PEPPY NOONAN.
There is one journalist that I truly trust. That writer thinker is Peggy Noonan. She wrote speeches for Ronald Reagan. She has written inspirationally magic articles ever since. I have sought those articles out especially in those times when I needed inspiration.
I just read then reread her new article.
-----link-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
---------------
Her Article is in the Wall Street Journal. I was nearly in tears as I felt her heart break as she told the truth as she saw it about the state of the Republican party. She has that problem of telling the truth. On the second reading of her article I was again near tears as I realized how I had been spinning the news so it looked better than it really was. I was hurt by the truthfulness Peggy forced me into by reading her work and believing in her honesty. I had to face my honesty or lack of it.
I have been posting about how a lot of the things she sees as sure signs of our party’s failure hadn’t really been that bad and “look at the Dems and what they do”, I’d say with a cynical snark.
She is saying I think that the Democrats had a cat fight and now it’s almost over and they are still what they always were -- Democrats. Republicans have done pretty much nothing except get sucked into complacency, succumbed by success , sitting there twiddling their thumbs while Rome burns, except of course, she said it better. Why do I still blog this then? Simply to make her feel better. Will she read my blog. NO. I guess it is to simply make me feel better.
-----quote-----
They are also – Hill leaders, lobbyists, party speakers – successful, well-connected, busy and rich. They never guessed, back in '86, how government would pay off! They didn't know they'd stay! They came to make a difference and wound up with their butts in the butter. But affluence detaches, and in time skews thinking. It gives you the illusion you're safe, and that everyone else is. A party can lose its gut this way.
----------------
She’s a writer, I’m a blogger. Perhaps if I can bear my soul through such heart breaking times as she can in search of the truth, then perhaps I too will find truth in places undreamt of as she can. Always in the past as I have read her articles I drew strength from her fearless reportage of the current state of affairs. I knew that she would tie the mess up and present a solution that would inspire me. Well the hurt came when I realized that she has quit being hopeful for this party. Notice the small p in party. I feel her hopes that the current leadership would change, return, realize they went astray and would come scurrying back have finally reached the end. For giving up that ghost I shed a tear with her.
Peggy Noonan used a surrogate, Mr. Reed to express the fallacies I have held and still do hold to a point. He expressed those ideas falsely held being that the Party was on the rebound. We were in the inevitable valley of a cycle. We had gone through Goldwater, then Nixon and Vietnam and Watergate and rose back to power. We can do it again. Then she let out her own heart felt misgivings about why didn’t we do anything when we had a chance to stand up for our principles when it mattered, when they were slipping away. The heartbreak I felt was that she knew why, I knew why, and all that was left to do was to ask the question. The time had past.
Today I went to the 2nd district Republican Roundup, my first. I truly wish I had read her article before I went. Congressman Pete Hoekstra was there and he said that perhaps the most important vote he made was to vote against “No Child Left Behind” Pete Hoekstra was one of the few of the original “Revolutionaries” left, one of the few who did stand up for principle. He though saddened to have to vote against his president, will sleep better tonight than I. During that meeting I mentioned Peggy Noonan’s name in relation to a style I would love to emulate and I saw a sharp piercing look shoot my way from Mr. Hoekstra. I wondered at the time what that was and I believe now he was hoping I would talk about her article. Share her feeling with the group. Perhaps he had read her article, perhaps I’m just thinking too much into that look, but something was there, perhaps just a shared admiration for her work.
Peggy Noonan when talking about the leadership under Bush, echoed the feelings I had and tried feebly to express at the roundup today about our local efforts.
-----quote-----
Mr. Bush has squandered the hard-built paternity of 40 years. But so has the party, and so have its leaders. If they had pushed away for serious reasons, they could have separated the party's fortunes from the president's. This would have left a painfully broken party, but they wouldn't be left with a ruined "brand," as they all say, speaking the language of marketing. And they speak that language because they are marketers, not thinkers. Not serious about policy. Not serious about ideas. And not serious about leadership, only followership.
---------------
I realize the leaders are what the followers allow them to be. In that regard we have let down the leadership, But I went to the Roundup looking for leadership, and they talked about the leadership of “followership” I was looking for serious leadership from thinkers about policy that I could take back to the people in my precinct to try and regain their trust in the Republican party, In Me. This as in all politics is a personal thing . Mr. Pete Hoekstra was the one shining star I saw I’m afraid for only a couple of minutes as the time was spent mainly on marketing the Brand.
My heart and prayers go out to Peggy Noonan. Also my thanks for the work she does.
She’ll be back. I feel better after my rant, she will too I hope. This new republican “non brand” needs some spiritual leaders, I know I do anyway. We’ve got a rebuilding job to do. It starts here, we can start it now. Us who are the new ones need to let Peggy and the others know that we can watch her back, she knows I’m sure Pete is there ,--- that there is spirit out there, that there is gut.
Regards, Liver Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
HOW NEUTRAL IS NET NEUTRALITY ????
NET NEUTRALITY
YEA OR NAY
This was a really tough choice for me. The title alone seemed above reproach. Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008.
Who could argue against that? I see you already guessed it. Lol. I thought it was a bit too good to be true so I started to investigate.
First a LINK to the bill HR 5353
------link-----
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas---------------
Sorry the link above won't work, If you want to see the bill go to my right side bar about 3/4 ths down under "Research Links" click on US House Tracking It'll take you to the Thomas site. In the Search box type hr 5353 then under that box check bill number then click search it should take you to the bill. I don't know why the link won't work. If someone knows a way around that problem please let me know. thanks.
Next a link to a pretty partisan article. Does frame one side well. IMO
-----link-----
http://www.savetheinternet.com/
---------------
Next an article from a group I usually am in favor of CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste).
-----link-----
http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=11408
---------------
Well I’ve decided for now to side against HR 5353 in favor of my principle that say less regulation is better. Also the old cliché comes to mind. “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it”
What really bothers me comes from the last series of articles I wrote titled “Shell Games - A 3 Part series” in which I talked about the harmful effects of bureaucracies. See my blog archive. In those artilces I wrote about how they all are started for the very best of reasons. This initial (enabling) legislation usually only starts with setting up the infrastructure to (study) the problem. Costs and regulation is hardly mentioned because the study is minimal. The real regulations and costs come later, out of the recommendation of the study group. Then over the years the group (read bureaucracy) grows. I’m afraid the language of this bill fits my template like a glove. From the wonderful title, to the lack of mention of any possible regulations, I really start to worry that this may enable exactly what it claims to be protecting us from, for all the right reasons. I’m afraid it would put this wonderfully free media into the hands of the politically correct. Much like the threat of the “fairness doctrine” on the radio waves.
At least for now I’m siding with CAGW. When it comes to giving the government enough rope I’m usually against it (Think about it) as we are the ones they hang with it.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
YEA OR NAY
This was a really tough choice for me. The title alone seemed above reproach. Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008.
Who could argue against that? I see you already guessed it. Lol. I thought it was a bit too good to be true so I started to investigate.
First a LINK to the bill HR 5353
------link-----
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas---------------
Sorry the link above won't work, If you want to see the bill go to my right side bar about 3/4 ths down under "Research Links" click on US House Tracking It'll take you to the Thomas site. In the Search box type hr 5353 then under that box check bill number then click search it should take you to the bill. I don't know why the link won't work. If someone knows a way around that problem please let me know. thanks.
Next a link to a pretty partisan article. Does frame one side well. IMO
-----link-----
http://www.savetheinternet.com/
---------------
Next an article from a group I usually am in favor of CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste).
-----link-----
http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=11408
---------------
Well I’ve decided for now to side against HR 5353 in favor of my principle that say less regulation is better. Also the old cliché comes to mind. “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it”
What really bothers me comes from the last series of articles I wrote titled “Shell Games - A 3 Part series” in which I talked about the harmful effects of bureaucracies. See my blog archive. In those artilces I wrote about how they all are started for the very best of reasons. This initial (enabling) legislation usually only starts with setting up the infrastructure to (study) the problem. Costs and regulation is hardly mentioned because the study is minimal. The real regulations and costs come later, out of the recommendation of the study group. Then over the years the group (read bureaucracy) grows. I’m afraid the language of this bill fits my template like a glove. From the wonderful title, to the lack of mention of any possible regulations, I really start to worry that this may enable exactly what it claims to be protecting us from, for all the right reasons. I’m afraid it would put this wonderfully free media into the hands of the politically correct. Much like the threat of the “fairness doctrine” on the radio waves.
At least for now I’m siding with CAGW. When it comes to giving the government enough rope I’m usually against it (Think about it) as we are the ones they hang with it.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Friday, May 16, 2008
WARNINGS
Great site where I found this article. The Brad Blog. Nice Blog, nice comment section. Open and Free.
-----link-----
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5990--------------
The article is by Richard Viguerie who states that the entire leadership of the Republican party should resign. I agree with his logic. The same logic of my previous post. Republicans have failed the Conservatives and betrayed the trust put in them by those who elected them. They have broken their allegiance to the “common sense” principles that got them elected. The government was broke then and it is still broke. Take note that those same principles got the Democrat Childers recently elected in Mississippi. See my previous post and the video in it that I lifted from Constitutionally Right.
The party is broke and we can’t expect the leadership to fix it. Perhaps they can. I doubt it. Regardless for Republicans to regain the trust of the American people a lot has to happen. I hope it does. I hope we have more vision than just waiting through the next four to eight years under Democratic rule so we have something negative to run against. Kind of like we did against Clinton, like the Dems are doing, running against Bush. We need to run on issues from the “bottom up” We need to listen at the precinct level to what the problems are then come up with Conservative solutions that work. Not more of those condescending pleas for money thinly disguised as surveys or polls. How stupid does the leadership think we are. Kind of like when a candidate calls himself Dick instead of Richard and takes off his suit coat and rolls up his sleeves on his $100 shirt to “get down” with the people?? Give me a break. When I go to work I change clothes.
We have a golden opportunity here to be the real party of change. We are up against it. The gun is aimed our way. Let’s take that as inspiration to make true change. Let’s live up to our promise of making government work, not for government but for us the people. We need real alternative solutions.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS I see Pete Hoekstra co-sponsored an Energy Bill In the house called. The Main Street U.S.A. Energy Security Act (H.R. 6001). We’ve got to keep putting out alternatives that present “common sense” ideas. We have to support those who do. Link to the article about that.
-----link-----
http://hoekstra.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=91019
--------------
Thanks
-----link-----
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5990--------------
The article is by Richard Viguerie who states that the entire leadership of the Republican party should resign. I agree with his logic. The same logic of my previous post. Republicans have failed the Conservatives and betrayed the trust put in them by those who elected them. They have broken their allegiance to the “common sense” principles that got them elected. The government was broke then and it is still broke. Take note that those same principles got the Democrat Childers recently elected in Mississippi. See my previous post and the video in it that I lifted from Constitutionally Right.
The party is broke and we can’t expect the leadership to fix it. Perhaps they can. I doubt it. Regardless for Republicans to regain the trust of the American people a lot has to happen. I hope it does. I hope we have more vision than just waiting through the next four to eight years under Democratic rule so we have something negative to run against. Kind of like we did against Clinton, like the Dems are doing, running against Bush. We need to run on issues from the “bottom up” We need to listen at the precinct level to what the problems are then come up with Conservative solutions that work. Not more of those condescending pleas for money thinly disguised as surveys or polls. How stupid does the leadership think we are. Kind of like when a candidate calls himself Dick instead of Richard and takes off his suit coat and rolls up his sleeves on his $100 shirt to “get down” with the people?? Give me a break. When I go to work I change clothes.
We have a golden opportunity here to be the real party of change. We are up against it. The gun is aimed our way. Let’s take that as inspiration to make true change. Let’s live up to our promise of making government work, not for government but for us the people. We need real alternative solutions.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS I see Pete Hoekstra co-sponsored an Energy Bill In the house called. The Main Street U.S.A. Energy Security Act (H.R. 6001). We’ve got to keep putting out alternatives that present “common sense” ideas. We have to support those who do. Link to the article about that.
-----link-----
http://hoekstra.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=91019
--------------
Thanks
Thursday, May 15, 2008
NEVER FORGET - LOOK AT THE FACTS
I was disappointed by the news that we lost the Mississippi seat, so I started checking into it and I found this link. This website did a wonderful job of ferreting out some facts. Well worth the look see.
-----link-----
http://constitutionallyright.com/2008/05/14/conservatives-should-still-have-hope-for-november/---------------
Notice in the article how it was pointed out the Democrat who won was more conservative than McCain. Pro guns Pro life. Anti-imigration. Charles Signorile at Constitutionally Right made some astute observations. I loved the way he tied in Ed Morrissey’s remarks. I took the liberty to steal their link to Ed Morrissey’s article.
-----link-----
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/14/the-lesson-for-republicans-they-didnt-learn-the-lesson-of-2006/--------------
The whole crux is that Republicans will do bad because the people who voted them in did so for their conservative ideas about lower taxes, cutting earmarks (government waste) and smaller government. We did none of those things. I especially liked the part about the leadership of the Republican Party not following through on their promises to the people. A quote from the Morrissey article.
-----quote-----
. They lost those mid-term elections not because voters stopped supporting conservative principles, but because the House GOP stopped supporting conservative principles.
----------------
I feel that I had made that point in my previous post. Seems like I’m not the only one who’s figured it out. The question remains whether we as a party can do enough to restore some trust with the electorate between now and the election. I see that Huckabee is rumored to be top of the list for VP with John McCain. This would help us a lot. In My opinion.
We need to get to work on the local and state level to put together a solid platform to run on that stresses common sense conservative principles. We need candidates that are not afraid to talk to the issues. Candidates that will listen to “we the people” Candidates willing to get into the real world and offer real world solutions to fix a broken government.
Again I thank Constitutionally Right for making my day.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link-----
http://constitutionallyright.com/2008/05/14/conservatives-should-still-have-hope-for-november/---------------
Notice in the article how it was pointed out the Democrat who won was more conservative than McCain. Pro guns Pro life. Anti-imigration. Charles Signorile at Constitutionally Right made some astute observations. I loved the way he tied in Ed Morrissey’s remarks. I took the liberty to steal their link to Ed Morrissey’s article.
-----link-----
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/14/the-lesson-for-republicans-they-didnt-learn-the-lesson-of-2006/--------------
The whole crux is that Republicans will do bad because the people who voted them in did so for their conservative ideas about lower taxes, cutting earmarks (government waste) and smaller government. We did none of those things. I especially liked the part about the leadership of the Republican Party not following through on their promises to the people. A quote from the Morrissey article.
-----quote-----
. They lost those mid-term elections not because voters stopped supporting conservative principles, but because the House GOP stopped supporting conservative principles.
----------------
I feel that I had made that point in my previous post. Seems like I’m not the only one who’s figured it out. The question remains whether we as a party can do enough to restore some trust with the electorate between now and the election. I see that Huckabee is rumored to be top of the list for VP with John McCain. This would help us a lot. In My opinion.
We need to get to work on the local and state level to put together a solid platform to run on that stresses common sense conservative principles. We need candidates that are not afraid to talk to the issues. Candidates that will listen to “we the people” Candidates willing to get into the real world and offer real world solutions to fix a broken government.
Again I thank Constitutionally Right for making my day.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
"BUILD IT and THEY WILL COME"
Well so much for “one a days” I have way too much to say and so far not very many are listening so I’m going to just post whenever the mood strikes. I’m going under the idea of “Build It and They Will Come”. If what I say is good then eventually people will listen. I base my politics on the same line. As long as I believe my concepts then even if people don’t come, at least I’ve had a chance to practice writing and letting off steam. Lol
Here is an article about the upcoming election and the GOP fears.
-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10366_Page2.html
--------------
Since I made the list of donors to the Republican Party back when I donated to George W. in his first election, I keep getting all the thinly disguised appeals for money. I’m not stupid I know money is vitally important in an election, Karen Buie mentioned when I asked that she spent around $2,000 just for yard signs. I can imagine what a national campaign would cost. But that’s not the point. In the literature I’m profusely thanked and referred to as generous, steadfast, loyal and a few other glowing attributes. I gave $25.00 to Bush twice in 8 years, that’s about $3.10 or so a year. The typical spiel is how with all that money they will help rid the world or at least the Congress of the Democrats.
The problem is that they never really say what they are going to do, other than vague references to some generic ideas. Almost “Miss America” answers. As long as they are asking such a trusted and loyal member of the club as myself for such generous contributions, they could at least let me know what they are actually doing. SPECIFICALLY. After I watched Keith Butler get kicked out of the US Senate race by Mr. Cole and Mrs. Dole in favor of their “better” party candidate, I sent a letter to Mr. Cole telling him my thoughts. I’m sure he never even saw, or if he did even cared what his faithful, loyal and generous contributor wrote. This “Big Party” is just like any other “Big” anything. The people get lost in the shuffle. I don’t know what “Big” company writes these condescending syrupy letters and fake polls, nor how “Big” they charge. But I know it pisses me off “Big” time. Lol.
I’ve blogged about some solutions I see as useful. I’ve posted about Newt’s American Solutions, also about David Cameron’s new Conservatism in England. Newt sees the handwriting and he sent the leaders a warning letter before this recent stuff has started to hit the fan. I hate to take the wind out of anybodies sails, but there are elitists in both parties. There is time to act if somehow we can do it fast at the higher level. Other wise we have to do what we can at the local level and start building, start getting rid of the dead wood.
I hate it when I see the party that is supposed to represent Individual Freedom through smaller and more efficient government become what they were hired to fight against: by us, “we the people”. I get it, I know the excuses, I’ve read the books. I hate what “we” are becoming . Republicans were hired to fix a broken government we didn’t. The Democratic plan is just as bad and probably worse if they can figure out what it is. But what in the hell does that have to do with us. If we run a campaign against the Dems then how are we different than they are when they run against a third term of Bush. We will be just as lame as they are.
Now we are facing the cost for being lazy and rolling over to the “Bigness” of the problem. I’m getting upset with the party, because they are putting me in a position where I’m complaining and blaming others. Well I’m starting to refuse that idea. If all we want to do is bitch and complain about the Dems and their policies then I think I’d rather find or start a 3rd party based on issues with specific legislation in mind. Both would lose but at least I would feel better about it. Before I do that I’m going to try to get into politics around here and start speaking my mind, because it’s a terrible thing to waste, I’m talking about wasting the party not my mind. Lol
I’m going to the 2nd District Roundup. I’m going to write out my thoughts and give them to people there. I’m also going to prepare a short speech if I get a chance I’ll give it. Bob Dylan is a favorite of mine and we’ve gone through a lot of the same changes together. I realize I’m a rookie in actual politics, but as Dylan once said “You don’t need a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” It’s painfully obvious. Also I’m a conservative with a free, active and a trained mind which can think for itself, Dylan also once said, “I gotta stop being influenced by fools”. Me too. Lol. It won’t take long to scope out the fools. My contributions will go up some in the money end and up greatly in the volunteer category. Only for the candidates that I like. “Bottom Up Politics” anyone? See my other web site. Get involved.
http://bottomuppolitics.blogspot.com
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Here is an article about the upcoming election and the GOP fears.
-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10366_Page2.html
--------------
Since I made the list of donors to the Republican Party back when I donated to George W. in his first election, I keep getting all the thinly disguised appeals for money. I’m not stupid I know money is vitally important in an election, Karen Buie mentioned when I asked that she spent around $2,000 just for yard signs. I can imagine what a national campaign would cost. But that’s not the point. In the literature I’m profusely thanked and referred to as generous, steadfast, loyal and a few other glowing attributes. I gave $25.00 to Bush twice in 8 years, that’s about $3.10 or so a year. The typical spiel is how with all that money they will help rid the world or at least the Congress of the Democrats.
The problem is that they never really say what they are going to do, other than vague references to some generic ideas. Almost “Miss America” answers. As long as they are asking such a trusted and loyal member of the club as myself for such generous contributions, they could at least let me know what they are actually doing. SPECIFICALLY. After I watched Keith Butler get kicked out of the US Senate race by Mr. Cole and Mrs. Dole in favor of their “better” party candidate, I sent a letter to Mr. Cole telling him my thoughts. I’m sure he never even saw, or if he did even cared what his faithful, loyal and generous contributor wrote. This “Big Party” is just like any other “Big” anything. The people get lost in the shuffle. I don’t know what “Big” company writes these condescending syrupy letters and fake polls, nor how “Big” they charge. But I know it pisses me off “Big” time. Lol.
I’ve blogged about some solutions I see as useful. I’ve posted about Newt’s American Solutions, also about David Cameron’s new Conservatism in England. Newt sees the handwriting and he sent the leaders a warning letter before this recent stuff has started to hit the fan. I hate to take the wind out of anybodies sails, but there are elitists in both parties. There is time to act if somehow we can do it fast at the higher level. Other wise we have to do what we can at the local level and start building, start getting rid of the dead wood.
I hate it when I see the party that is supposed to represent Individual Freedom through smaller and more efficient government become what they were hired to fight against: by us, “we the people”. I get it, I know the excuses, I’ve read the books. I hate what “we” are becoming . Republicans were hired to fix a broken government we didn’t. The Democratic plan is just as bad and probably worse if they can figure out what it is. But what in the hell does that have to do with us. If we run a campaign against the Dems then how are we different than they are when they run against a third term of Bush. We will be just as lame as they are.
Now we are facing the cost for being lazy and rolling over to the “Bigness” of the problem. I’m getting upset with the party, because they are putting me in a position where I’m complaining and blaming others. Well I’m starting to refuse that idea. If all we want to do is bitch and complain about the Dems and their policies then I think I’d rather find or start a 3rd party based on issues with specific legislation in mind. Both would lose but at least I would feel better about it. Before I do that I’m going to try to get into politics around here and start speaking my mind, because it’s a terrible thing to waste, I’m talking about wasting the party not my mind. Lol
I’m going to the 2nd District Roundup. I’m going to write out my thoughts and give them to people there. I’m also going to prepare a short speech if I get a chance I’ll give it. Bob Dylan is a favorite of mine and we’ve gone through a lot of the same changes together. I realize I’m a rookie in actual politics, but as Dylan once said “You don’t need a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” It’s painfully obvious. Also I’m a conservative with a free, active and a trained mind which can think for itself, Dylan also once said, “I gotta stop being influenced by fools”. Me too. Lol. It won’t take long to scope out the fools. My contributions will go up some in the money end and up greatly in the volunteer category. Only for the candidates that I like. “Bottom Up Politics” anyone? See my other web site. Get involved.
http://bottomuppolitics.blogspot.com
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
THE CAN DO SPIRIT
THE “CAN DO” SPIRIT
A tip of the hat to GordoM of Muskegonpundit for his blog about the same article I’m writing about here.
-----link-----
http://muskegonpundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/who-stole-american-spirit.html--------------
The link for the article.
-----link-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121072001228989941.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries---------------
Mr. Karabell wrote an excellent article in the Wall Street Journal, about how America and it’s people have lost their “American Spirit”. He uses example after example about the troubles we now face, while hurtful are by no means the worst troubles we have faced and with sure knowledge overcome in the past. Not even close. What is the reason he asks? He answers it by saying.
-----quote-----
“Something else is going on – namely a cultural rut of pessimism that is draining our collective energy, blinding us to possibilities, and eroding our position in the world.”
-----------------
What is this cultural rut of pessimism and where does it come from. Light bulb time. It is a simple thing as all great ideas are, It is a lack of personal freedom that is driving us into that pessimistic rut Mr. Karabell is talking about. It is that lack of the knowledge that we can do something about our own lives. An unsureness of our Freedom. We use that Freedom to maintain Freedom has been and is being attacked from all sides. By Big Government, Big Business, Big Unions which claim we need to let them be a steward over our freedom. Whenever we give up freedom to a larger body for the perceived common good, we lose control over our own life and give it to that larger body. To some point this is necessary to form and maintain a society. Remember that Freedom is the one great piece of currency the American public has had from the birth of the nation. All people have it. It’s those pesky unalienable rights. We had to spend some of that currency setting up a government, but we made sure that we could change that government if necessary because we knew the pitfalls of uncontrolled power. Over the centuries however we have gradually become penniless our currency nearly spent. We traded it at first for the necessary; (protection from threats domestic and foreign). Later on as the government grew and for it to keep growing we traded more of it for perceived threats. Now we simply give it away for what might be threats in the future. On the personal front we spent it first on necessities then on luxuries then on purely ego driven things.
The things we need to change to get the power back are many and deep, but we need to start. We need a new lens through which we look at things. We have to frame the question differently. Instead of what is in it for me? Which of my choices offers me more Freedom. Also we have to teach ourselves everyday to be more self-sufficient. Also we have to relearn the rewards of common courtesy. Education needs to teach self reliance, lessons from our history about Freedom, and most importantly children have to be taught to think talk and write on their own. Not what others want them to think, but how to think.
We need to control the legal system, make it clear and easy to understand. If a thief breaks into my house I should know that I can protect my self and my property and not have to worry that I might be the one in jail. We have to make laws that reinforce my right to live my life the way I chose only limited in so far as hurting directly someone else. If someone has an aversion to red I should not have to worry about a lawsuit for planting roses. Judges need to regain their rightful mantel as the “common sense” arbiter of the law. Example if a 6 year old is suspended from school because he has a butter knife in his lunch box the judge should not only let the child go, but admonish the petty bureaucrat.
We as individuals due to this “unsureness” of our freedom are even losing the ability to demand that we be treated as free people. We must make it easy for individuals to assert their freedom. We have been beaten down into submission by paper work and the constant fear mongering. More and more, individual action is looked upon as being against the common good even undemocratic. But it is precisely that individual spark of the “can do spirit” that is the only thing that can turn us away from that “pessimistic rut” that Mr. Karabell pointed out. Check out the old movie Fountainhead. It warns of this in the 1930’s ? . In the 1960’s it was “1984” by Orwell.
We all get frustrated at by our lack of freedom. At this loss of control. Especially when we see the breakdown of the institutions and people we have given that freedom to. When what they tell us to do is not in our favor. This causes our dislike for the government and the people who work there. We learn to dislike and blame those in power of either party. We also blame things like illegal immigrants, taxes, barking dogs, barking spouses, you name it, anything that bothers us, we complain about it. Soon we get to the point of hating that thing, whatever it is. Dialogue and common courtesy break down due to our insecurity. Fear leading to hate creeps in due to our insecurity. We have gotten the knowledge that we can do something about these wrongs, beaten out of us with the constant drumbeat across the board by the “joy of pessimism”. We hear it on the radio on tv, in the workplace from our friends, from politicians. It’s even in the churches. People are talking about what other people are doing not what “we the people” can do. Or especially what can I myself do. How can I take back some of that currency I’ve squandered. You see it’s really a personal thing. We are the ones who spent our freedom for luxury, thinking there wasn’t a cost. Kind of like overspending on your credit card and the bill comes due. Everybody blames the credit card co. Sure without them we would not have that problem, but remember without us they would not be in business. A solution to that problem is not to get another credit card. It is just as oxymoronic to think that the government will somehow magically give back their power to us. People will however sooner or later try to take back that freedom from a need for survival. I hope it is sooner because even now it would be almost impossible without violence to get some of that power back. We should lose that luxury we fall back on. The luxury of pessimism. The easy way out. Blame somebody else, come on what would John Wayne do? Let’s start trying to be honest with ourselves so we can be honest with others. Who cares if they aren’t honest. I’m selfish enough to know I want to be honest with myself.
From this point on I’m going to try to be an optimist. I’m going to make an effort not to blame others but try to figure out how to make solutions. I do believe that pointing out what is wrong is necessary for change. But it is only a first step. We have to take back the power and learn to have faith that “we the people” individually can make decisions. To a lot of people politics is a war and to think different, one is considered naïve. Remember that in order to form a more perfect union two diametrically opposed factions came together to save themselves from death at British hands and found common ground in politics. With politics they fought a war, and won and created a nation. There are two ingredients to Freedom. Having it and then using it. How we use it will determine whether we will keep it. Politics like guns, or money is a tool, we are the ones who decide how to use those tools. We can use those tools to build with instead of tearing down. It is harder but the righteousness of the work and the self fulfillment from the creation of the product are awesome and the pride of self accomplishment helps to rebuild individual freedom. Remember Freedom is free, but once lost, costly indeed.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Ps the thoughts in the movie below are always in my mind. My basic default position. Not only the “can do spirit”, but the “I have the right to do it spirit”
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq9udFmsNO0
--------------
A tip of the hat to GordoM of Muskegonpundit for his blog about the same article I’m writing about here.
-----link-----
http://muskegonpundit.blogspot.com/2008/05/who-stole-american-spirit.html--------------
The link for the article.
-----link-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121072001228989941.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries---------------
Mr. Karabell wrote an excellent article in the Wall Street Journal, about how America and it’s people have lost their “American Spirit”. He uses example after example about the troubles we now face, while hurtful are by no means the worst troubles we have faced and with sure knowledge overcome in the past. Not even close. What is the reason he asks? He answers it by saying.
-----quote-----
“Something else is going on – namely a cultural rut of pessimism that is draining our collective energy, blinding us to possibilities, and eroding our position in the world.”
-----------------
What is this cultural rut of pessimism and where does it come from. Light bulb time. It is a simple thing as all great ideas are, It is a lack of personal freedom that is driving us into that pessimistic rut Mr. Karabell is talking about. It is that lack of the knowledge that we can do something about our own lives. An unsureness of our Freedom. We use that Freedom to maintain Freedom has been and is being attacked from all sides. By Big Government, Big Business, Big Unions which claim we need to let them be a steward over our freedom. Whenever we give up freedom to a larger body for the perceived common good, we lose control over our own life and give it to that larger body. To some point this is necessary to form and maintain a society. Remember that Freedom is the one great piece of currency the American public has had from the birth of the nation. All people have it. It’s those pesky unalienable rights. We had to spend some of that currency setting up a government, but we made sure that we could change that government if necessary because we knew the pitfalls of uncontrolled power. Over the centuries however we have gradually become penniless our currency nearly spent. We traded it at first for the necessary; (protection from threats domestic and foreign). Later on as the government grew and for it to keep growing we traded more of it for perceived threats. Now we simply give it away for what might be threats in the future. On the personal front we spent it first on necessities then on luxuries then on purely ego driven things.
The things we need to change to get the power back are many and deep, but we need to start. We need a new lens through which we look at things. We have to frame the question differently. Instead of what is in it for me? Which of my choices offers me more Freedom. Also we have to teach ourselves everyday to be more self-sufficient. Also we have to relearn the rewards of common courtesy. Education needs to teach self reliance, lessons from our history about Freedom, and most importantly children have to be taught to think talk and write on their own. Not what others want them to think, but how to think.
We need to control the legal system, make it clear and easy to understand. If a thief breaks into my house I should know that I can protect my self and my property and not have to worry that I might be the one in jail. We have to make laws that reinforce my right to live my life the way I chose only limited in so far as hurting directly someone else. If someone has an aversion to red I should not have to worry about a lawsuit for planting roses. Judges need to regain their rightful mantel as the “common sense” arbiter of the law. Example if a 6 year old is suspended from school because he has a butter knife in his lunch box the judge should not only let the child go, but admonish the petty bureaucrat.
We as individuals due to this “unsureness” of our freedom are even losing the ability to demand that we be treated as free people. We must make it easy for individuals to assert their freedom. We have been beaten down into submission by paper work and the constant fear mongering. More and more, individual action is looked upon as being against the common good even undemocratic. But it is precisely that individual spark of the “can do spirit” that is the only thing that can turn us away from that “pessimistic rut” that Mr. Karabell pointed out. Check out the old movie Fountainhead. It warns of this in the 1930’s ? . In the 1960’s it was “1984” by Orwell.
We all get frustrated at by our lack of freedom. At this loss of control. Especially when we see the breakdown of the institutions and people we have given that freedom to. When what they tell us to do is not in our favor. This causes our dislike for the government and the people who work there. We learn to dislike and blame those in power of either party. We also blame things like illegal immigrants, taxes, barking dogs, barking spouses, you name it, anything that bothers us, we complain about it. Soon we get to the point of hating that thing, whatever it is. Dialogue and common courtesy break down due to our insecurity. Fear leading to hate creeps in due to our insecurity. We have gotten the knowledge that we can do something about these wrongs, beaten out of us with the constant drumbeat across the board by the “joy of pessimism”. We hear it on the radio on tv, in the workplace from our friends, from politicians. It’s even in the churches. People are talking about what other people are doing not what “we the people” can do. Or especially what can I myself do. How can I take back some of that currency I’ve squandered. You see it’s really a personal thing. We are the ones who spent our freedom for luxury, thinking there wasn’t a cost. Kind of like overspending on your credit card and the bill comes due. Everybody blames the credit card co. Sure without them we would not have that problem, but remember without us they would not be in business. A solution to that problem is not to get another credit card. It is just as oxymoronic to think that the government will somehow magically give back their power to us. People will however sooner or later try to take back that freedom from a need for survival. I hope it is sooner because even now it would be almost impossible without violence to get some of that power back. We should lose that luxury we fall back on. The luxury of pessimism. The easy way out. Blame somebody else, come on what would John Wayne do? Let’s start trying to be honest with ourselves so we can be honest with others. Who cares if they aren’t honest. I’m selfish enough to know I want to be honest with myself.
From this point on I’m going to try to be an optimist. I’m going to make an effort not to blame others but try to figure out how to make solutions. I do believe that pointing out what is wrong is necessary for change. But it is only a first step. We have to take back the power and learn to have faith that “we the people” individually can make decisions. To a lot of people politics is a war and to think different, one is considered naïve. Remember that in order to form a more perfect union two diametrically opposed factions came together to save themselves from death at British hands and found common ground in politics. With politics they fought a war, and won and created a nation. There are two ingredients to Freedom. Having it and then using it. How we use it will determine whether we will keep it. Politics like guns, or money is a tool, we are the ones who decide how to use those tools. We can use those tools to build with instead of tearing down. It is harder but the righteousness of the work and the self fulfillment from the creation of the product are awesome and the pride of self accomplishment helps to rebuild individual freedom. Remember Freedom is free, but once lost, costly indeed.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Ps the thoughts in the movie below are always in my mind. My basic default position. Not only the “can do spirit”, but the “I have the right to do it spirit”
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq9udFmsNO0
--------------
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
CAN'T HELP THIS ONE EITHER!!
Some more do as I say not as I do.
-----link----
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080514195919.fs9bwpxs&show_article=1
-------------
I'm all for freedom but gee whizz.
Think I'll send this to Gerry Vanwoerkom as a poster for the anti smoking bill in the state legislature. After all J. Granholm wants the movie industry to come to Michigan, I suppose Sean would be eating in restaurants. Don't think it would do the movie business climate in Michigan much good by putting Sean Penn in jail. lol
This is great stuff. Who could write such things? Who'd believe it?
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link----
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080514195919.fs9bwpxs&show_article=1
-------------
I'm all for freedom but gee whizz.
Think I'll send this to Gerry Vanwoerkom as a poster for the anti smoking bill in the state legislature. After all J. Granholm wants the movie industry to come to Michigan, I suppose Sean would be eating in restaurants. Don't think it would do the movie business climate in Michigan much good by putting Sean Penn in jail. lol
This is great stuff. Who could write such things? Who'd believe it?
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
I CAN'T HELP BUT POST THIS
Colorado considering hiring a single conservative professor. Big Controversy. Where diversity is the big deal, almost a religion. Any irony here?
-----link-----
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/may/13/cu-seeks-right-wing-prof/--------------
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS They'll need more money than that just to provide body guards and metal detectors for his or her classes. lol Better let the ACLU know.
-----link-----
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/may/13/cu-seeks-right-wing-prof/--------------
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS They'll need more money than that just to provide body guards and metal detectors for his or her classes. lol Better let the ACLU know.
"THE MORE THINGS CHANGE"
The platform of the Democratic Party, in a past election stated, "We believe that a party platform is a covenant with the people to be faithfully kept by the party entrusted with power." It called for a 25-percent reduction in federal spending, a balanced federal budget, a sound gold currency "to be preserved at all hazards," the removal of government from areas that belonged more appropriately to private enterprise, and an end to the "extravagance" of Hoover’s farm programs. This is what the candidate promised.
------------
From
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=4019
---------------
Hearing those Ideas I would of thought they were from some crazy Right wing whacko. A 25% cut in federal spending? Getting government out of the private sector. Good conservative principles. They were however uttered by FDR as a candidate against Hoover. Needless to say once elected FDR did the opposite. The above article quotes an FDR aid as saying
[Commenting decades later on Hoover’s administration, Rexford Guy Tugwell, one of the architects of Franklin Roosevelt’s policies of the 1930s, explained, "We didn’t admit it at the time, but practically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started."[13]]
Seems like common practice since then for Dems to run on conservative issues then once elected make liberal policy.
-------Back to the article by Mr. Reed. The following quote shows how fast the campaign promises were changed.
[Frustrated and angered that Roosevelt had so quickly and thoroughly abandoned the platform on which he was elected, Director of the Bureau of the Budget Lewis W. Douglas resigned after only one year on the job. At Harvard University in May 1935, Douglas made it plain that America was facing a momentous choice:
Will we choose to subject ourselves — this great country — to the despotism of bureaucracy, controlling our every act, destroying what equality we have attained, reducing us eventually to the condition of impoverished slaves of the state? Or will we cling to the liberties for which man has struggled for more than a thousand years? It is important to understand the magnitude of the issue before us . . . . If we do not elect to have a tyrannical, oppressive bureaucracy controlling our lives, destroying progress, depressing the standard of living . . . then should it not be the function of the Federal government under a democracy to limit its activities to those which a democracy may adequately deal, such for example as national defense, maintaining law and order, protecting life and property, preventing dishonesty, and . . . guarding the public against . . . vested special interests?[18]]
Well we made the choice in favor of the “despotism of bureaucracy” and we’ve been living with it ever since, and constantly becoming more and more like the “impoverished slaves of the state”
Now we stand at a nexus of history. The technology of this age stands ready for us to enhance our freedom or be used to finally shut us (we the people) out of the game for good.
<
Regards, one of the many , WE THE PEOPLE
Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
------------
From
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=4019
---------------
Hearing those Ideas I would of thought they were from some crazy Right wing whacko. A 25% cut in federal spending? Getting government out of the private sector. Good conservative principles. They were however uttered by FDR as a candidate against Hoover. Needless to say once elected FDR did the opposite. The above article quotes an FDR aid as saying
[Commenting decades later on Hoover’s administration, Rexford Guy Tugwell, one of the architects of Franklin Roosevelt’s policies of the 1930s, explained, "We didn’t admit it at the time, but practically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started."[13]]
Seems like common practice since then for Dems to run on conservative issues then once elected make liberal policy.
-------Back to the article by Mr. Reed. The following quote shows how fast the campaign promises were changed.
[Frustrated and angered that Roosevelt had so quickly and thoroughly abandoned the platform on which he was elected, Director of the Bureau of the Budget Lewis W. Douglas resigned after only one year on the job. At Harvard University in May 1935, Douglas made it plain that America was facing a momentous choice:
Will we choose to subject ourselves — this great country — to the despotism of bureaucracy, controlling our every act, destroying what equality we have attained, reducing us eventually to the condition of impoverished slaves of the state? Or will we cling to the liberties for which man has struggled for more than a thousand years? It is important to understand the magnitude of the issue before us . . . . If we do not elect to have a tyrannical, oppressive bureaucracy controlling our lives, destroying progress, depressing the standard of living . . . then should it not be the function of the Federal government under a democracy to limit its activities to those which a democracy may adequately deal, such for example as national defense, maintaining law and order, protecting life and property, preventing dishonesty, and . . . guarding the public against . . . vested special interests?[18]]
Well we made the choice in favor of the “despotism of bureaucracy” and we’ve been living with it ever since, and constantly becoming more and more like the “impoverished slaves of the state”
Now we stand at a nexus of history. The technology of this age stands ready for us to enhance our freedom or be used to finally shut us (we the people) out of the game for good.
<
Regards, one of the many , WE THE PEOPLE
Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
SHARIA LAW
US CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR
SHARI A LAW
It won’t happen overnight this change, it will creep slowly in the backwaters of the news hardly noticed let alone scrutinized. Little bits and pieces bubbling up now and then only to sink into the steady swirl of the 24/7 news. We will brush these small things aside with the knowledge that and because we are a fair , just and tolerant nation. Slowly are we starting to see the effects of Sharia based doctrines coming out in America.
http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?p=1182
---------------
Another tip of the hat to Gordom at the Muskegonpundit for this video from pajama media. States how Islamic law is filtering into our courts through frivolous and apparently not so frivolous law suits. Backed by some big money.
-----link-----
http://muskegonpundit.blogspot.com/search?q=sharia+law
---------------
They talked about the libel law, well it was recently signed almost in secret.
-----link-----
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/020856.php--------------
The first real ratification of the supremacy of Constitutional law over foreign law that I‘ve seen in awhile. Hope it will not be the last.
------While I do not agree with all the claims made under the umbrella of the “separation of Church and State”. I do agree that the wording of the Constitution stating in Article 1 “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” is very specific. What it does not include is choosing one religion over another. Christian or Islamic or Voodoo for that matter.
-----I cannot understand why so many liberals are in favor of the sharia law. Everything they dislike (hate) and accuse conservatives of trying to do is there codified into law. Sharia law includes preaching a state religion, basing laws upon religion, teaching religion in schools, subordinating women’s rights to men’s, stopping free speech. All of these are codified in Sharia law. We are pikers compared to them. And saints compared to what we really stand for.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
SHARI A LAW
It won’t happen overnight this change, it will creep slowly in the backwaters of the news hardly noticed let alone scrutinized. Little bits and pieces bubbling up now and then only to sink into the steady swirl of the 24/7 news. We will brush these small things aside with the knowledge that and because we are a fair , just and tolerant nation. Slowly are we starting to see the effects of Sharia based doctrines coming out in America.
http://www.joelstrumpet.com/?p=1182
---------------
Another tip of the hat to Gordom at the Muskegonpundit for this video from pajama media. States how Islamic law is filtering into our courts through frivolous and apparently not so frivolous law suits. Backed by some big money.
-----link-----
http://muskegonpundit.blogspot.com/search?q=sharia+law
---------------
They talked about the libel law, well it was recently signed almost in secret.
-----link-----
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/020856.php--------------
The first real ratification of the supremacy of Constitutional law over foreign law that I‘ve seen in awhile. Hope it will not be the last.
------While I do not agree with all the claims made under the umbrella of the “separation of Church and State”. I do agree that the wording of the Constitution stating in Article 1 “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” is very specific. What it does not include is choosing one religion over another. Christian or Islamic or Voodoo for that matter.
-----I cannot understand why so many liberals are in favor of the sharia law. Everything they dislike (hate) and accuse conservatives of trying to do is there codified into law. Sharia law includes preaching a state religion, basing laws upon religion, teaching religion in schools, subordinating women’s rights to men’s, stopping free speech. All of these are codified in Sharia law. We are pikers compared to them. And saints compared to what we really stand for.
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Monday, May 12, 2008
FAIR TAX ?? WHAT SAY YOU
FAIR TAX
What about the Fair Tax as written in HR 25 (See my side bar under research, US House bill tracker)and explained by Neil Boortz and John Lender with Rob Woodall.
I have been reading all I can on this good and bad, am buying the book today. Still can’t get my head around the details but so far I like it.
Before I start babbling on about, waxing philosophical as is my want. Here are some links I’ve used to get a feel for it. The last link to boortz.com has a “webanar” just a long seminar by Boortz answering a lot of questions about the Fair Tax. Well worth the time if you want his full point of view.
You Tube Hannity and Fair Tax Authors.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di2em2S25qM
---------------
A good place for source material and explanation.
-----link-----
http://www.squidoo.com/the-fairtax#module2445300
----------------
The fair tax group at fairtax.org
-----link-----
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
--------------
Best book on fair tax. “Fair Tax The Truth” By Boortz+Lender See my side bar under Books. Below a link to Neil Bortzs’ web site.
-----link-----
http://boortz.com/---------------
Now my turn, it’ll be brief. One positive aspect that ties into my ideas of good government that no one has mentioned. How much time is spent in Congress by legislators coming up with those 11000 amendments to the tax bill Neil Boortz talked about? Also think of the transparency issue. There would be one giant bucket of money collected each year. Congress would then have to divide it up. This bucket of money would come from one source. It would be relatively easy to see coming in and out vs. the old way. Finally as you know I’m all about the “bottom up” method. Well at the end of the Webinar Boortz said that this was a “bottom up” campaign. Well it rang my bell.
He also said , and it goes along with my thoughts, for it to work the “bottom” has to do something.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Let’s start the dialogue here now???
What about the Fair Tax as written in HR 25 (See my side bar under research, US House bill tracker)and explained by Neil Boortz and John Lender with Rob Woodall.
I have been reading all I can on this good and bad, am buying the book today. Still can’t get my head around the details but so far I like it.
Before I start babbling on about, waxing philosophical as is my want. Here are some links I’ve used to get a feel for it. The last link to boortz.com has a “webanar” just a long seminar by Boortz answering a lot of questions about the Fair Tax. Well worth the time if you want his full point of view.
You Tube Hannity and Fair Tax Authors.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di2em2S25qM
---------------
A good place for source material and explanation.
-----link-----
http://www.squidoo.com/the-fairtax#module2445300
----------------
The fair tax group at fairtax.org
-----link-----
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
--------------
Best book on fair tax. “Fair Tax The Truth” By Boortz+Lender See my side bar under Books. Below a link to Neil Bortzs’ web site.
-----link-----
http://boortz.com/---------------
Now my turn, it’ll be brief. One positive aspect that ties into my ideas of good government that no one has mentioned. How much time is spent in Congress by legislators coming up with those 11000 amendments to the tax bill Neil Boortz talked about? Also think of the transparency issue. There would be one giant bucket of money collected each year. Congress would then have to divide it up. This bucket of money would come from one source. It would be relatively easy to see coming in and out vs. the old way. Finally as you know I’m all about the “bottom up” method. Well at the end of the Webinar Boortz said that this was a “bottom up” campaign. Well it rang my bell.
He also said , and it goes along with my thoughts, for it to work the “bottom” has to do something.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Let’s start the dialogue here now???
Sunday, May 11, 2008
FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION
Freedom From Government Intervention.
A bedrock of Conservative belief is the Freedom of the individual to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Make no mistake while conservatives believe in freedom we also believe in government. That’s why we signed the Constitution along with the other side and our government was formed. We (both sides together) realized that a government was a necessary mechanism through which we could funnel our efforts to fight the British and gain our Freedom as individuals and as a country. That much seems obvious.
What I want to talk about today is an American version of the new British Conservative “bottoms up” direction in governance. In the following article by Mr. Reed from the Macinac Center, he cites the authors of a book titled “Governing by Network” by Goldsmith and Eggers, who talked about the idea of the government being a facilitator rather than the actual provider of goods and services, bringing the delivery of those down to the local level. A type of precursor to the new “bottom up” Conservative model.
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=9394
---------------
The thrust of my comments today are not to be about cutting back government at least money wise but rather “intrusiveness-wise”. More along the lines of the British model. This I assume will also be cost effective. As in the article above, with the help of the private sector the county government hopes to make their interaction with “we the people” more user friendly and cost effective. This effort I believe should be kept focused not on the idea of cutting cost so much as being able to give more and better services for the cost. Leaving a sense of well being in those served. (pursuit of happiness). Try reading the book “Gross National Happiness” by Arthur Brooks. Or read my recent blog.
-----blog-----
http://conservativeinmuskegon.blogspot.com/2008/05/two-brooks-emerging-river.html
---------------
We need to gain the trust of “we the people” for those ideas. Then and only then can “we the people” turn that focus to cutting government if necessary. The whole country has to have confidence in the “we can do it” attitude before change is possible.
True Conservatives in the US House and Senate are starting to stand up for freedom. It is sad to see that the media anyway finds it shocking.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/washington/10shield.html?adxnnl=1&partner=BREITBART&adxnnlx=1210546806-LqXC7bp0UlsUjDjo6fN5Tw---------------
The US House passed the Journalism “Shield Law” by a veto proof margin. Republican (and leading conservative) Mike Pence backed the bill. The article talked of what Mike Pence said- [“What’s a conservative like me doing passing a bill that helps reporters?” Mr. Pence asked in the House debate last year. The answer, he said, came from his belief that “the only check on government power in real time is a free and independent press.”
Shielding reporters’ confidential sources, Mr. Pence said, “is not about protecting reporters; it’s about protecting the public’s right to know.” In the Senate which has yet to vote on this bill. A republican Arlen Specter seems to be leading the conservative charge for the bill in the Senate. Passage is uncertain.
The purpose I highlighted the above article was to show that the idea of
Freedom is what is behind this seeming revolt against the President. The idea that Freedom is more important than the perceived threat to national security posed by the law. To parrot Mike Pence, it’s about the public’s (freedom) right to know. The Conservative cause for transparency in all aspects of government is also a part and parcel of all of the above. The more transparency the more “we the people” can exercise our freedom. In the state of Michigan the HB5137 sponsored by Jack Hoogendyk still sits in the appropriations committee. The bill would cost little or nothing. Google and the Federal gov are offering to provide it and Texas who has done it claims they have saved millions. Gee makes sense to me.
-----link-----
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=24778489624
--------------
Enough is enough. We need some energized leaders to start showing the public that they are serious about providing “we the people” with some seriously better service for the money.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
A bedrock of Conservative belief is the Freedom of the individual to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Make no mistake while conservatives believe in freedom we also believe in government. That’s why we signed the Constitution along with the other side and our government was formed. We (both sides together) realized that a government was a necessary mechanism through which we could funnel our efforts to fight the British and gain our Freedom as individuals and as a country. That much seems obvious.
What I want to talk about today is an American version of the new British Conservative “bottoms up” direction in governance. In the following article by Mr. Reed from the Macinac Center, he cites the authors of a book titled “Governing by Network” by Goldsmith and Eggers, who talked about the idea of the government being a facilitator rather than the actual provider of goods and services, bringing the delivery of those down to the local level. A type of precursor to the new “bottom up” Conservative model.
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=9394
---------------
The thrust of my comments today are not to be about cutting back government at least money wise but rather “intrusiveness-wise”. More along the lines of the British model. This I assume will also be cost effective. As in the article above, with the help of the private sector the county government hopes to make their interaction with “we the people” more user friendly and cost effective. This effort I believe should be kept focused not on the idea of cutting cost so much as being able to give more and better services for the cost. Leaving a sense of well being in those served. (pursuit of happiness). Try reading the book “Gross National Happiness” by Arthur Brooks. Or read my recent blog.
-----blog-----
http://conservativeinmuskegon.blogspot.com/2008/05/two-brooks-emerging-river.html
---------------
We need to gain the trust of “we the people” for those ideas. Then and only then can “we the people” turn that focus to cutting government if necessary. The whole country has to have confidence in the “we can do it” attitude before change is possible.
True Conservatives in the US House and Senate are starting to stand up for freedom. It is sad to see that the media anyway finds it shocking.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/washington/10shield.html?adxnnl=1&partner=BREITBART&adxnnlx=1210546806-LqXC7bp0UlsUjDjo6fN5Tw---------------
The US House passed the Journalism “Shield Law” by a veto proof margin. Republican (and leading conservative) Mike Pence backed the bill. The article talked of what Mike Pence said- [“What’s a conservative like me doing passing a bill that helps reporters?” Mr. Pence asked in the House debate last year. The answer, he said, came from his belief that “the only check on government power in real time is a free and independent press.”
Shielding reporters’ confidential sources, Mr. Pence said, “is not about protecting reporters; it’s about protecting the public’s right to know.” In the Senate which has yet to vote on this bill. A republican Arlen Specter seems to be leading the conservative charge for the bill in the Senate. Passage is uncertain.
The purpose I highlighted the above article was to show that the idea of
Freedom is what is behind this seeming revolt against the President. The idea that Freedom is more important than the perceived threat to national security posed by the law. To parrot Mike Pence, it’s about the public’s (freedom) right to know. The Conservative cause for transparency in all aspects of government is also a part and parcel of all of the above. The more transparency the more “we the people” can exercise our freedom. In the state of Michigan the HB5137 sponsored by Jack Hoogendyk still sits in the appropriations committee. The bill would cost little or nothing. Google and the Federal gov are offering to provide it and Texas who has done it claims they have saved millions. Gee makes sense to me.
-----link-----
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=24778489624
--------------
Enough is enough. We need some energized leaders to start showing the public that they are serious about providing “we the people” with some seriously better service for the money.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
A LEADER THAT LEADS
A LEADER THAT LEADS
A SOLUTION THAT WORKS
CAN WE DO IT HERE?
CAN HE PULL IT OFF THERE?
David Cameron the leader of the Conservative Party in England talking about the change needed in government and how it can happen. He is calling for ending the current top down form of government to a more bottom up driven model. That message is winning over votes in record numbers. Partly for the message and partly for the messenger. In the article below he explains his concept in specific. Using I might add a presumed Liberal cause. Green Transportation. (Brings to mind what Newt Gingrich has been saying about getting into the environmental debate.) He shows how to take the process which hasn’t worked and put it in the hands of locals. Specifically he say take the 100 million promised to the locals with all the strings and limits of use, cut those strings and let the locals figure out what is best for them as they know best. Makes great sense to me.
-----link-----
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=webcameron.story.page&obj_id=143742&speeches=1---------------
We could use a Conservative Council here in West Michigan to come up with solutions to some of our problems and offer them to the governing boards. Anybody think they want to help start one? Kind of what the Neighborhood associations started out to do but turned into the quagmire of groups trying to collect government money basically so they can get a share for themselves.. That may be too cynical. I just know that I will have to check into how the Conservative councils are set up across the pond.
-----In the next speech he set’s out his agenda for change in Health Care. I quote him here.
“The health service needs serious reform. That reform should be steady, purposeful and with a clear direction, avoiding unnecessary upheaval. Changes in lifestyles, in technology and medicine itself, in the expectations people have of the services they receive all this means we need a more decentralised, more patient-centred, less bureaucratic system. And at the same time, if we are to maintain public consent for all the extra spending the NHS receives we have to ensure better value for money than we've had in the past.
But my point is that reform should be bottom-up, not top-down: wherever possible driven by the discretion of professionals responding to the needs and wishes of their patients.
We need to change the essential power relationship in the NHS: from a vertical relationship where professionals are told what to do by politicians and managers above them with patients left just to take what they're given to a horizontal relationship where professionals have the necessary autonomy and discretion to respond to the demands of patients and patients are in the driving seat because they have the ultimate power: the power to choose the service they want.”
------The concept of letting people have the power to determine how to spend the money is “Old School” to conservatives. What is new is that the money comes from the government. The link to that speech is below. He further goes on the explain how this can happen.
-----link-----
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=webcameron.story.page&obj_id=143765&speeches=1--------------
One recurring theme beside the obvious “bottom up” thing is that the governmental system need not be treated as the bad guy, but as someone who needs help. In other words as a “Constrained” conservative would say. It’s there let’s use it.
This guy is good! I can’t help but quote him. Here he explains why all the constant attempts at reform of the bureaucratic system in the past have failed.
---”It's all the product of Labour's bureaucratic mindset, or what I call policy by PowerPoint: clever flowcharts and organograms which ignore the human relationships that are the most important aspect of healthcare.”
These are the things that people instinctively know in their hearts, what all people realize what used to be called common sense. Any government meeting hall is filled with this type of “Power-Point” presentation. Facts and charts and you name it. Forget about the people.
-----Well enough for now, check out my side bar for more links to his speeches under "Xtra Links for current posts".
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
<
PS Just found this link about a local study made up business leaders to make Macomb County more cost effective. The article lends insight into the idea of Bottom Up Govrnment American Style. Not the example of Government not the maker but the facilitator of services.
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=9394--------------
Author Mr. Lawrence W. Reed writting for the Macinac Center, makes some good points.
A SOLUTION THAT WORKS
CAN WE DO IT HERE?
CAN HE PULL IT OFF THERE?
David Cameron the leader of the Conservative Party in England talking about the change needed in government and how it can happen. He is calling for ending the current top down form of government to a more bottom up driven model. That message is winning over votes in record numbers. Partly for the message and partly for the messenger. In the article below he explains his concept in specific. Using I might add a presumed Liberal cause. Green Transportation. (Brings to mind what Newt Gingrich has been saying about getting into the environmental debate.) He shows how to take the process which hasn’t worked and put it in the hands of locals. Specifically he say take the 100 million promised to the locals with all the strings and limits of use, cut those strings and let the locals figure out what is best for them as they know best. Makes great sense to me.
-----link-----
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=webcameron.story.page&obj_id=143742&speeches=1---------------
We could use a Conservative Council here in West Michigan to come up with solutions to some of our problems and offer them to the governing boards. Anybody think they want to help start one? Kind of what the Neighborhood associations started out to do but turned into the quagmire of groups trying to collect government money basically so they can get a share for themselves.. That may be too cynical. I just know that I will have to check into how the Conservative councils are set up across the pond.
-----In the next speech he set’s out his agenda for change in Health Care. I quote him here.
“The health service needs serious reform. That reform should be steady, purposeful and with a clear direction, avoiding unnecessary upheaval. Changes in lifestyles, in technology and medicine itself, in the expectations people have of the services they receive all this means we need a more decentralised, more patient-centred, less bureaucratic system. And at the same time, if we are to maintain public consent for all the extra spending the NHS receives we have to ensure better value for money than we've had in the past.
But my point is that reform should be bottom-up, not top-down: wherever possible driven by the discretion of professionals responding to the needs and wishes of their patients.
We need to change the essential power relationship in the NHS: from a vertical relationship where professionals are told what to do by politicians and managers above them with patients left just to take what they're given to a horizontal relationship where professionals have the necessary autonomy and discretion to respond to the demands of patients and patients are in the driving seat because they have the ultimate power: the power to choose the service they want.”
------The concept of letting people have the power to determine how to spend the money is “Old School” to conservatives. What is new is that the money comes from the government. The link to that speech is below. He further goes on the explain how this can happen.
-----link-----
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=webcameron.story.page&obj_id=143765&speeches=1--------------
One recurring theme beside the obvious “bottom up” thing is that the governmental system need not be treated as the bad guy, but as someone who needs help. In other words as a “Constrained” conservative would say. It’s there let’s use it.
This guy is good! I can’t help but quote him. Here he explains why all the constant attempts at reform of the bureaucratic system in the past have failed.
---”It's all the product of Labour's bureaucratic mindset, or what I call policy by PowerPoint: clever flowcharts and organograms which ignore the human relationships that are the most important aspect of healthcare.”
These are the things that people instinctively know in their hearts, what all people realize what used to be called common sense. Any government meeting hall is filled with this type of “Power-Point” presentation. Facts and charts and you name it. Forget about the people.
-----Well enough for now, check out my side bar for more links to his speeches under "Xtra Links for current posts".
<
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
<
PS Just found this link about a local study made up business leaders to make Macomb County more cost effective. The article lends insight into the idea of Bottom Up Govrnment American Style. Not the example of Government not the maker but the facilitator of services.
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=9394--------------
Author Mr. Lawrence W. Reed writting for the Macinac Center, makes some good points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)