promoting the unwanted, redheaded stepchild that is individual liberty

Posts Tagged ‘politics’

In the game of politics what really matters?

In politics on April 26, 2010 at 12:49 am

Democrat, Republican, progressive, libertarian, conservative, communist — so many labels that only serve to divide. Yet people cling to these categories as if their very identities depended on them. For some, it does.

Politics becomes more than just a necessary evil their sense of civil duty requires them to take part in. It is a game, a lust for political banter, partisanship and identity.

But do politics really matter and, if so, why?

Political junkies can regurgitate the latest national news or recite the who’s who in Washington, yet most can’t recall the reason they became involved in politics to begin with. Was it a concern for free markets? A desire to protect family values? The environment perhaps?

The truth is, these “junkies” have lost sight of what really matters — namely, people. If human beings do not matter than no issue, whether it be marriage, energy, or the economy, is of any importance.

Hearing political pundits refer to the “tea baggers” or discuss Nancy Pelosi’s Botox injection is wearisome. Such matters are trivial when compared to real, human issues such as the effects of the “war on drugs” or the genocide in Darfur. It’s an embarrassment we even discuss them.

All of us, whatever our political identity, need to remember what truly matters in this game called politics. Otherwise we have no business playing.

Advertisements

Obama ‘allows’ Israel to defend itself, retain secrecy

In foreign policy on October 5, 2009 at 3:13 am

 

Source: AP

Source: AP

 While America and the international community are bullying Iran into allowing U.N. inspectors access to its nuclear plants, Israel is retaining sovereignty of its borders.

Friday, the Washington Times reported that President Obama agreed to allow Israel to continue with its nuclear arsenal exempt from international inspections, reaffirming a decade-old secret.

At first glance, the Obama administrations policy seems unfair — and it is. But more importantly is the notion that Israel is being allowed by the United States to retain secrecy of its national defense.

Israel — like Iran, like America — is a sovereign nation.

Someone should start making patriotic bumper stickers that read: America, policing the world since 1945.

Id buy one.

 

Ready or not, here we come Iran!

In war, war and peace on September 28, 2009 at 5:28 am

Top three reasons why the U.S. should go to war with Iran:

1) Their leader is a crazy, brutal dictator.

2) They are pursuing weapons of mass destruction in the form of nuclear weapons.

3) They are evading U.N. inspections.

Iran, like Iraq, is an unstable dictatorship. International treaty clearly states that only stable countries such as China and Russia are allowed to have nuclear weapons. Not only is Iran unstable, it is centered in the much volatile Middle East. Only one nation, Israel, is allowed/given nuclear technology because they are our friend.

This Thursday, five permanent U.N. security council members plus Germany will meet with Iranian officials in Geneva to discuss nuclear disarmament. The United States, Britain, Russia, China, France and Germany will attempt to pressure Iran into letting international inspectors have full access to Irans newly disclosed underground uranium enrichment plant.

All of these nations, with the exception of Germany, have nuclear weapons. But then again, they should be allowed to have nuclear weapons as they are amongst the worlds civilized. And although the United States is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in warfare, it has every right to tell Iran what to do.

I hope Iran refuses to allow the international inspectors full access. Then, as with Iraq, we can go in and clean house. Perhaps we could even establish a democracy for the Iranian people in the process. Although we may have to reinstitute the draft and print/borrow more money via the Federal Reserve to accommodate a third war, our efforts will be worth it. After all, we are the leader of the free world.

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Prove it”  Iran.

If not, were coming in to get you.

(Note: This post is meant to be satirical.)

The ugly side of a movement

In racism on September 28, 2009 at 1:59 am

As a student preparing for a career in journalism, I’ve been taught over and over again the importance of honesty and fairness in reporting. So for the sake of truly being “fair and balanced” I decided to Google “Tea Party movement racist” yesterday.

Sometimes the truth is more unsettling to the reporter than to the reader.

I found a number of images depicting signs with racist/ethnocentric phrases spray-painted on them. Evidently, Freedom Works and Glenn Beck have conveniently overlooked many of the events’ participants. Their reporting of The Tea Party movement and the 9-12 Project depict a sterilized version of what’s really going on at these protest — ignoring much of the racial “background noise” as Tim Wise, author of Between Barack and a Hard Place, puts it.

Now, you may be thinking: “All this racial baiting seems to be nothing more than dirty politics. It’s the age-old tactic of employing the ‘race-card’ to distract from the real issues of taxation and government spending.”

At least, that’s what I thought. Sometimes I really hate being wrong.

While many have attacked the Tea Party movement for its racial undertones, the real issue isn’t race — it’s a highbred of nationalism, ethnocentrism and racism.

Take, for example, the recent hysteria over “socialism” and “communism.” Let me first say that I do not support socialism or communism. I find them both fallacious and their view of human beings oppressive. But I do not fear socialism or communism — on the contrary, I see merit in many of their ideas.

But the constant employment of the blade and sickle and the finger pointing harkens back to the days of McCarthy and “red baiting.” Americans had a heightened sense of nationalism during and after World War II. The election of President Barack Obama seems to have brought to surface the nationalistic/ethnocentric attitudes of many Americans.

Take, for example, the “birther” movement. For sure, some of the birthers are racist individuals who don’t want a “Kenyan” in the White House. But the large majority are red-blooded Americans who don’t want their country to be taken over by a “foreigner.” They are nationalist who see America and American culture (e.i. capitalism, Christianity, etc.) as being threatened.

At first, I couldn’t imaging where all these tea partiers were during the bailout-Bush era. Now, I understand. The majority of these people didn’t see Bush as the threat that they see Barack Obama. After all, Bush was American; he was from Texas; he gave lip service to the ideals of capitalism and limited-government spending. But Barack — he’s just too different.

It’s sad to see the racist/ethnocentric/nationalistic tendencies of America boil to the surface. A movement that is seemingly empowering the people is at the same time oppressing them. My hope is that the ideas of liberty and limited government rise above the ignorance and prejudice that are clinging to them.

Time Magazine asks Ron Paul about the Fed, marijuana, media bias

In Federal Reserve, politics on September 23, 2009 at 4:01 am

Recently, on Time Magazine’s “10 Questions,” Rep. Ron Paul was asked ten questions submitted by readers. A total of 220 questions were submitted.

In the interview, Paul talks about his new book, End the Fed. Paul’s “Audit the Fed” bill, HR 1207, has received the support of two-thirds of the House of Representatives.

Addressing the current financial crisis, Paul tells the Time reporter:

“The Federal Reserve is the culprit and if we can get an audit we could reveal exactly what they do. Because they deal in trillions of dollars of extending loans to special interests, special banks, special corporations, they make deals with other central banks and other governments of the world. So they’re a government to themselves and they print their own money.”

Watch out (again) for Ron Paul in 2012.