Friday, March 1, 2013

Surviving the Test of Time...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny



The nation is indeed in serious trouble. The right and the left are so enmeshed in their own ideological perspective neither can differentiate between day and night. It's okay they keep reassuring themselves...  after all  those we elected are working hard at ensuring our well being. A sentiment that   will, in the long run, amount to exactly NOTHING.

Yep, the nation's electorate, which is of course us, are happy believing those we elect are going to address the problems we face and ultimately resolve them in our best interests. However, given the present realities I guess it depends on whether or not one really understand what your interests are. At this juncture in history my bet rests on most don't have a clue what there own rational self interests are, let alone how to preserve them.

Okay... whether you agree or not I'm here to tell you that 99.9% of the politicians you elect are out to accomplish one thing and one thing only, it is getting reelected. In other words the a'holes will tell you anything they think you want to here. I don't mean to offend anyone but I must say they are apparently doing a mighty fine job deciphering what they think you are saying because for the most part you keep reelecting them.

I find it interesting, indeed comical, the number of times I hear people say "it's not my representative and Senator." that is part of the problem. How foolish and naive can one be?

As a classical liberal, and for those who do not understand what that means do some research, I can only say our leadership in both parties have failed us. To be fair the socon and neocon factions of the rEpublican party are the most at fault for attempting to keep the country on a 19th and 20th century footing. I have a news flash for you, time and technology moves on. If we are to keep the nation we all love we must move on with the times as well.

On a different yet related note.

I'm not my brothers or sisters keeper. I must live for myself and act voluntarily and responsibly to insure for myself and my family the level of prosperity we desire. Having said this I will be among the first to acknowledge your rights as well as  standing up to secure and protect them if necessary. I will be ready and willing to protect you and members of your family from bodily harm to the maximum extent I am able. In return I will ask nothing other than to let me live my life as I choose. Honorably and and with the self respect I have eared the right to demand.

The beacon of liberty, prosperity, and equality has shone brightest on the North American continent and the United States of America. Have we always lived up to the lofty ideals Thomas Jefferson inscribed in our Declaration of Independence? Without hesitation I will say no, we have not. However, even given this, today we remain the freest and most productive nation the world has ever known. Whether we remain in this position depends entirely on us.

We are facing the test that time always demands of great nation states. From Ancient Greece to the Roman Empire. From the Persian Empire to the Ottoman Empire. From the Incas and the Aztecs. From the British Empire to Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union they have all failed this test. Today the United States of America facing the same test other great nation states have failed.

Will our diverse and uniquely different nation be the next to fail the test of time? I hope not. It will depend on us working together to solve the problems of a modern, diverse, and free nation. Sadly, given the current state of our nation I fear the worst.

Good Night until another time.

40 comments:

  1. As long as that intersection of big business, big government, and big labor continues to get such huge traffic/pimpin', I truly fear that the results will continue to disappoint.......That, and wouldn't it be nice if these politicians would think outside the box once in a while? Stimulus, stimulus junior, stimulus with a side order of fries. I mean, my God, it's getting so damned predictable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You make some good points that dovetail nicely with my premise. Likely it is neither conservatives or progressives will respond to this post. Few ideologues actually make the attempt to analyze their positions let alone recognize they are part of the problem.

      Life is good. When you figure it out

      Good Night USA, and Good Luck.

      Delete
  2. Les, I agree with your sentiments and am exhausted from even trying to fight it. Politics is hopeless, DC is not reformable. The question for me and my new family is this: where do we go?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have decided it is near hopeless, but, and it is a big but, it may still be possible. One thing is certain though, compromise will have to be part of the equation.

      Perhaps the best opportunity was missed when the President "shrugged" at Simpson Bowles.

      To throw in the towel is to admit defeat. Fighting to preserve the best of America, recognizing the need for intelligent change, and accepting we can never get 100% of what we like very likely will result in finding common ground. Which, whether one likes it or not, is required in a nation as large and diverse as.ours.

      Delete
  3. So, if you study history, then name the nation states that HAVE survived the test of times!

    We always focus on failure and on the nation states that have failed...we never mention the ones that succeed.

    I will give you two: The Netherlands and Switzerland

    The one thing that both of them have in common is that while at different times they were both great powers neither one ever had a military and were not that big in the colonialization business.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did not say we have failed because we are not yet there.

      To have an efficient and effective military is sensible and in the best interest of the nation's people. When used in response to an unprovoked act of aggression by a hostile predator nation.


      Of course being the world's big kahuna invites the second biggest to go for the gold. Or a lunatic madman.

      Unfortunaly succeeding generations did not heed the words of founding fathers with respect to 'foreign engagements.

      Delete
  4. Also, taospeaks, Norway, a Scandinavian country, ranked as the happiest country in the world according to Forbes Magazine (January 2013). The USA fell from 10th place last year to 12th this year, not even making the top ten.

    Next came Denmark, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, our neighbors to the north, Canada, Finland, The Netherlands, Switzerland, and Ireland.

    Every single one of those top ten happy countries has government universal health care. As I've stated on my blog, it is really difficult to pursue life, liberty, and happiness when you're sick or when that sickness wipes out your life's savings. I understand these are countries much smaller in population than the US. We are the world's third most populous country. In addition to our vast natural resources, we have a large population as a natural resource.

    Our problems are man-made. We ought to be able to solve them. We have the resources, but not the political will because there is, IMO, a political party that has allowed the crazies to take over and instead of working for compromises and solutions, they are working for policy purity.

    A country of 300 million people CANNOT be governed without compromise. I place the deadlock at the feet of the GOP. They absolutely will not compromise at all ever. There's your deadlock. And an unhappy country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed our problems are man made, as all problems are. Solutions must be man made as well.

      Compromise, intelligent compromise is indeed the avenue to finding workable solutions that have the greatest positive impact and the least negative ones.

      The nation's political leadership of both parties spends by far more time placing blame at the feet of the other party IMNHO.

      Delete
    2. They may be "happier" but everybody seems to want to come to this country and not nearly so much theirs.

      Delete
    3. "but everybody seems to want to come to this country and not nearly so much theirs."

      Can we please stop with the platitudes?

      Folks do emigrate to European countries and, as is the case here, immigration policy is a controversial issue in those countries. Witness the recent growth in popularity of anti-immigration parties in Europe. Try moving to Switzerland-you might find it very difficult to get in. France has a hefty immigrant population especially from North Africa which was France's big colonial bailiwick. England has (or at least had, they may have changed it recently) policy of admitting anyone from English colonies so they get e.g. a lot of Indians, Pakistanis, etc.

      Sure people want to come here too. Though, of late, the trends have changed a bit. Entrepreneurial types used to come here to get educated and stay here to start businesses. Lately more of them are leaving after getting educated to start businesses elsewhere.

      Now you could say that's because the U.S. is anti-business. But what are the pro-business countries these folks are choosing instead of the U.S.? India? Pakistan? Malaysia? China???! Brazil is booming these days. Do you want to live in any of those countries? Do you want the U.S. to be more like any of those countries? If not, too bad. Because the U.S. is becoming a "2nd World" country and I don't see how it can be stopped. Business is increasingly global and has no national allegiances. Capital will flow to where the best deals can be found and if that means countries with cheap labor, no worrisome regulations designed to keep the water and air free of industrial toxins, no worries about worker safety, child labor, ... that's where the money will go. Right now the Western developed countries still have most of the relatively wealthy consumers that business needs. But as middle classes grow in the developing world, that will change.

      Delete
  5. I must live for myself and act voluntarily and responsibly to insure for myself and my family the level of prosperity we desire.

    ---------
    That's the pure stinky cheese. The will and your desires are NEVER satisfied.
    Until you realize the existence of serious conflicts of interest the Libertarian
    philosophy is useless and comic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Netherlands never had a massive navy?

    See, that's why people don't pay attention to Libertarians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whatever. Lots of libertarians are opposed to the MIC. You must be thinking about the neocons.

      Delete
    2. I will give you two: The Netherlands and Switzerland

      The one thing that both of them have in common is that while at different times they were both great powers neither one ever had a military and were not that big in the colonialization business.
      -----
      The Netherlands didn't colonize? Surely you've heard of the spice trade, even if Tao has not.

      Delete
  7. Replies
    1. My appology, It got sent to spam. I've been a bit under the weather these past few days.

      Delete
  8. No problem. I usually inadvertently delete comments. At least you were able to find mine.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shaw, per usual, only underscoring the craziness and recalcitrance on the Republican side. The fact of the matter is that, while, yes, the Republicans were significantly less than helpful during Obama's first term, it's Obama who's currently putting forth the "it's my way or the highway" (and his hysteria over sequester was hardly Presidential) routine. I mean, just look at what happened right after the election, for Christ. Boehner (who I'm hardly a supporter of) put forth a deficit reduction package ($800 billion in revenues and $1.4 trillion in cuts) that was significantly TO THE LEFT of the almost deal that he and Obama had in 2011 ($800 billion in revenues and $3.2 trillion in cuts) and it was Obama who responded comically to it, putting forth a package of $1.6 trillion in revenues and $400 billion in cuts that wasn't even that much because it also contained more stimulus spending (the same old, same old).............And as for these crazy ideas, I really think that the donkeys can more than hold their own in this regard as well; Cash for Clunkers, a Green Jobs Czar, a heathcare plan in which a person only has to pay a (relatively) small fine and then is allowed to purchase health insurance once he or she gets sick, Cap and Trade (a policy that even Obama's former budget director, Peter Orszag, referred to as corporate welfare), etc., etc..

    ReplyDelete
  10. Obama tried with Republicans for four years. All he got was the most vile attacks on himself. It should be no surprise he now goes directly to the people. Obama is the most conservative Democratic president ever. Republicans should be taking advantage of that instead of trying to claim he is such a socialist. Republicans have made the worst political decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Truman, Kennedy, Carter, and Clinton were all more conservative than Obama in my opinion. Cleveland, too, but that's going pretty far back.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon, On point A you are correct, and, going to the people is appropriate. Reagan and Clinton were quite good at it. Obama, given his recent Gallup Poll numbers may not ne as effective at it.

    On point B you are. incorrect IMO. While he is certainly NOT a socialist (any more so than FDR or GWB) he is not the most conservative democratic president. Either. Will pretty much covered that one quite accurately, IMO.

    He might stack up fairly close to LBJ, given ObamaCare and drone strikes.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Did Obama put the unemployed to work with an FDR type government work program? No, even though Democrats wanted him to do just that in 2009.
    In fact, in 2007 (check the polls then) 75% of Americans wanted some kind of government, or universal health care, but Obama said that would not make sense. I doubt that wold be the response from LBJ, Kennedy, FDR, or Truman.
    Would Kennedy, LBJ, or Truman offer 4 trillion in cuts (as Obama offered last year before we settled on sequestration) including our social safety net programs, I doubt it.
    Which Democratic president would bail out corporations and banks, while watching millions of citizens lose their homes?
    The idea of military invention, is to create new arms that will kill our enemy, with the fewest casualties among our forces. Drones do that, and a Republican president GB instituted that policy first. They save more civilian casualties, than sending 100's of thousands of troops into the field. How many Iraqi civilian deaths happened when Bush sent troops into Iraq? Not to mention our war on terrorism is against groups of terrorists, not States we can invade, which was Bush's mistake invading Iraq.
    Obamacare is a regulation of insurance companies, not a government takeover of medical care like the Democratic Medicare.
    Will, you make a general statement about Democratic presidents, but do you disagree with what I just cited? Please cite specific issues (as I just did-and there are more) where those Democratic presidents would have been more conservative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you should ask them. Perhaps you can find a psychic that could help you.

      HISTORY, as always shall be the final arbiter. For now, it is what it is. American politicians will continue to do what they do best. Piss into the wind and hope they don't get hit by the yellow rain.

      Moving on you may enjoy my follow up post. If not, well there is always the wind...

      Delete
  14. I think that Obama was more or less reasonable for the first term but when he came out 2 months ago with his proposal of $1.6 trillion in taxes and $400 billion in cuts (which really wasn't even that in that it included additional stimulus spending) and then told the Republicans to stuff it, yeah, that was pretty "liberal".......Truman cut federal spending by 45% after WW2 (this, despite all the Keynesians telling him not to). Kennedy cut taxes and ran to the right of Nixon on fighting communism. Carter increased Pentagon spending and was challenged from the left by Teddy Kennedy. Clinton passed welfare reform, a capital gains tax cut, NAFTA, and refrained from crazy-assed spending (Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute LOVES Clinton). Those would be my examples, I guess.......And the almost deal that Obama and Boehner had was exactly that, almost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good examples, however likely not satisfactory for aNon, the phantom wizard from Delusionville.

      I bet aNon is enjoying the yellow rain shower he likes to give self however.

      Delete
    2. Oops, I really have no clue as to aNon's gender. My bad. Hope I didn't offend yellow showers.

      Delete
    3. And I'm not sure if the bank bailouts can be considered "conservative" if more of the Democrats in the House voted for them than Republicans.

      Delete
  15. Truman cut spending by 45% after WW II? The war spending stopped, and you call that a conservative move? Now I know why you you are confused. That's not an acceptable example. A Democratic president cutting taxes would only be considered conservative in today's delusional mind of contemporary conservatives, not that I thought you were anything else, but it sure reveals your childish view of politics. That's like saying Reagan and Bush were liberals because they never cut spending and, in fact, increased the size and budget of government. You guys are funny, but continue to spout like you know anything about politics, NOT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude, you simply don't know your history. All throughout the war and especially at the ending of it, virtually every Keynesian economist of the day was predicting yet another great depression and that if Truman didn't put forth yet another massive spending bill the results would be calamitous. Truman considered it but was ultimately persuaded by the Republicans to cut spending instead and 1946 was one of the greatest years in U.S. history.......As for Kennedy, he cut the top marginal rates. When was the last time that a Democrat did that? I'll save you the time. It's never been done.......And if you actually think that Obama is more conservative than Clinton, who passed welfare reform, NAFTA, a capital gains tax cut, and who actually kept spending under control for 8 years, then you are living in another galaxy, man.

      Delete
  16. Well aNon, looks like the ball got spiked back at ya. Don't choke on it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. You missed my point, figures; and no I don't consider things that never happened, neither does any good student of history

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What never happened? Alvin Hansen (the American Keynes) didn't prod Truman into putting forth yet another big stimulus bill? Truman didn't cut federal spending by 45% (yes, a lot of that was the war ending but not ALL of it) and get rid of price supports? Kennedy didn't cut the top marginal rates from 91% to 77% and later to 70%? Clinton didn't pass NAFTA, welfare reform, a capital gains tax cut and retard the growth of federal spending to 2% a year?......As for Jimmy Carter, the man went on Larry King and said that he had a better relationship with Howard Baker and Bob Michael than he did with the Democratic leadership, and I'm pretty sure that when Teddy Kennedy challenged him in 1980, it was FROM THE LEFT.

      Delete
    2. Les, I talk politics a lot; on the blogs, on Facebook, at work, and I've never once heard a person say that Obama was more conservative than Clinton, Kennedy, et. al.. I guess that it just goes to show you that anything is possible.

      Delete
    3. aNon has certainly proven that time and time again! What would we ever do without trolls like aNon?

      Delete
  18. Hey Will, aNon the Delusional thinks you missed his point. As if he had one to begin with. This troll is rapidly wearing out his welcome. Pointless, clueless, and delusional. Yep, time to send it back to.the dense forest from whence it came.

    ReplyDelete
  19. aNon, you are one sick disgusting individual. Hopefully the mold was broke after you were conceived. You are an example of a fetus that should have been aborted. You are sick and your pathetic comments and personal attacks (like your last one today at 6:00 PM EDT) will .never see daylight here.

    So aNon go back to your dark and dank celler and amuse yourself. You pathetic disgusting pile of human excrement.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Replies
    1. No, aNon the it is MUCH worse. You wouldn't believe the number of personal attacks I have just either sent to spam or deleted because they were either bald faced character assassination and lies or simply too disgusting to print.

      aNon is like a pit bull. Once it thinks it has got a hold of you it never lets go. One VERY sick dude indeed. Whoever it and or its cousins are they represent the most disgusting element of society.

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.