Posts Tagged ‘economy’

On a personal level admitting a mistake can be difficult, especially when you once passionately believed in your decision. This thorny task becomes virtually impossible when individuals are poised to pounce and proclaim “I told you so!” It’s a point of pride for all involved and pride, we all know, is a deadly and destructive sin.

I wish to address my conservative minded friends and challenge you to consider your ways. Do arrogance and condescension win points with you? Are you persuaded to a new opinion by someone who generally makes it known they consider you an idiot? Name calling, personal attack and I told you so serve only to inflate some egos while bruising others.

The chief point I want to make is precisely this: each person is sovereign over their will. Almighty God is the only Being capable of overcoming individual will and he won’t so what makes us think we can? Are conservative values true and good? Absolutely! Do conservative principles reflect the truth about human nature and provide a system whereby freedom serves mankind universally and individually? The answer, proven by the American experiment, is a resounding YES! But no amount of brow-beating will (or should for that matter) change anyone’s mind.

The challenge and opportunity for conservatives is to demonstrate the objective truth inherent in our principles of personal freedom and personal responsibility. But we must not stoop to arrogance and condescension. We must win a hearing and be invited to share and discuss important ideas. I recommend asking gentle questions that invite people to consider issues at a deeper level. When someone willingly considers key ideas and principles you are on the verge of winning the battle with out firing a shot.

Passion plays a vital role in both Liberalism and Conservatism. The enthusiasm of the Conservative is that of the grateful soul, thankful for the manifold opportunities true freedom brings. Yet he is not blind to the challenges and pitfalls which arise from human nature. Unfortunately, the passion must often be exhibited in a defensive posture against those determined to take away freedom.

The zeal of the so called Liberal is at heart subjective. He wishes to have the cake and eat it too, as it were. Consider the slogans Liberals proffer: “Hope” and “Change” and “Fair” or especially “Believe.” There is no lack of fervor in these words but no amount of passion changes their subjective nature. Ask for specifics such as “hope in what?” or “change to what?” or “fair to whom?” and especially “believe in what/who?” If these cannot be answered specifically then we must wonder just how these slogans reference reality. To merely pose questions such as these is portrayed as cruel and heartless by Liberals and Progressives. Yet the questions remain and unanswered.

Millions of American citizens are coming to realize the gravity of their decision to vote for Barack Hussein Obama. The excitement of the campaign is giving way to a creeping uneasiness as rhetoric becomes reality and slogans are sculpted into actual policy. Taxes are rising, jobs are scarce, home prices are depressed and this administration is inflating the currency as fast as the printing machines will drink the ink! Right now we are seeing first hand, not stylistic oratory, but the stiff actuality of Democratic Party policy. People who voted for the current president are nervous.

Let’s make it easy for them to come around!

Remember that that which is false cannot be demonstrated and the truth about modern Liberalism is that it is incompatible with personal freedom. Ask the right questions in a gentle way and encourage genuine discussion. Don’t let pride manifest as arrogant condescension. Be approachable and inviting and people will make up their own minds either factually and objectively or emotionally and subjectively.

Conservatives offer a vision that’s not about greed and class envy, it’s all about freedom and responsibility. Our national character is not about have verses have not or victor verses victim. It is about normal, everyday citizens channeling naturally selfish inclinations into productively meeting the needs of their fellows. That is free market capitalism and it works so well precisely because it recognizes this embarrassing fact about human self interest. But prideful arrogance is an automatic turn-off, so avoid it! Besides, it’s not like we invented Truth, we just take part in it.

Thanks for reading.

“Everybody says this is going to create a lot of jobs. We feel strongly that it’s going to be in the three to four million range.”

Those were Christina Romer’s (Obama’s top economic advisor) words nine months ago in a February press conference, touting the $789 billion White House stimulus package. So where do we stand now? According to the Labor Department’s number this morning, that “the three to four million range” is actually how many jobs eliminated.

But these numbers are based strictly on unemployment claims, and are a little misleading. There millions of Americans who’s unemployment compensation has, and millions more who have settled for a part-time job.  So, in reality, the number of jobs eliminated is more like 14.5 million jobs gone or 17.5 percent.

How’s the $789 million working for you?

The rule of law is the very fabric of a free and civil society. Lev Rex is Latin for “law is king” and represents a fundamental principle upon which the American experiment rests. Central to our consideration is the stability conferred to the general public by the rule of law. For it is the absence of arbitrary law that enables individuals to make rational decisions regarding their futures and fortunes. Lex Rex is the sure foundation upon which a free and civil society can be and has been built.

But reverse the order, make “king is law” the rule and what results is the personification of arbitrariness!  If the ruler makes, rather than follows and enforces the law, then freedom and civility are destroyed. The random, unsure nature of this type system provides no certain principles upon which to base rational decisions. This presents businesses with incalculable risks, discourages investment and job creation. (Not to mention the deleterious effects of the rulers now being the focus of business rather than the customer.) Clearly, the common man benefits under the rule of law.

Now, for the really uncomfortable part.

President Barack Hussein Obama has appointed dozens of so called “czars” accountable only to himself. Neither the voters nor their elected representatives have had any voice in their selection, confirmation or, indeed, in whether the positions even ought to exist! This is the act of a Sovereign, a King and not a president. A president’s job is to act as chief protector of the citizen’s freedom by enforcing the particulars laid down in the constitution of the U.S.A.

F. A Hayek in his classic “The Road To Serfdom” describes how a free democratic people become enslaved. First a “crises” is seized upon to make political capitol. Then come the inevitable debates resulting in political stalemate. Finally a leader emerges promising to “change” the state of affairs if given enough power (temporarily, of course.) Authority is gradually concentrated until all opposition is squelched. The fact that this sounds like today’s headlines should be cause for alarm and action!

What can possibly result from appointing czars but an administration and governance reflective wholly of the president’s personal will? Where are the representatives of the people? The congress is being marginalized and the will of the citizen is becoming less and less relevant.

There is no easy or politically correct way to state it so I’ll just be blunt. Our free and civil society cannot survive the consolidation of power now taking place under Barack Hussein Obama. This situation represents nothing short of Rex Lex. The king is law. Only America doesn’t have a king…or do we?

Michael Moore wants us all to go to heaven; at least I think that’s what he meant on Hannity last night. Hannity, interviewing Moore about his new movie, Capitalism: A Love Story (I haven’t seen it and don’t plan to), was introducing Moore, when he adamantly interjected that he was a Christian. So Michael, welcome to the family.

Moments later, while Hannity was trying to establish Moore’s wealth, and that he wouldn’t have been able to amass his millions without capitalism, Moore made these defining statements,

“I believe what Jesus said…Jesus made it very clear, ‘the rich man is going to have a very difficult time getting into heaven…we’re going to be judged on how we treat the least among us.”

See, he wants us all to go heaven.

Those in the religious left have a litany of issues that are in direct contrast to those on the right; but wealth distribution seems to be the issue of the day. With health care and the economic crisis now at the forefront, it is the social responsibility of the government to take from the rich, and like Robin Hood, give to the poor, because it’s ordained by God or that’s what Jesus would want.

But is it? Jesus taught us to sacrifice; where is the sacrifice in taking care of the needy through higher taxes? Where is the righteousness in the government taking my money and giving it to the “least among us?”

Well, Mike, thanks but I too believe what Jesus says, and that is getting to heaven is an individual thing. We will be judged on what we do individually, not collectively.

In several posts, I have referred to Obama as Premier Obama for his fondness of Europe and Europe’s fondness of him, and its socialist connotation. But, I have to admit, as Steve McCann points out, that’s not quite fair.

In the United Kingdom, the Queen is the head of state, the Prime Minster is the head of government; the same goes for Denmark, Spain, and a couple others. In Russia, the President is the head of state, and the Prime Minster is the head of government (reporting to the President); France, Italy, and a few others have a similar setup. Even Canada has a separation between the Prime Minister and the Governor General. The US is the only major democratic nation where the head of state and the head of government are one in the same – well, at least they are supposed to be. Obama has only accepted half of the constitutional roles – the head of state. Not performing as head of government, he has handed over health care to Nancy Pelosi; the economic crisis to Tim Geithner; and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to, well, the Taliban and Al qaeda.

Obama has accepted his role as head of State, however, with great passion and expertise – after all, the 2012 Olympics will be in Chicago, right? Yes, his majesty King Barrack I has done a tremendous job in wooing the world, speaking to the masses, appearing on late night talk shows, stumping for climate change, and apologizing for US indiscretion.

Welcome to the Kingdom of America – a monarchy, and not a constitutional one.

High five to Steve McCann.