ,
Posted in political corruption | No Comments »

A Tale of Two Speakers

August 2nd, 2008 by beerme

A few months ago, Newt Gingrich started something that made perfect sense. The former Speaker of the House, reviled by the Left because of the admittedly partisan rancor during the clash between the Republican Revolution and Clinton’s various zippergates, had started a discussion a year or so ago with his creation of a non-partisan political action platform and organization, American Solutions. A few short months ago he announced a new campaign and petition, entitled, “Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.” This campaign and the petition hit a nerve and has been wildly successful. Over 1,250,000 people have signed onto the effort, so far! The campaign is successful because it makes good sense. Most people recognize that supply and demand fuels economic changes and more oil will drop prices. The fact that there’s abundant oil in our own country makes this approach even more popular.

The Republicans in Congress have been as much asleep on this issue as the Democrats (though, they have not been so intent on destroying the economy for shaky environmental reasons as, for instance Nancy Pelosi) but they saw the nerve this issue twanged with the public and jumped on it fairly quickly. To placate their global warming obsessed base, the Democrats responded to this campaign with a resounding, “No”. The main response was a (sounding ever so reasonable, like a parent explaining to child why they really can’t have a pony), “Tsk, tsk tsk. You can’t drill your way out of this mess”! Some, predictably, tried to blame the energy crisis on Bush and his “failed policies”. Many blamed it on “oil speculators”, who are profiting off the fears of the American people. A funny thing happened, though, when President Bush finally caught ahold of the issue. On the very day he announced the lift of the Executive moratorium on off shore drilling, oil prices plummeted more than 5$ a barrel! See, even the possibility of future oil supply being increased caused the supply and demand engine to move! That’s what speculation does to prices and it’s a good thing.

Yesterday, in the House of Representatives, a pretty interesting thing happened. A check of the news will probably not yield any mention of it. On Google News, the only congressional-related “news” worthy of their front page, was an AP article heralding the Democrats for trying to overcome years of Republican neglect in relation to…you guessed it, the children! A check of other news sites yielded much the same non-reportage. This is unfortunate because the actions of a few Republican Representatives, in response to the reprehensible behavior of the Democrat leadership of the House, was inspiring, to say the least.

Nancy Pelosi, who has stated that she is “trying to save the planet” (to some liberal applause, it seems), has stubbornly refused to allow a vote on any bill that would decide-up or down- whether to lift the ban on off-shore drilling or indeed to promote more drilling anywhere in the U.S. This is itself a despicable assault on free speech and honest debate in Congress, especially from one who claimed, as the first female Speaker of history, that she would pledge “to make this Congress the most honest and open in history”. How open is a debate where, while your opponent is speaking you gavel him down and turn the microphones off, as well as the lights?

Former Speaker Gingrich started this debate. He is a credentialed intellectual, a college history professor, a prolific author and a political consultant. The man has bona fides, gravitas. He is a student and teacher of history. When he speaks, one knows he is listening to a man of intellect and character. Nancy Pelosi, on the other hand, seems more interested in lead paint in toys (admittedly important but certainly there are very few provable casualties of this latest public health “disaster” than, say, people who drown in buckets of water…) than financial and energy freedom for Americans. This Speaker is more interested in the novels of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, fast friend of Fidel Castro, than in the history we need to know in order to avoid repeating. She is more interested in scoring points against the Bush White House and Republicans (and both, as in McCain = Third Bush term) than in the cause of bipartisanship she loudly proclaimed at becoming Speaker.  She is a disgrace. And she proved it yesterday in the House.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

To Be Secure…

July 31st, 2008 by beerme

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by an Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be searched.”-The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

From Patriot Act allowances to Elliot Spitzer’s downfall, to DUI chekpoints or simple “consent searches”, the right of the people to be secure from unlawful government intrusion is not safe and has not been vouchsafed for quite some time. The big concern is how much more will those rights be eroded over the next few years, as it seems pretty unlikely that any of the erosion will ever be restored.

The seed of this current rant was planted when I researched the trials and tribulations of one Brett Darrow, a young college student from St. Louis, Missouri. It seems Mr. Darrow’s troubles started when he was allegedly assaulted by an off-duty police officer in 2005. Apparently after his filing a complaint about the officer’s (off-duty) conduct, he received a ticket (speeding?). A deal was reached between the parties, resulting in all charges against Darrow being dropped if he dropped his lawsuit against the police department.

Darrow was angry and wanted to do something about the police harassment he felt he had received after complaining about the officer who allegedly assaulted him, so he placed cameras and microphones in his 1997 Nissan Maxima and kept them rolling just about all the time. This resulted in two incidents that have made him a hero to some and a rabble-rousing punk to others. In September of 2007, he encountered a St. George Police Officer in a commuter lot, where he failed to properly respond to the officer’s questions regarding his activities. The result turned out to be quite nasty and ended the career of that officer in that town. You may read about it and view some of Darrow’s video here.

Darrow’s troubles continued in November of 2007 when he entered a DUI checkpoint and declined to explain his personal information to the checkpoint officers. This resulted in these officers threatening to “find something to charge him with” so they could take him to jail. All for merely standing up for his rights not to detail to them where he was going and what he was doing at the time of the stop. You may view this video and read the transcripts here.

Shortly after the last incident some threats were made about Mr. Darrow on a website entitled, “CopTalk”, a forum for police officers and wannabes, apparently. Later Darrow noticed a police car staking out his house. He also was cited by another St. George police officer for a traffic violation but the charges were dropped when he brought the video to the hearing to defend himself. You may read about this incident here.

The young Mr. Darrow obviously is making himself a target of the local police. He also is obviously looking for trouble. Still, as a private citizen, he is entitled to conduct himself as such without worrying about being harassed by the local constabulary just because he doesn’t want to chat it up with them while they are violating his fourth amendment rights. In this day and age, it seems, the fourth amendment is something of an implied, rather than a concrete stricture. These officers feel empowered to take such liberties with drivers for no reason except that they can, and they get away with it scott-free unless the driver has clear video and audio of the incident to back up his claims that the officer lied.

How do most people react when they are asked to “voluntarily” submit to a roadside search by a police officer? According to the Illinois State Police, 94 percent of white motorists and 96 percent of minority ones “consent” to such searches. These searches are voluntary because if the officers had any reasonable suspicion to allow an involuntary search they would conduct it without need of consent. Still most of us, when asked, submit. Why? Because it is under an implied threat of force. There is an inherent compulsion in an officer’s request, as well as a palpable intimidation. If you think this intimidation is without reason, you need only watch the videos of Mr. Darrow’s escapades to be corrected!

Blame the Patriot Act if you want, or the war on organized crime, the war on drugs or the war against drunk drivers. Whatever you consider the cause of these erosions of our privacy, keep in mind that it has been done to us by our own elected officials. The legislators that passed these laws or did not pass laws to prohibit these abuses as well as the sheriffs that conduct the searches and the prosecutors that conduct the trials are all elected by us to do this damage. Usually it is because we think they are only going to use these tools against “those people”. Those people who use drugs or drive loaded or aid and assist “terrorists”, or whatever despicable type of human being elicits the least sympathy.

Because we have so vilified drivers who drink, it is now acceptable to arrest them after they’ve only had one or two beers and couldn’t possibly be a danger to anyone. It’s their blood’s chemical makeup that makes them guilty, not their behavior. Recently, it was reported that the National Center for State Courts, an organization founded by former IUS Supreme Court Justice Warren E. Burger, had partnered with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in an effort to promote “efficient disposal of traffic cases.” Apparently this means the judges are supposed to help the prosecutors in DUI cases! The center thinks the Courts have a role in decreasing the incidents of impaired driving. Most people used to think the Courts’ only role was to ensure a fair and impartial hearing in a trial procedure. That’s changed apparently!

This information and other items of interest related to the laws and their impact on drivers can be found at the excellent website, theNewspaper.com

What is the answer? How do we halt these erosions of our rights or-is it possible?-actually reverse these abuses and return to a more sensible era of personal rights and responsibilities? The answer is to elect people of character and integrity. It’s that simple!

Now, go do it!

Posted in Original Intent | No Comments »

Irrational Observations

July 29th, 2008 by beerme

I was reading a short article today by Paul Jacobs about fear and how it affects us as it relates to gasoline prices. A good point to remember in more areas than simply fuel pricing, is that fear makes everyone do things that they haven’t fully reflected upon. In short, reacting emotionally to anything is usually something we will live to regret.

I was thinking about that concept and how it relates to so many other political issues in our time (Iraq War, Patriot Act, Immigration Reform, Gun Control, etc.), when I received an email from the Obama Campaign, asking for donations. This campaign is itself one of the most emotional and least rational of any I’ve ever experienced. I wondered if fear and irrational hatred might sweep Obama into the Presidency.

I guess this concept of irrationality also encompasses the “cult of personality” concept, doesn’t it? Barry certainly has achieved that status. Here is a candidate that announced recently that he was going to accept the nomination on the final day of the Democrat Party’s National Convention. That in itself is a departure from all of the previous candidates I’ve ever seen. Isn’t Obama still the presumptive Presidential nominee? A bit presumptive of him to announce that he will accept said nomination on the final day of the convention, isn’t it?

He also announced in the video accompanying the donation pitch, that he wants as many supporters as possible to be present when the announcement of the nominee is made (after all, the party that holds fast to ideas such as “Super Delegates”, would want anyone left out or treated as less than equal, right?). So they are going to move the entire convention to a stadium for that final historic day. I’m sure Obama will have his new presidential shield placed in an appropriately advantageous spot for this occasion.

Even if this candidate was suitably prepared to seek the Presidency, I would have to conclude that the hysteria involving his candidacy (Hope and Change being emotional concepts)and the manner in which he and the party continue to play upon voters fears and hatred (of Bush and McCain’s Third Bush Term), illustrates a need for a pause and a reflection before jumping into the feel good flow. Post a Danger sign: Here there be Hype.

Tags:
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

A Republic, If You Can Keep It

March 12th, 2008 by beerme

This is the first post of my new blogivist blog! I have been blogging off and on for a few years, now and have had a somewhat schizophrenic blog called Beer and Firkins for a large part of that time. That blog is more involved with my obsession…er, hobby, homebrewing beer. I intend this one to be more of a political blog. So, expect more in the way of conservative-leaning, libertarian politics from this site from here on out. I hope you like it or at least enjoy it. I encourage honest debate and won’t delete comments or ban comment-posters unless I really want to.

Oh, the title of the blog refers to a statement made by Benjamin Franklin in 1787. After debating the new form of government at the constitutional convention for some months, Franklin was leaving the hall and was approached by a Mrs. Powell (that’s all I know about the lady), who asked him, “Well Doctor, what have we got a republic or a monarchy?” His answer was, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” I hope we can…

Here is a recent article I wrote in Beer and Firkins:

OK, people, here we go again! All you’re gonna hear about (at least from the Clinton faction) is that “every vote must count”. You’ll be hearing about disenfranchisement of different segments of the community and how the sanctity of our democratic process rests on the “one person, one vote” principle. All of this because of the I-75 corridor cancellation. Michigan and Florida failed to play by the DNC rules and held their primaries early. The candidates agreed to follow the rules and not campaign in those two states. No one figured the vote (and elector) totals would be this close and actually make those two states…important. Oh well, now they are. They could be so at any time. So, really, isn’t the calendar placement of each state’s primary a wash? More on this later…

Essentially, the entire problem rises from the idea that the primary system unfairly boosts the importance of the states whose primaries occur the earliest. Historically these are Iowa and New Hampshire, with a few others thrown in over the years. The argument (and it’s a good one) is that these states enjoy an importance far beyond their meager populations in paring down the number of candidates early in the primary races. I see nothing wrong with this but most do. The Founders did not plan on our nation being infatuated with “democracy” when they crafted our Constitution. They warned specifically against the tyranny of popular opinion. The idea that some of the less populous states might have more power than their population dictates would not have fazed them in the least. In fact that is the entire reason behind such facets of our system as the electoral college and the assignation of at least one U.S. Representative per state, regardless of population.

We are a nation of laws. That was the lesson of the 2000 debacle in Florida. The laws were violated by the Florida Supreme Court in favor of the argument that our government is a democracy. The Florida Supreme Court knelt at the altar of “the will of the people” and decided that that concept overruled the law. Even the U.S. Supreme Court failed to firmly establish the fact that this concept is unfounded. It is not the will of the people-in the form of a popular vote-that decides our governmental makeup. We are a republic, not a democracy.

The rule in the primary system-and I would be happy to entertain arguments that the entire primary system is wrong and serves to do nothing but maintain the power of the two dominant political parties, but that argument is for another day-is that you follow the party and their rules for the primaries. When Michigan and Florida violated those rules, they were told their delegates would not be seated. “Well, they won’t really do that”, said the party faithful in those states. “They can’t do that, it would disenfranchise all those voters”, said the pundits. So they went right ahead and had their primaries early. They never expected them to count for much anyway, it was the principle of the thing, you know. They WILL take Michigan and Florida seriously in the next election, by golly!

Now, I understand that there is a good argument that this primary process does not necessarily give Michigan and Florida their due. But the outcome in this year’s process is the exception that disproves that point. You can’t have it your way every time. Now what do we have? I love the fact that this mess is stirring up dissension in the ranks of the Democrats, because I disagree with their agenda on almost every point, but it could just as well have been the Republicans who were in this mess. Then I would have been upset. Of course, with a candidate like John McCain, I’m not sure the Republicans have a candidate in the race, but that, too is another argument for another day. The point is that we didn’t play by the rules, the rules were explained to us before we changed our primary dates, and we did it anyway.

Look at the deliciousness of this situation! Those people who most favor the idea that “every vote should count” and that we have a duty to ensure that no voter is disenfranchised (including felons, illegals and dead people), are actually hollering for disenfranchisement! Obama’s folks think the results should stand and those delegates from Florida and Michigan should not count. He is winning without them and counting them would only hurt his position. Hillary-the only person on the ballot in Michigan-wants those votes, even though she agreed not to campaign in Michigan and (it could be argued) shouldn’t have even had her name on the ballot. We all know that a Clinton is not beyond quibbling over the definition of “is”, if it might benefit their political ambitions.

Watching Debra Wasserman Schultz and Debbie Dingell on Fox News Sunday this morning was so much fun! First of all, is there a congressperson any more dingbatty than Ms. Wasserman Schultz? I would put her against anybody for the least rational, most ditzy congressperson award. Thank you, people of Florida, for electing this entertaining goof! I don’t watch American Idol, so I appreciate a good laugh every now and then and watching her squirm over trying to sound dignified and reasonable in debating this situation was much better than watching the latest untalented hack get reamed by Simon! In contrast, Debbie Dingell looked reasoned and intelligent! People, if a popular vote can elect people such as Debra Wasserman Schultz, is that not in itself an argument against such a system?

Obama is going to be forced to argue against seating the delegates from Michigan and Florida. He is going to argue FOR disenfranchisement! Should be fun! Hillary is going to be forced to argue that blacks and young white college students in those two states should not have a place at the table of national politics. That should be fun! What will be the compromise in this decision? What Solomon-like carving can make both sides “happy”? Is a “win-win” even possible? I would argue that it isn’t, because people are under the impression that the mechanism of the vote is the same as on American Idol. The most votes wins. I’m sure most people think that is not only morally right but also technically and legally correct. Well, it ain’t.

Here’s a novel idea and one that you WILL NOT hear anyone arguing for; not in this age of “every vote must count”, anyway: Why don’t the Democrats allow the two state legislatures to elect their electoral college electors? That’s the way it was originally meant to be, anyway. It would be a return to original intent. It would allow the people’s elected representatives to choose the electors who will vote for their President and Vice President. Article II, Section I: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.” What could be more fair and true to the concepts set down in our Constitution?
Oh, wait a minute. We’re talking about the Democrats, here…
Never mind.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Original Intent, Uncategorized | No Comments »