Intellectual Bankruptcy of too many conservatives.
So I noticed on Facebook that the Philadelphia Daily New columnist Will Bunch had written an article about Henry Paulson taking a trip to the Reagan library to give a speech even though he'd turned down all other requests for speeches owing to the complete financial meltdown in our system. Well some guy wrote in to basically high-five Bunch but then this Canadian began evoking 1984, the Orwell novel not the Reagan landslide to attack the two men. As the conversation persisted the Canadian began insulting the commentator, not Bunch, the commentator on Bunch's article.
I began to think about how quickly conservatives turn to personal attacks (which isn't to say liberals don't but conservatives are definitely the quickdraws in this America). This guy said Reagan's legacy was easy to explain but he didn't have time, but he did have time to write up insults to the positive commentator. I assume when the financial world is collapsing around you, when your much cherished ideologies go up in smoke there is nothing left but insults. What is funny is that this Reagan-lover is Canadian but clearly not so much a Reagan-lover that he would live in the USA enduringly shaped by the Reagan administration. I guess he might love the idea of Reagan ideology where everyone is on their own and stepping on everyone else they can for their piece of the ever-shrinking pie but when push came to shove he prefers his Canadian government health insurance, his clean Vancouver air and his electorally-responsive Canadian parliamentary system. It's easy to want "economic freedom" when all your needs are satisfied by a responsible government I guess.
Sadly I live in the United States and our government has been terribly irresponsible and so I am busy worrying about making sure the basic needs of my fellow citizens are met before I begin criticizing the ideas of the people actually living in the country where the actual bad policies of the Reagan years are wreaking havoc.
I sometimes wish I could live in Canada knowing my basic needs are always accounted for so that I could rage against the machine that succors me and provides me health care, all the while luxuriously wishing for the system which Reagan wanted in which the machine would not succor me nor minister to my health.
Conservatives have become such petulant children. It is especially funny coming from a Canadian though. I mean conservatives in America have to live with their decisions at least, conservative Canadians get to scream and yell about America's liberalism (which had been a small movement recently) while living in a social democracy and not having to worry if they will have health insurance or unemployment insurance if their economy goes down the tank.
I have seen several McCain supporters mention how they would love to move to Canada now that Obama won. This is a clear indication that they don't understand the reasons for liberals speaking about doing so during the Bush years, nor do they understand what Canada is like (which shouldn't surprise us since many- though clearly not all- conservatives have little clue about what things are like outside our borders). American liberals wanted to go to Canada not because they wanted out of America but because they wanted to go to a country that looked like and represented what they believed. These conservative and McCain lovers should ALL go to Canada for a few year because when they came home they'd probably be much stronger supporter of Obama's policies, since Obama would be right-of-center in Canada, and since they'd get to appreciate the things that Canada does that work for Canadians, which we don't do in the United States for US citizens.
What Obama Won't Do....
We have heard high hopes for President-Elect Obama along with the irrational fears of McCain and Bush supporters who were roused to a frenzy by a dishonest and dishonorably campaign. Obama is not a socialist, or if he is then socialism has surely become quite conservative over the years. However, between the hysterical fears of racists, Christianists, and those who haven't taken any courses on political economy and those optimistic people who believe Obama can remake the world anew I offer what I hope is a sobering yet nonetheless optimistic assessment of the Obama presidency.
So with that in mind I will share a list of things which Obama WON'T do, but in NOT doing them will be well on his way to a successful presidency.
Barack Obama will NOT secretly order the kidnapping and torture of people who might maybe know something about people who might maybe think about maybe hurting American soldiers deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Barack Obama will NOT disregard the marchers in the street when they demand he NOT go to war.
Barack Obama will NOT start wars for the photo opportunities it will provide for his re-election campaign.
Barack Obama will NOT violate the contracts of US soldiers who thought they were defending America, but were actually just defending Union Carbide, ExxonMobil and other "energy" companies, by redeploying them indefinitely until their nerves, marriages, health and lives are destroyed.
Barack Obama will NOT disregard the rulings of the Supreme Court, and the legislation of Congress to violate the Constitutional rights of US citizens, by listening to their phone calls and reading their mail.
Barack Obama will NOT devote most of his executive efforts to crafting 'signing statements' by which he would announce his intention to disregard his Constitutional obligations by failing to enforce or abide by legislation passed by Congress and signed on his own desk.
Barack Obama will NOT fill his government with cronies picked more for their loyalty than their confidence.
Barack Obama will NOT commend someone for doing a "heckuva job" while bloated corpses float around the streets of New Orleans and New Orleaneans rot in the Superdome.
Barack Obama will NOT fund raise in Arizona while New Orleans drowns.
Barack Obama will NOT clear brush while California burns.
Barack Obama will NOT play golf after just announcing he'd given it up to "support the troops."
Barack Obama will NOT blame the CIA when he ignores the intelligence information they diligently provided to him.
Barack Obama will NOT act out his adolescent father resentments by subsuming all of his policy decisions under an umbrella goal of doing "more" than daddy did. (Iraq, Re-election, Tax Cuts no matter how disastrous to long term economic health, etc.)
Barack Obama will NOT disregard the needs of America's youth for a sound future (We won't let him)
Barack Obama will NOT ignore the opinions of our friends and allies througout the world who often see and understand things in more profound ways than we can or he can.
Barack Obama will NOT draw stupid lines in the sand between "new Europe" and "old Europe" based upon who toadies to us most effectively.
Barack Obama's VP will NOT shoot his friend while hunting.
Barack Obama's VP will NOT stay hidden in an undisclosed location- even though with the way Biden runs his mouth Obama might prefer him to stay there.
Barack Obama will NOT HIDE his press conferences from the public by scheduling them at 10AM on weekdays when no one is watching.
Barack Obama will NOT bury bad news and bad policy on Friday afternoon so it won't make the "news cycle."
Barack Obama will NOT spend 2-3 months of every year on 'vacation' at his 'ranch' while the nation's problems compound.
If Barack Obama fails to enact an ambitious agenda, many might consider it a failure or a wasted opportunity, but we must remember that by NOT doing many things which his predecessor did he will leave this country a better and stronger place. The failures of president Bush were not always the sins of neglect, but often the sins of appalling actions. Obama has to simply NOT do many things and we will have a better, stronger country. So please let us not expect Obama to achieve everything we want, though we can expect him to try. However we can demand that he NOT repeat the appallingly un-American actions of President Bush and his administration and by doing so get this country on a more humane and honest track.
Labels: Obama WON'T future goals
Republicans and the Economy.
I am tired of hearing how it was difficult for Republicans to win because of the difficult economic circumstances. This supposes that economics simply exists on its own. Republicans, and I just got an email from Mike Duncan, need to open their minds and their eyes and see what is in front of them. They didn't lose because the economy magically tanked. They lost because their policies and ideology helped to wreck our economy. Their desire for war and tax cuts bankrupted our government, while their desire for vengeance on 9 year old Afghani boys in the wrong place at the wrong time bankrupted our moral authority.
It was not a "difficult environment." Republicans lost because the American people finally opened up their eyes to what people like me have been saying since the Clinton Administration, which is that their ideas, ideologies and policies have directly contributed to the decline of this nation. It is time for the Republicans to look at what their ideas have reaped and begin to re-evaluate what those beliefs are. Our nation slid on their watch because of what they did. To be sure, they had a lot of help from the American people but that is because we followed their leadership; they led us into war, wasteful spending, corruption and a whole host of other ills. It is not a tough environment, it is just desserts.
The question of course now becomes whether the Republicans and Democrats who are now running our government can figure out new solutions and new ideas which can right the ship of state, restore our standing (both financial and moral) in the world and make Americans stop fearing and loathing each other. The Republicans should be chastened by the abysmal failure of their ideology, but as we know Democrats certainly did not fight against this ideology and Bill Clinton even embraced much of it, so thus what is good for the Republicans should also be good for the Democrats. We need to reconsider our fundamental understandings of economics, education and political relations.
And one last thing. All of you who think Obama is a socialist or that socialism never worked both know nothing about what socialism actually is and further equate socialism, which functionally exists in Denmark, Sweden, France and many other countries, with Communist tyranny which we saw consuming lives in the 20th century. First, learn about economics and political economic theory and then learn about the governments of countries in the world which actually exist. Otherwise you just look stupid spouting your fear-mongering about socialism.
Labels: Republicans defeat economics Obama socialism education fundamentals elections
McCain's Concession Speech.
John McCain is currently giving his concession speech and I have to say it is actually a remarkable one- informed by history, gracious in defeat and respectful of his opponent. If only this McCain has been the McCain on the campaign trail he might have had a better chance. He seems to remember who he was in 2000, the guy who we thought would balance out John Kerry very effectively in 2004. Of course, as we all know, our political system encourages viciousness, innuendo, racism in the no-holds barred attempt to defeat the one other political party. I am not sure if there could ever be a fair and honorable campaign in the United States with so much at stake in our distorted system, but McCain's surely was not one of them and in fact the desperate viciousness of his surrogates set new lows.
However, watching this concession speech I can't help but begin to feel sympathy for him, the same sympathy I felt watching him in South Carolina in 2000. (As I hear his supporters boo and catcall him and such I remember the problems that still exist with these horrid people and the challenges which we will still face to enlighten and educate Americans beyond their racism and prejudices. Perhaps we can also teach them what socialism actually is and why Obama is quite distant from actual socialism.)
So I now remember who John McCain once was, but I also am reminded of who his followers are. It is a mixed bag, but now our hopes are for Obama to be what he has the potential to be, a transformational president.
Labels: McCain concession speech
Military Service.....
We often hear about how heroic soldiers are those who fight in defense of the nation, and all that other pablum which suppresses free discussion and forces the trite statement of all politicians, "I support the troops." There is a certain truth to soldiers as those people who heroically defend their homes, but as we know well, the idea of a standing, professional army was hotly debated in the early years of the United States for good reasons. The civilian militiamen at Lexington and Concord had proven the effectiveness of common people soldiers fighting in defense of their homes, while through the professional British Army, quartered amidst the citizenry of Boston, we learned how soldiers' simple purpose is to kill and to maintain order through the threat to kill. Their job is one of destruction of life and property. Even those military engineers who build, often just build to better deliver the destruction. It is not just that the soldiers kill and destroy, though that is their primary purpose, but because while waiting, while being "on-guard" as it were, for the call to kill and destroy (yes even in defense) they contribute nothing to society. Throughout the history of humankind professional armies have plundered and taken from those civilians around them to maintain themselves. The purposes of quartering troops among the people, as the British did in Boston in the 1770s and as was forbidden by our Bill of Rights, were not just for maintaining order but to make it that the civilians would feed the soldiers and attend to their needs so that the government did not have to worry about it. This was a win-win for the British government since keeping an army in the field is a problem. As we know from the historical accounts and many contemporary accounts, quartered soldiers extract, money, food and virginity from those occupied civilians, terrorizing and living a parasitic existence through the threat of force.
I say this all because the network of amendments to the US Constitution dealing with firearms and quartering are intimately related to each other and the circumstances of the 18th century. We have moved away from this ideal of citizen-soldiers, though we have a National Guard which in many ways embodies this, however the $600 billion a year we spend to maintain our standing army suggests that the founders had more wisdom than they themselves knew. (Of course our active duty army consumes another $200 billion or more to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, so a total of about $800 billion a year and likely more) We have moved away from their ideal and this has cost us treasure and blood in ridiculous amounts. Further it has encouraged vainglory in our leaders so much that they invade countries to "advance our interests" to thereby spread the loss of blood and life to others at no risk to themselves all the while declaring their patriotism and love of country.
It should not surprise us that Iraqis and Afghanis are unhappy with our presence. It is not just the invasion which obviously would upset them, but the reality that they have to live in a way which our Founding Fathers found intolerable, with soldiers quartered in their midst, and destruction in their cities and towns. What has made their lives easier is that the American citizens are picking up the bills to the tunes of billions per month, however, easy is relative when your family member is accidentally shot to death at a checkpoint, or when your door is kicked in in the middle of the night because your suspected of doing something you did't do.
So why this discourse? Well simply it is because war is the problem itself. Our soldiers (and often most soldiers) are often good people who behave honorably, but the condition of war leads them to do things which are anti-humanitarian, and worse, changes some into monsters. However, with a standing professional army and billions of dollars of annual expenditures which need justification, our leaders can too easily pull the trigger on foreign adventures and invasions which just create war and destruction and which do not actually benefit any person except a thin slice of war profiteers. Not only is this destruction an impediment to progress and humanity, but tying down soldiers in the act of destroying means they are not involved in production and peace, which means it is a double loss. They are away from their families and jobs; their sole purpose is to destroy and then rebuild what they have destroyed.
The United States will not abolish firearm ownership and perhaps they should not since the firearm issue was not one of crime but defense. The citizen-soldiers were intended to keep their muskets to serve in the militia, a militia which we don't have any longer. A drastic reduction in our standing army to a level like existed before the Civil War would be in our best interest as a nation and a society. Citizen-Soldiers would stand up in the unlikely event of an invasion and their skill with the freely available arms would make them as effective against an invading force as those rag-tag Iraqi militia rebels are defending their homes against us. The best soldier is the one defending his home. All else just exemplify the professional armies of Europe's past, ravenous beasts which consume the production and livelihoods of all those around them while building nothing of value. They are as much the drain on our economic progress by existing as unproductive soldiers as by the destruction they leave in their midst in executing their duties.
Labels: soldiers professional army FoundingFathers Iraq militia Constitution USA
