What makes us great?
Individual Freedom.
What makes us free?
(What or whom makes us free has to do with unalienable rights and a bunch of our right wing religious whacko forebears’ out of the past.)
That is not what I’m talking about here.
In Bureaucratic speak, what is our enabling legislation?
You already think you know. It’s the Constitution of the USA.
The trick seems to lie in the definition of freedom. That changes with time.
Just rent a few episodes of “Little House on the Prairie”. Just look at the utter despair in their faces. Their total lack of hope. Too bad they didn't have someone to show them the way of Hope. Just imagine the horrible life we have let our government save us from.
-----picture-----
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3617167360/tt0071007
-------------------
Here was a young family that came to a new area and built a sod house next to a small crick and started to raise a family. I think we all know what the crick was good for, urinating and drinking. I know a city inspector or two who would be jumping up and down with glee if they were to find this situation today. It was later they built the house above. Still way subhuman conditions.
{I mean dirt floors? A ladder to the second floor without handrails and ballisters no further than 4 inches apart so a baby doesn’t die? What about heat? During the winter their fireplace could never keep the house at 70 degrees at a height of 4 feet off the ground. Oh yes what about the whole waste disposal system? I’m looking forward to breakfast so I’d rather not get into that right now. Use your own imagination.}
Let’s just suffice it to say there would not be 7 seasons of “Little House” to watch on TV. Today the house would have been demolished, the children packed off to “Protective Services”, and the land would have been brought back to it’s pristine condition before man defiled it. Only animals would be allowed to urinate and drink from the small crick. (We do love our animals don't we?) But then of course the government needed a building to house their bureaucracy in! What a small price to pay for the good it would do. Downright patriotic to oppose it. Below a Chinese “visionary” establishment. If you are lucky enough to get an invitation to study at this school, you will soon be taught to see the similarities to Frank Lloyd's view of a Prarie Home and how it rises out of and blends with the environment. Now that is education at it's finest.
-----link-----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laojiao--------------
This “Little House Period” in our history some will tell us was the beginning of ruination of our planet. When any individual claimed to know what was best for themselves and their loved ones was the beginning of the end for what was good for the whole world. After all how could any one person know what was best for the whole world, it is too complicated and mind boggling for an individual to know. After all it was people like the Engles family that were the pioneers of Global Warming and other yet undreamt of sufferings for humanity yet to come.
Thank goodness that in our enlightened age we now have a vast bureaucracy to decide for us what our individual actions should be in order to not hurt the rest of mankind and our planet. I mean, haven’t we proved time and time again that the government knows what is best for us and how to handle problems better than we do? This must surely be the case. If it wasn’t and we thought the government couldn’t solve our problems, then why on earth would we fork over 1/3 or what we make to them year in and year out? Why else would we continue to give away our individual freedoms till so few remain?
Shame on those of you unwilling to give up your individual freedom for the greater good. Look at all the good that has been accomplished so far. Our united society is crime free, hunger is gone, diversity has ended prejudice, our economy is robust, any one who wants to work can and anyone who doesn’t want to can still live the good life. Why would anyone want to do other than what they’re told.
Oh and the children. Look at the success of education and what our children are learning. We will soon again be on the cutting edge of technology and science. I know there are still a few pockets of people that have not been helped yet to see the “vision”, but nothing that can’t be fixed by the government spending an extra trillion or two, and a couple of brand new bureaucracies thrown in.
-----vision of helping those who won’t help themselves-----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shayang_workers.JPG
-----------------------------------------------------------
Oh the joy of those men bonding over their work and puzzles.
Another link to a way to help lead those unwilling to follow.
-----link-----
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=45134736
--------------
This stubborn clinging to the old ideas must stop. A new age is upon us. All people must be treated equally, fed equally, housed equally, taught equally. I have seen the progress so far. It is all around us. Michigan is a shinning example in education and industry. Michigan’s governor has indeed blown them away.
-----Blown away-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Ty6qe7bkA&NR=1
-------------------------
Perhaps if we could find a way to give her 4 more years she could come up with some of our own education camps to keep those young people from moving away so they can be blown away with her ideas instead.
Perhaps I should start digging my redoubt and buying up dried figs and the like. Buy up ammunition before it’s all banned.
But on the other hand maybe I’ll get off my butt and get political. Here is a novel idea I could always vote. Volunteer and donate money for and to others who think the way I do. Imagine the audacity of that.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
A Journeyman Reformer
As you know if you read any of the stuff I splatter all over the web, I talk a lot (or write a lot as it were). I hope you also get the feeling that I try to back up what I say by deeds. I try to walk the walk, and that is immensely harder and more time consuming than talking the talk.
I also quickly tire of constant verbal and typographical abuse that is the fodder of most that I see on the Web. Some creative satire like a hard hitting Coulter I enjoy sometimes, but the thinly veiled hate I quickly tire of.
I read the article linked below in the WSJ about Jeb Bush written by Fred Barnes and found it to be enlightening. A lot of what I try to do Jeb Bush has done and continues to do. He is a reformer. I talk also about doing good deeds simply for the sake of the doing. This Bush seems to echo that, he enjoys the doing even more than talking about it. Though they both seem to feed upon each other.
-----link-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457271366086479.html
---------------
The following quote tells me something about the sincerity of what he says.
-----quote-----
. "I'm totally comfortable with what I'm doing and how I'm going about it. I hope I can find a role to play that doesn't include running for office to make a contribution."
-----------------
Some may think he is just showing some false humility and hiding his true agenda. I think not. He sounds like a man that enjoyed fighting the reform fight and knowing what his goals and convictions are. A man sure of himself because he has been there and done that. For a long time.
From the article about what reforms he made as Governor of Florida.
-----quote by Fred Barnes-----
“His tenure was memorable because of his intense focus on reform of education, government, the budget process, civil service, health care, procurement and race-based programs. He also cut taxes in a state with no income tax.”
------------------------------------------
I agree also with the article and Mr. Bush that we should decentralize the government. Let the states be freer to experiment with different systems.
I am also so sick of hearing the Democrats and some Republicans always blaming Bush for everything. They must really be dunderheads or complete idiots to believe that drivel. Well Jeb made a good case for my being a dunderhead if all I’m going to do is blame Obama for the next 4 or 8 years.
I had to love his idea of a British style shadow government. I’ve blogged about that for quite awhile now. I think with Cantor and Boehner in the House we have a start. We need to trot out our financial shadow cabinet member with a plan. Etc.
So as I said I talk a lot. But will try to refrain from name calling especially of the President, although when it comes to the Mutt’ess and Jeff of the Senate, it will be too tempting to overcome the obvious completely.
I will try to bring out a shadow type of solution based neighborhood government. It’s more work but hopefully more rewarding. As far as our local party, well I’ll just start doing and see where it leads.
Perhaps I can have a shadow of the contentment Jeb Bush has found from being an activist reformer.
-----quote------
What did he take away from his experience as governor? Mr. Bush says he "learned you could change things if you worked at it. What I learned was how to take ideas and implement them over the long haul. The thing with politics is that it's focused on the here and now." However, "by focusing on the longer-term things I had a chance to take conservative ideas and reform-minded thoughts and put them into practice. It was invigorating. It was uplifting to me personally to see that in America a whole lot of people can work together to accomplish that
-----------------
Finally, I will work on my humility by honestly holding my plans and myself accountable, not blaming others for my or my plans shortcomings. Again Jeb Bush put it better than I.
-----quote------
"You have to have an aspirational [mine inspirational?]goal, and you have to communicate it over and over and over. You have to have the humility to recognize that people aren't watching your every word. . . . You have to be constantly adding to the reforms. You have to take the risk of measuring the success or lack of it. You have to be held accountable . . . Sometimes it's not fun."
------------------
Call me naïve, but I think I can at least try and perhaps I’ll learn to find contentment in the trying. Perhaps even some fun in the doing.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
ps
For links about my admiration for British Politics see my side bar near the top for web Cameron and further down under "Update Across The Pond"
I also quickly tire of constant verbal and typographical abuse that is the fodder of most that I see on the Web. Some creative satire like a hard hitting Coulter I enjoy sometimes, but the thinly veiled hate I quickly tire of.
I read the article linked below in the WSJ about Jeb Bush written by Fred Barnes and found it to be enlightening. A lot of what I try to do Jeb Bush has done and continues to do. He is a reformer. I talk also about doing good deeds simply for the sake of the doing. This Bush seems to echo that, he enjoys the doing even more than talking about it. Though they both seem to feed upon each other.
-----link-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457271366086479.html
---------------
The following quote tells me something about the sincerity of what he says.
-----quote-----
. "I'm totally comfortable with what I'm doing and how I'm going about it. I hope I can find a role to play that doesn't include running for office to make a contribution."
-----------------
Some may think he is just showing some false humility and hiding his true agenda. I think not. He sounds like a man that enjoyed fighting the reform fight and knowing what his goals and convictions are. A man sure of himself because he has been there and done that. For a long time.
From the article about what reforms he made as Governor of Florida.
-----quote by Fred Barnes-----
“His tenure was memorable because of his intense focus on reform of education, government, the budget process, civil service, health care, procurement and race-based programs. He also cut taxes in a state with no income tax.”
------------------------------------------
I agree also with the article and Mr. Bush that we should decentralize the government. Let the states be freer to experiment with different systems.
I am also so sick of hearing the Democrats and some Republicans always blaming Bush for everything. They must really be dunderheads or complete idiots to believe that drivel. Well Jeb made a good case for my being a dunderhead if all I’m going to do is blame Obama for the next 4 or 8 years.
I had to love his idea of a British style shadow government. I’ve blogged about that for quite awhile now. I think with Cantor and Boehner in the House we have a start. We need to trot out our financial shadow cabinet member with a plan. Etc.
So as I said I talk a lot. But will try to refrain from name calling especially of the President, although when it comes to the Mutt’ess and Jeff of the Senate, it will be too tempting to overcome the obvious completely.
I will try to bring out a shadow type of solution based neighborhood government. It’s more work but hopefully more rewarding. As far as our local party, well I’ll just start doing and see where it leads.
Perhaps I can have a shadow of the contentment Jeb Bush has found from being an activist reformer.
-----quote------
What did he take away from his experience as governor? Mr. Bush says he "learned you could change things if you worked at it. What I learned was how to take ideas and implement them over the long haul. The thing with politics is that it's focused on the here and now." However, "by focusing on the longer-term things I had a chance to take conservative ideas and reform-minded thoughts and put them into practice. It was invigorating. It was uplifting to me personally to see that in America a whole lot of people can work together to accomplish that
-----------------
Finally, I will work on my humility by honestly holding my plans and myself accountable, not blaming others for my or my plans shortcomings. Again Jeb Bush put it better than I.
-----quote------
"You have to have an aspirational [mine inspirational?]goal, and you have to communicate it over and over and over. You have to have the humility to recognize that people aren't watching your every word. . . . You have to be constantly adding to the reforms. You have to take the risk of measuring the success or lack of it. You have to be held accountable . . . Sometimes it's not fun."
------------------
Call me naïve, but I think I can at least try and perhaps I’ll learn to find contentment in the trying. Perhaps even some fun in the doing.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
ps
For links about my admiration for British Politics see my side bar near the top for web Cameron and further down under "Update Across The Pond"
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Denominator
What is the common denominator of the political system??
Give people what they want ??
Give people what they need ??
Better yet, talk people into wanting what they need ??
I’m not talking the populist rhetoric of a Huey P. Long, for he gave them what he thought they wanted and needed.
I’m talking about the definition of “the people”. I mean all the people, rich, poor and in between.
Best of all is to allow all the people the ability to determine for themselves what they need and what they want and to try whatever method they desire to try and get it. Then try to find someone or some party that will try to let me do just that.
Americans call that freedom.
That idea of freedom can be found in the Constitution.
I want the freedom to choose for example how to educate my children. The freedom to decide what they should learn, at what speed they can best learn it.
If worse comes to worse and I decide to teach them 2+2=5;;; is it somehow better that the government makes the same mistake and teaches all the children 5 is the sum of 2+2??
I’m too old to think the government doesn’t make mistakes.
Which method is easiest to correct? Which method can simply be remedied with acknowledgement of a mistake?
When was the last time you heard a government bureaucracy admit to any mistake?
I’m still young enough to admit an obvious mistake for the sake of my children. I trust myself to do that quick and as painless as possible for the love of my children.
In the same vein, when did you last hear a large corporation admit to a mistake. Instead they’ll wage a multi million dollar ad campaign about how great the product really is, trying to hide the obvious. At least until they can come up with another product.
Here I might ad that a small company, say a mom and pop doesn’t have the time or money to do such silliness. They simply say oops then go about finding the right way to undo their mistake.
What about a political party? Last time? Mistake? Never. An individual candidate almost always.
I think that I will start looking for that difference in the business’ I shop at. (and politicians I vote for). I may be different than most but I’ve had countless talks with “company” people on the phone and in person just trying to get them to say they did or said something wrong.
It’s sometimes possible to do that but it takes a lot of time and usually isn’t worth the effort. Buying a new tie as an example; but for the education of our children it is indeed worth the trouble.
I think I’ll start looking for that difference in all the services I buy whether they are with cash or through my tax dollars.
I will also stop calling government workers civil servants. Servants don’t get paid and I would feel unjustified and morally opposed to having servants do anything for me. Seems like our greatest leader tried to put an end to that sort of thing.
Lincoln by the way was a Republican.
Lest we forget. It took him a long time to find a general who'd admit to a mistake them move on and move on and mistakes did Grant do untill he won the war.
When the Civil Servants understand that they are getting paid by our money for what they do and that they willingly and freely have choosen to do that job; perhaps they will come to the conclusion that they owe us a days worth of effort. Some satisfaction. Perhaps the politicians who control them will themselves give us a days worth of effort and try to do just that.
As a freedom loving person I know what I feel. I feel fully justified in demanding just that.
May be the common denominator in the political system is that “we” get involved and start to do just that.
Just that is the answer, and what a powerful just that can be, if we can do -- yup you guessed it -- Just That.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Give people what they want ??
Give people what they need ??
Better yet, talk people into wanting what they need ??
I’m not talking the populist rhetoric of a Huey P. Long, for he gave them what he thought they wanted and needed.
I’m talking about the definition of “the people”. I mean all the people, rich, poor and in between.
Best of all is to allow all the people the ability to determine for themselves what they need and what they want and to try whatever method they desire to try and get it. Then try to find someone or some party that will try to let me do just that.
Americans call that freedom.
That idea of freedom can be found in the Constitution.
I want the freedom to choose for example how to educate my children. The freedom to decide what they should learn, at what speed they can best learn it.
If worse comes to worse and I decide to teach them 2+2=5;;; is it somehow better that the government makes the same mistake and teaches all the children 5 is the sum of 2+2??
I’m too old to think the government doesn’t make mistakes.
Which method is easiest to correct? Which method can simply be remedied with acknowledgement of a mistake?
When was the last time you heard a government bureaucracy admit to any mistake?
I’m still young enough to admit an obvious mistake for the sake of my children. I trust myself to do that quick and as painless as possible for the love of my children.
In the same vein, when did you last hear a large corporation admit to a mistake. Instead they’ll wage a multi million dollar ad campaign about how great the product really is, trying to hide the obvious. At least until they can come up with another product.
Here I might ad that a small company, say a mom and pop doesn’t have the time or money to do such silliness. They simply say oops then go about finding the right way to undo their mistake.
What about a political party? Last time? Mistake? Never. An individual candidate almost always.
I think that I will start looking for that difference in the business’ I shop at. (and politicians I vote for). I may be different than most but I’ve had countless talks with “company” people on the phone and in person just trying to get them to say they did or said something wrong.
It’s sometimes possible to do that but it takes a lot of time and usually isn’t worth the effort. Buying a new tie as an example; but for the education of our children it is indeed worth the trouble.
I think I’ll start looking for that difference in all the services I buy whether they are with cash or through my tax dollars.
I will also stop calling government workers civil servants. Servants don’t get paid and I would feel unjustified and morally opposed to having servants do anything for me. Seems like our greatest leader tried to put an end to that sort of thing.
Lincoln by the way was a Republican.
Lest we forget. It took him a long time to find a general who'd admit to a mistake them move on and move on and mistakes did Grant do untill he won the war.
When the Civil Servants understand that they are getting paid by our money for what they do and that they willingly and freely have choosen to do that job; perhaps they will come to the conclusion that they owe us a days worth of effort. Some satisfaction. Perhaps the politicians who control them will themselves give us a days worth of effort and try to do just that.
As a freedom loving person I know what I feel. I feel fully justified in demanding just that.
May be the common denominator in the political system is that “we” get involved and start to do just that.
Just that is the answer, and what a powerful just that can be, if we can do -- yup you guessed it -- Just That.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Country We Think We Are
Star Parker in an article written 12/15/08 titled “Republicans Need To Get Back To Business”, laid out a reasonable argument.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2008/12/15/republicans_need_to_get_back_to_business
---------------
In my book, a well written article should be able to crystallize my assorted thoughts on a subject. It should add clarity out of the gibberish my mind formulates. Star’s article does that.
Star Parker’s article talks about getting the party out of attack mode and into creating a message, cause or platform mode. Not changing brands, not ignoring it’s roots; but rather going back to them.
I remember the 1950’s vaguely at best. But I do remember the growth of the middle class. I remember my dad saying and teaching me that I could do anything I wanted. That I had the right to do that as long as I didn’t directly harm anyone else. I bring this up because we as a country have gotten away from that. Is it possible to get back? Do we really want to get back?
Ms. Parker makes a case for trying to sell our business model to the minorities. From my experience in the building trades and from what I see in the lower class neighborhood in which I live. It is the newest and least empowered minorities that are clinging onto the conservative values to help them get a foothold in our society.
I have seen minorities and myself, who when trying to get ahead without government help are being forced to go under the radar of the government to do things I was brought up thinking I had a right to do. I realize that I still have that right but sometimes I can’t afford the legal right I’d have to pay to use it.
In the building trades for example there is widespread dislike and hatred for Mexican workers. Whether legal or illegal citizenship status really seems to have nothing to do with it. I could make a case for not only Mexican workers having the old “Work Ethic” but also that this is a class type of thing. I work harder to earn my food if none is available without working.
I also see the same in the family values of the poor. It is strongest when it is all we have. The family throughout history have been the building block of civilization. The family that survives in lower financial classes is grateful for itself and it sees all the benefits that can come from the family. It is too bad that this “family structure” is forced to fly under the radar too. Forced to operate illegally out of rental units.
Increased reliance upon the government supplying the needs that the family used to has decimated the family. However it is my idea that what is left is stronger than ever. I also believe that there is a latent knowledge that the old ideas of “individual Freedom” work. The “Aunties” and Grandmothers though single that help raise an extended family know the meaning of work to support the family.
Parker’s article brings to light the idea that we as Republicans need to show that we truly believe in the message of traditional values, free enterprise and strong national defense, and limited government. We need to show by all of our action, how free enterprise and limited government can help people. How traditional values are the lynch pin that creates an atmosphere in society that rewards good work and helps rebuild our confidence in our abilities to survive and the freedom to pursue our happiness as we define it, in ways we so choose.
Do we all have to be poor to see and use and value this freedom. I think not. As this country is going broke we may find out anyway. But I hope not. I think this is the best time we as Republicans have to show case our ideas in concrete actions. Especially at the lower levels of government where ideological principles matter less than whether something works or not. I think we need to keep these freedoms open to all if we are to continue to be the country we think we are.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Ps. Star Parker’s wrote latest article linked below later. It helps explain some of her thinking.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/01/12/republicans_need_shareholder_revolt
--------------
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2008/12/15/republicans_need_to_get_back_to_business
---------------
In my book, a well written article should be able to crystallize my assorted thoughts on a subject. It should add clarity out of the gibberish my mind formulates. Star’s article does that.
Star Parker’s article talks about getting the party out of attack mode and into creating a message, cause or platform mode. Not changing brands, not ignoring it’s roots; but rather going back to them.
I remember the 1950’s vaguely at best. But I do remember the growth of the middle class. I remember my dad saying and teaching me that I could do anything I wanted. That I had the right to do that as long as I didn’t directly harm anyone else. I bring this up because we as a country have gotten away from that. Is it possible to get back? Do we really want to get back?
Ms. Parker makes a case for trying to sell our business model to the minorities. From my experience in the building trades and from what I see in the lower class neighborhood in which I live. It is the newest and least empowered minorities that are clinging onto the conservative values to help them get a foothold in our society.
I have seen minorities and myself, who when trying to get ahead without government help are being forced to go under the radar of the government to do things I was brought up thinking I had a right to do. I realize that I still have that right but sometimes I can’t afford the legal right I’d have to pay to use it.
In the building trades for example there is widespread dislike and hatred for Mexican workers. Whether legal or illegal citizenship status really seems to have nothing to do with it. I could make a case for not only Mexican workers having the old “Work Ethic” but also that this is a class type of thing. I work harder to earn my food if none is available without working.
I also see the same in the family values of the poor. It is strongest when it is all we have. The family throughout history have been the building block of civilization. The family that survives in lower financial classes is grateful for itself and it sees all the benefits that can come from the family. It is too bad that this “family structure” is forced to fly under the radar too. Forced to operate illegally out of rental units.
Increased reliance upon the government supplying the needs that the family used to has decimated the family. However it is my idea that what is left is stronger than ever. I also believe that there is a latent knowledge that the old ideas of “individual Freedom” work. The “Aunties” and Grandmothers though single that help raise an extended family know the meaning of work to support the family.
Parker’s article brings to light the idea that we as Republicans need to show that we truly believe in the message of traditional values, free enterprise and strong national defense, and limited government. We need to show by all of our action, how free enterprise and limited government can help people. How traditional values are the lynch pin that creates an atmosphere in society that rewards good work and helps rebuild our confidence in our abilities to survive and the freedom to pursue our happiness as we define it, in ways we so choose.
Do we all have to be poor to see and use and value this freedom. I think not. As this country is going broke we may find out anyway. But I hope not. I think this is the best time we as Republicans have to show case our ideas in concrete actions. Especially at the lower levels of government where ideological principles matter less than whether something works or not. I think we need to keep these freedoms open to all if we are to continue to be the country we think we are.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Ps. Star Parker’s wrote latest article linked below later. It helps explain some of her thinking.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/01/12/republicans_need_shareholder_revolt
--------------
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Comrade
The government of the people, by the people and for the people no longer works. Or at least is grinding to a halt. The people seem to know it as their opinion of Congress is the lowest it has ever been. We are grasping for leaders to lead us out of the quagmire.
The following was found in the The American Conservative, which illustrates how we can no longer solve problems from on top. I claim it is because we are way top heavy in our efforts.
The Politics of Same
By Fred Reed
“It seems to me that America's difficulty in facing the country's problems is not that we have the problems, but that we can't face them or won't--that the machinery of government and means of political change have frozen, congealed, clotted. Solutions are often possible, but movement toward them isn't. The optimistic might see this as a challenge, others as rigor mortis.”
Though not as pessimistic; I think the trend is painfully obvious. To change the way things work or more precisely don’t work is after all the purpose behind my blogging effort. The article goes briefly through our major problems from education to housing to the military and a lot of the others. Mr. Reed’s take on the situation was “…..what is politically possible won't work, and what will work isn't politically possible. Gridlock.”
I would like to provide a way to solve the dilemma. From all places out of China, out of the mouth of former Premier Zhou En-Lai. Last night I listened to a channel I had never listened to on D TV. It was a Chinese channel and lightly translated. (Everyone talked Chinese, subtitles were in Chinese with only a translator talking seemingly uncut in an almost unintelligible, to me accent). It was a show about Zhou En-lai and how he brought China out of the “Bad Old Days” of the Cultural Revolution and into a more moderate new era.
I was struck by the translators use of the words “Truth from Fact”. In our culture the two have become equal. I agree with my Comrade Zhou. (wow did this Conservative Republican just say that? lol). Zhou En-lai was talking in regard to his country’s philosophy. He meant that his country’s governing mechanism should be led by truth not have the facts shifted around to meet the philosophy.
When a judge looks at the facts he ultimately has to decide on which of the facts lead to the truth. This presumes there is a truth. As in our case the law is based upon the truth agreed upon in our Constitution. In China the truth is codified as well. Both are based upon the well being of the people.
The translator further went on to talk about how that thought led to the idea that practice should determine doctrine or ideology not the other way around.
This idea struck me in its simplicity. This is the same type of idea as “enjoy the Journey not the destination”
This fits perfectly into my “Make Do, Make It Now, Make It Work”. An axiom of my 3M idea is that we continually remake (it) in the image of what we learn in the process of making it originally. In this way we learn by the doing. We also make ourselves better for the effort. We keep making it better to fit the ever changing landscape. This is the essence of the “bottom up” approach. Let the individual through “individual Freedom” do the remaking. Let the government see the “truth” in those efforts and remake it’s own laws to facilitate that freedom.
I sometimes think we in America face an unbeatably entrenched Bureaucracy, well I should think of Communist China and be thankful. Zhou En-lai fought long and hard to make his vision a reality against a lot tougher odds than we. For one we only have a hundred years of bureaucratic tradition to fight vs. China’s thousand.
Perhaps if I think of the struggle as the journey I will be able to enjoy it, feel more at peace with it and take comfort in what I can accomplish along the way. For myself as well as others. Let the end result be what it will be. Then others can take over the journey in their quest for their individual growth and freedom.
Could it be as simple as learning to do things for ourselves more and relying on the government for less? Not THAT simple. There is a “Happiness” to be found in the journey towards that freedom. We have to practice that freedom to relearn the “Happiness” that comes from that. Then we must demand our right to pursue that freedom. That is where the journey is, the work that we must learn to enjoy. We can then go about our journey of changing the laws that interfere with our “Happiness”
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
The following was found in the The American Conservative, which illustrates how we can no longer solve problems from on top. I claim it is because we are way top heavy in our efforts.
The Politics of Same
By Fred Reed
“It seems to me that America's difficulty in facing the country's problems is not that we have the problems, but that we can't face them or won't--that the machinery of government and means of political change have frozen, congealed, clotted. Solutions are often possible, but movement toward them isn't. The optimistic might see this as a challenge, others as rigor mortis.”
Though not as pessimistic; I think the trend is painfully obvious. To change the way things work or more precisely don’t work is after all the purpose behind my blogging effort. The article goes briefly through our major problems from education to housing to the military and a lot of the others. Mr. Reed’s take on the situation was “…..what is politically possible won't work, and what will work isn't politically possible. Gridlock.”
I would like to provide a way to solve the dilemma. From all places out of China, out of the mouth of former Premier Zhou En-Lai. Last night I listened to a channel I had never listened to on D TV. It was a Chinese channel and lightly translated. (Everyone talked Chinese, subtitles were in Chinese with only a translator talking seemingly uncut in an almost unintelligible, to me accent). It was a show about Zhou En-lai and how he brought China out of the “Bad Old Days” of the Cultural Revolution and into a more moderate new era.
I was struck by the translators use of the words “Truth from Fact”. In our culture the two have become equal. I agree with my Comrade Zhou. (wow did this Conservative Republican just say that? lol). Zhou En-lai was talking in regard to his country’s philosophy. He meant that his country’s governing mechanism should be led by truth not have the facts shifted around to meet the philosophy.
When a judge looks at the facts he ultimately has to decide on which of the facts lead to the truth. This presumes there is a truth. As in our case the law is based upon the truth agreed upon in our Constitution. In China the truth is codified as well. Both are based upon the well being of the people.
The translator further went on to talk about how that thought led to the idea that practice should determine doctrine or ideology not the other way around.
This idea struck me in its simplicity. This is the same type of idea as “enjoy the Journey not the destination”
This fits perfectly into my “Make Do, Make It Now, Make It Work”. An axiom of my 3M idea is that we continually remake (it) in the image of what we learn in the process of making it originally. In this way we learn by the doing. We also make ourselves better for the effort. We keep making it better to fit the ever changing landscape. This is the essence of the “bottom up” approach. Let the individual through “individual Freedom” do the remaking. Let the government see the “truth” in those efforts and remake it’s own laws to facilitate that freedom.
I sometimes think we in America face an unbeatably entrenched Bureaucracy, well I should think of Communist China and be thankful. Zhou En-lai fought long and hard to make his vision a reality against a lot tougher odds than we. For one we only have a hundred years of bureaucratic tradition to fight vs. China’s thousand.
Perhaps if I think of the struggle as the journey I will be able to enjoy it, feel more at peace with it and take comfort in what I can accomplish along the way. For myself as well as others. Let the end result be what it will be. Then others can take over the journey in their quest for their individual growth and freedom.
Could it be as simple as learning to do things for ourselves more and relying on the government for less? Not THAT simple. There is a “Happiness” to be found in the journey towards that freedom. We have to practice that freedom to relearn the “Happiness” that comes from that. Then we must demand our right to pursue that freedom. That is where the journey is, the work that we must learn to enjoy. We can then go about our journey of changing the laws that interfere with our “Happiness”
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Saturday, January 3, 2009
The Impossible Dream.
The Impossible Dream.
From Carnegie to the spate of current self help people, they all seem to think no idea is impossible once you cut through all the clutter, get to the core and define the dream or goal. Place that defined goal in front of you, then all your decisions will help achieve that goal. Once a goal is stated all else will follow.
I agree with that at least in part. Once I have a goal firmly in mind my brain seems almost subconsciously to sort itself out with that goal in mind. I become focused on the goal. All my action take on a slant in helping me achieve that goal.
I have learned over my life that I can achieve nearly any one goal I set my mind to. It is when I try to accomplish several of these “impossible” goals that I become distracted and unfocused, and I lose my way.
I get the Magazine Newsmax and in the Jan. 08 issue they had a great many articles about the predicament the Republicans are in and different ways we can get out of the problem. They did put together an excellent and long piece titled “Rebuilding the Party of Reagan”. In a boxed page and a half highlight was their breakdown of nine different Conservative Coalitions that at this time are fighting for supremacy within the Republican Party.
-----link to Newsmax Jan 08-----
http://content.yudu.com/Ayura/NMJan09/resources/24.htm
--------------------------------
(ps scroll through the pages for all the articles....you will have to give your email to access the magazine)
Some of these coalitions are overlapping and almost any Republican can sympathize with at least one or two of most of the different groups. This re-organization of the party is inevitable after a defeat. The trick will be to re-shape the party along lines that will win. The whole thrust of the article as evidenced by the title was how Reagan re-shaped the Party into a winning coalition.
While this answers the question of how Reagan did it, it does not answer the question of how we can do it without a Reaganesq candidate. Remember the seeds of Reagan were planted through a horrible loss run by Goldwater. Then Reagan lost to Gerald Ford, then finally Reagan had his day.
Those days after the Goldwater loss are often referred to as the days of “Wandering in the Wilderness”. I too am wandering in the Wilderness. I am torn between the different forms or ideas of Conservatism. I find myself shifting between the different coalitions mentioned above in the Newsmax article. Are we with all this separating ourselves into different camps trying to be Democrat Like in our apparent love of diversity? I hope not.
As much as I like to think that I can remake our party, I realize that I don’t even have a clear vision of what I want that party to be like. I think I’ve finally understood the obvious. There is no one segment that equals the whole. We are a coalition of many parts. I can believe in my own brand of Conservatism but will not be effective if I cannot work with other Conservatives and Republicans. Much like Ron Paul believes in his brand of Republicanism, much to his credit he realizes that without the rest of the party he will go nowhere. There is that dreaded word compromise.
So my emphasis will be on Coalition building. Much as I posted in my beginning efforts, I became convinced that my core idea is that we as a Democracy are best served when all have a seat at the table and we accept the decision of the majority. That does not mean that I should stop pointing out the misguided decisions of the majority. Lol. That is the beauty of the system. The more voices, the more arguments the better the compromise will be. As we can never achieve perfection, never fear the need for argument will never end. For that very reason, compromise will also be always needed, short of war.
Now getting to my point. Michael Reagan in a blistering article in the above Newsmax titled “It’s Time to Retire the GOP’s Moderates” makes his own case about how the Reagan Coalition is still out there as evidenced by some social ballots that passed. Notably the California “same sex marriage ban” went down to defeat by 5% while the state voted for Obama by a whopping 24%. I agree with his assessment.
The main point I agree with him on in his article is that he claims all of the meetings we as a Party are having to figure out what went wrong and how to change the party are led by the “coterie that led the party into eight years of ignoring the traditions and principles of the party pursued so avidly by the Reagan administration, with which they have the effrontery to identify themselves.” Michael Reagan claims this same “coterie”… “turned its back on the grass roots.” He blames our loss on those same people espousing moderation. He claims David Brooks is one of the journalistic leaders of this “coterie”.
I have blogged the praises of David Brooks in the past in regards to some of his articles. Was I wrong. Perhaps. I’m human. Is Michael Reagan right? Perhaps not. I guess I have some thinking and soul searching to do.
I hate it when I have to actually think for myself. But without that I will not see the good in the different sides and fail to identify common ground for the common good of the party.
Perhaps if I do then I can take the good from both or in our case, them all and come up with my own. If others will do the same maybe we will all earn a place at the table where our futures are decided. Maybe a coalition we can again build.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Republican
From Carnegie to the spate of current self help people, they all seem to think no idea is impossible once you cut through all the clutter, get to the core and define the dream or goal. Place that defined goal in front of you, then all your decisions will help achieve that goal. Once a goal is stated all else will follow.
I agree with that at least in part. Once I have a goal firmly in mind my brain seems almost subconsciously to sort itself out with that goal in mind. I become focused on the goal. All my action take on a slant in helping me achieve that goal.
I have learned over my life that I can achieve nearly any one goal I set my mind to. It is when I try to accomplish several of these “impossible” goals that I become distracted and unfocused, and I lose my way.
I get the Magazine Newsmax and in the Jan. 08 issue they had a great many articles about the predicament the Republicans are in and different ways we can get out of the problem. They did put together an excellent and long piece titled “Rebuilding the Party of Reagan”. In a boxed page and a half highlight was their breakdown of nine different Conservative Coalitions that at this time are fighting for supremacy within the Republican Party.
-----link to Newsmax Jan 08-----
http://content.yudu.com/Ayura/NMJan09/resources/24.htm
--------------------------------
(ps scroll through the pages for all the articles....you will have to give your email to access the magazine)
Some of these coalitions are overlapping and almost any Republican can sympathize with at least one or two of most of the different groups. This re-organization of the party is inevitable after a defeat. The trick will be to re-shape the party along lines that will win. The whole thrust of the article as evidenced by the title was how Reagan re-shaped the Party into a winning coalition.
While this answers the question of how Reagan did it, it does not answer the question of how we can do it without a Reaganesq candidate. Remember the seeds of Reagan were planted through a horrible loss run by Goldwater. Then Reagan lost to Gerald Ford, then finally Reagan had his day.
Those days after the Goldwater loss are often referred to as the days of “Wandering in the Wilderness”. I too am wandering in the Wilderness. I am torn between the different forms or ideas of Conservatism. I find myself shifting between the different coalitions mentioned above in the Newsmax article. Are we with all this separating ourselves into different camps trying to be Democrat Like in our apparent love of diversity? I hope not.
As much as I like to think that I can remake our party, I realize that I don’t even have a clear vision of what I want that party to be like. I think I’ve finally understood the obvious. There is no one segment that equals the whole. We are a coalition of many parts. I can believe in my own brand of Conservatism but will not be effective if I cannot work with other Conservatives and Republicans. Much like Ron Paul believes in his brand of Republicanism, much to his credit he realizes that without the rest of the party he will go nowhere. There is that dreaded word compromise.
So my emphasis will be on Coalition building. Much as I posted in my beginning efforts, I became convinced that my core idea is that we as a Democracy are best served when all have a seat at the table and we accept the decision of the majority. That does not mean that I should stop pointing out the misguided decisions of the majority. Lol. That is the beauty of the system. The more voices, the more arguments the better the compromise will be. As we can never achieve perfection, never fear the need for argument will never end. For that very reason, compromise will also be always needed, short of war.
Now getting to my point. Michael Reagan in a blistering article in the above Newsmax titled “It’s Time to Retire the GOP’s Moderates” makes his own case about how the Reagan Coalition is still out there as evidenced by some social ballots that passed. Notably the California “same sex marriage ban” went down to defeat by 5% while the state voted for Obama by a whopping 24%. I agree with his assessment.
The main point I agree with him on in his article is that he claims all of the meetings we as a Party are having to figure out what went wrong and how to change the party are led by the “coterie that led the party into eight years of ignoring the traditions and principles of the party pursued so avidly by the Reagan administration, with which they have the effrontery to identify themselves.” Michael Reagan claims this same “coterie”… “turned its back on the grass roots.” He blames our loss on those same people espousing moderation. He claims David Brooks is one of the journalistic leaders of this “coterie”.
I have blogged the praises of David Brooks in the past in regards to some of his articles. Was I wrong. Perhaps. I’m human. Is Michael Reagan right? Perhaps not. I guess I have some thinking and soul searching to do.
I hate it when I have to actually think for myself. But without that I will not see the good in the different sides and fail to identify common ground for the common good of the party.
Perhaps if I do then I can take the good from both or in our case, them all and come up with my own. If others will do the same maybe we will all earn a place at the table where our futures are decided. Maybe a coalition we can again build.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Republican
Friday, January 2, 2009
Lonely Freeman
Another case against “Trimopolies”
No, a “Trimopoly” is not an ancient country in Greece. The term is one I invented to cover all of “Big Business” generically. The “Big Three” in the auto industry comes to mind. Then I think of Home Depot, Lowes, and Menards. While the prefix Tri is not mandatory, the suffix “mopolie” (a corruption of my own for Monoply) is mandatory.
In Capitalism as in Politics, the crème rises to the top. In the course of human events we come to understand through brutal trial by fire that there must be limits on the power the crème can consolidate. In politics we came to America to fight that consolidation of power and the corruption it brings. We as an example accept that a President shall be limited to only two terms no matter how good a leader he or she or it is. We formed our nation in part to stop the idea of an all powerful king or dictator. In this country we had a chance to get away from the king idea and we violently seized it and have been hanging on to it for a few hundred years.
Capitalism or Free Enterprise was the tool we used as individuals to work towards our dreams in our pursuit for Happiness. Before long we found that unbridled pursuit by the strong left less available for the weak to pursue. Monopolies were formed in business, forcing out the smaller competitors until the entire market (steel for example) were crowded or bought out by one all powerful interest or company. (Conglomerate).
Just as is politics we limited The Presidency to two terms, we found that we needed to pass anti monopoly laws, breaking up those monopolies to stop the corruption of our Free Enterprise system. The idea was to break up the power they had gained over the market they controlled. What I have seen through the years is the skirting of the intent of the law by consolidating that power into three or more hands versus only one. Hence the word “trimopolies”.
The major point I have to make is that as a nation we realize that the consolidation of power leads ultimately to corruption. Out right corruption and also a basic corruption of the process of “Free” Competition. It is my contention that “Big” business and government climbed into bed a long time ago to the detriment of Individual Freedom as well as the Individual’s ability to enter into Free Enterprise. The cost is a loss of what individual efforts bring to the table, namely a wealth of new ideas and the trial and testing of those ideas in a free market place. The cost of failure is not born by others, but by the individual willing to put his idea and product to the test.
Try to build any new idea and produce it and market it. You will find that you will lack the funds needed. You may have the product but to satisfy all the required licenses permits, etc; you wallet will soon be bare.
The anti monopoly laws were made to stop the destruction of untold smaller manufacturers by one large one. It worked and now we have three large ones putting hundreds of others out of business by lobbying Big Government to enact and enforce restrictive regulations and fees.
This begs the question. Why do we like big. What is the universal appeal for unlimited control of what we are do? Efficiency seems the culprit.
We hear it all the time. It is the primary justification used to consolidate anything. The savings in manpower from cutting all the duplication of services in consolidation will be enormous. We will be able to purchase in bulk quantities with consolidation thus saving more money. With consolidated power at the top we will be able to pick the best method and not have a bunch of different approaches which by definition the majority of which will be at least not be as good as the one we pick.
Every head of a bureaucracy knows this to be true. Just as every dictator or tyrant knows. Just ask them if you dare. All bureaucracies leave room for innovation and new ideas. The process is long and arduous because it will mean things will have to change on a massive scale. But why go to all this extra trouble? What do we call this type of person. This must be where the term Troublemaker came from.
Every time I apply for a building permit to do something to my house. I feel as if I am applying for an exemption to do something on my own without the government helping me. I feel that I am putting undo pressure on the bureaucracy I am dealing with to do something so I can fix my house to justify the higher taxes they will charge me to keep them in raises.
Oh Well forget my wanderings. I just read this article in the Jan. Newsmax magazine titled “Remember the lonely Fisherman” by Jane Blakemore. I admit to finding some affinity to the Lonely Fisherman. lol
I found this link but you must give your email to view it. It also took me a while to figure out how to navigate the ezine. But it really is quite elegant.
-----link-----
http://content.yudu.com/Ayura/NMJan09/resources/24.htm
---------------
The article explains an exquisite example of how “BigBusiness” is putting the screws to the little fisherman through the facilitating efforts of “Big Government. A careful read explains how all the Big issues of the day have been used as reasons to put laws and regulations into play that financially cause small fishermen out of the business and make it nearly impossible for new ones to enter the business without a huge out lay of ready cash and the other accouterments necessary to battle the bureaucracy. Basically if I had that much money, I’d buy a house on a lake along with a boat and fish at my leisure. I wouldn’t need to do it for a living. Not liking bureaucrats much I would be at home on the lake in my boat because as the article points out the owners of the boats are nowhere near to the actual work of fishing.
Plus the licenses are much cheaper.
Also the article brings into question the whole idea or reason behind the efficiency of Big, are they really more efficient? Do they really help the industry and the fish population as claimed. As usual the answer is no.
So what’s the answer? A bigger bureaucracy may just be the ticket.
Then again maybe NOT.
Does anyone think it’s time to set up a Freedom Party?
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
No, a “Trimopoly” is not an ancient country in Greece. The term is one I invented to cover all of “Big Business” generically. The “Big Three” in the auto industry comes to mind. Then I think of Home Depot, Lowes, and Menards. While the prefix Tri is not mandatory, the suffix “mopolie” (a corruption of my own for Monoply) is mandatory.
In Capitalism as in Politics, the crème rises to the top. In the course of human events we come to understand through brutal trial by fire that there must be limits on the power the crème can consolidate. In politics we came to America to fight that consolidation of power and the corruption it brings. We as an example accept that a President shall be limited to only two terms no matter how good a leader he or she or it is. We formed our nation in part to stop the idea of an all powerful king or dictator. In this country we had a chance to get away from the king idea and we violently seized it and have been hanging on to it for a few hundred years.
Capitalism or Free Enterprise was the tool we used as individuals to work towards our dreams in our pursuit for Happiness. Before long we found that unbridled pursuit by the strong left less available for the weak to pursue. Monopolies were formed in business, forcing out the smaller competitors until the entire market (steel for example) were crowded or bought out by one all powerful interest or company. (Conglomerate).
Just as is politics we limited The Presidency to two terms, we found that we needed to pass anti monopoly laws, breaking up those monopolies to stop the corruption of our Free Enterprise system. The idea was to break up the power they had gained over the market they controlled. What I have seen through the years is the skirting of the intent of the law by consolidating that power into three or more hands versus only one. Hence the word “trimopolies”.
The major point I have to make is that as a nation we realize that the consolidation of power leads ultimately to corruption. Out right corruption and also a basic corruption of the process of “Free” Competition. It is my contention that “Big” business and government climbed into bed a long time ago to the detriment of Individual Freedom as well as the Individual’s ability to enter into Free Enterprise. The cost is a loss of what individual efforts bring to the table, namely a wealth of new ideas and the trial and testing of those ideas in a free market place. The cost of failure is not born by others, but by the individual willing to put his idea and product to the test.
Try to build any new idea and produce it and market it. You will find that you will lack the funds needed. You may have the product but to satisfy all the required licenses permits, etc; you wallet will soon be bare.
The anti monopoly laws were made to stop the destruction of untold smaller manufacturers by one large one. It worked and now we have three large ones putting hundreds of others out of business by lobbying Big Government to enact and enforce restrictive regulations and fees.
This begs the question. Why do we like big. What is the universal appeal for unlimited control of what we are do? Efficiency seems the culprit.
We hear it all the time. It is the primary justification used to consolidate anything. The savings in manpower from cutting all the duplication of services in consolidation will be enormous. We will be able to purchase in bulk quantities with consolidation thus saving more money. With consolidated power at the top we will be able to pick the best method and not have a bunch of different approaches which by definition the majority of which will be at least not be as good as the one we pick.
Every head of a bureaucracy knows this to be true. Just as every dictator or tyrant knows. Just ask them if you dare. All bureaucracies leave room for innovation and new ideas. The process is long and arduous because it will mean things will have to change on a massive scale. But why go to all this extra trouble? What do we call this type of person. This must be where the term Troublemaker came from.
Every time I apply for a building permit to do something to my house. I feel as if I am applying for an exemption to do something on my own without the government helping me. I feel that I am putting undo pressure on the bureaucracy I am dealing with to do something so I can fix my house to justify the higher taxes they will charge me to keep them in raises.
Oh Well forget my wanderings. I just read this article in the Jan. Newsmax magazine titled “Remember the lonely Fisherman” by Jane Blakemore. I admit to finding some affinity to the Lonely Fisherman. lol
I found this link but you must give your email to view it. It also took me a while to figure out how to navigate the ezine. But it really is quite elegant.
-----link-----
http://content.yudu.com/Ayura/NMJan09/resources/24.htm
---------------
The article explains an exquisite example of how “BigBusiness” is putting the screws to the little fisherman through the facilitating efforts of “Big Government. A careful read explains how all the Big issues of the day have been used as reasons to put laws and regulations into play that financially cause small fishermen out of the business and make it nearly impossible for new ones to enter the business without a huge out lay of ready cash and the other accouterments necessary to battle the bureaucracy. Basically if I had that much money, I’d buy a house on a lake along with a boat and fish at my leisure. I wouldn’t need to do it for a living. Not liking bureaucrats much I would be at home on the lake in my boat because as the article points out the owners of the boats are nowhere near to the actual work of fishing.
Plus the licenses are much cheaper.
Also the article brings into question the whole idea or reason behind the efficiency of Big, are they really more efficient? Do they really help the industry and the fish population as claimed. As usual the answer is no.
So what’s the answer? A bigger bureaucracy may just be the ticket.
Then again maybe NOT.
Does anyone think it’s time to set up a Freedom Party?
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)