Beware of Labels

One of the resources I post discussion on is Whitehouse2. I do it mainly because arguments don't normally degenerate into tirades of "you liberal pig" or "you conservative swine". One of the posters over there is Recluse. He or She is bright and can carry on a discussion by actually making his points as well as his point of view.

WH2 is based on the premise of Priorities for the nation. Each "thread" is written in a manner that makes it an action item. The members support it or oppose it. They post talking points, documents, statistics, and discussions. It is linked to HelloCongress.org. By entering your zip code information you are linked to the pages of your federally elected officials. That means that Senator Umptyfratz of the great state of confusion can go to his page on HC and see which WH2 members are actually his constituents in the real world and what thier priorities for the nation are.

Anyway, Recluse posted "Thank a Liberal" as a document under the priority Restore, Uphold, and Defend the Constitution.

It falls in line with other famous posts on the net such as "thank a
soldier, thank a teacher, thank a dog-catcher. It is designed to make
you think. And it succeeds in several areas. For me, it makes me think
about how politics is consumed with labels. You are pigeon holed and
stereotyped and may God in his heaven pity you if you don't follow the
party line.

Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry

If you have not died in a heat wave, drought, hurricane, flood, wildfire, or other climate change disaster, and like the idea of your children and grandchildren not living in desert wastelands, thank a liberal.

Personally, I choose the label of Realist. I have plenty of opinion and philosophical differences with our system, but I consciously try to add a reality check to keep me honest. I don't see most of those improvements or changes in Recluses' post as what we label "liberal" in nature. In my opinion they more accurately fit the definition of the word "Radical". And, like most causes there is a time that the cause is fixed and needs to be honorably retired.

Some of the referenced programs in the post include Unions, the Rural Electrification Administration, and the FDA to name three. Do you notice that each has either outlived their useful lifespan or has morphed into a huge lumbering bureaucracy? I don't have a problem with progress. I like indoor plumbing and light switches. What I don't like is non-productive government agencies that suck our tax dollars into a black hole that Captain Kirk couldn't escape from. I'm also not too thrilled with organizations that would force a worker into their ranks, and force him to pay into their campaign coffers whether he supports their causes or not.

Right now the cause of the day is Health Care Reform. Eventually I hope that no one actually writes "If you enjoy waiting in line twelve months for an ultrasound..." or "If you enjoyed being told that you are too old for a lifesaving drug....." and they end it with "Thank a Liberal".

Here's the reality check. Beware of labels unless you apply them to yourself. Any label another puts on you is designed to force you into their mold. Thanks for reading.

FTFGIMAD

It's Tom Sullivans Fault (just kidding)

I can't believe how big a stink is being made over the Gates issue. I blame it on Tom Sullivans radio show. Just Kidding. I was listening yesterday and was frankly surprised at the amount of time the story got. I was even more surprised at the number of people who truly think the issue and arrest are racially motivated. Gates and others who see racism behind every action they don't like need a reality check. So, here goes.

• Screaming about it being racist doesn't make it so.
• Mr Obama should not have commented on it since it isn't a Presidential concern and his opinion of the police is not relevant anyway.
• Racism as an institution is gone. See the civil rights act, various hate crime legislation, societal disapproval, and the number of successful lawsuits over the last forty years.
• There are individual bigots and racists. They come in all skin colors and genders. We have a name for them. It starts with an "A" and rhymes with Bass (as in the fish).

I heard the police officer isn't going to apologize. Good for him. Oh, and if you want to listen to a talk radio show that doesn't normally devolve into bad manners, give Tom a shot. The link to his show is the one above and gives you plenty of options.

If We Can Put A Man On The Moon

Forty Years ago today man walked on the moon. All over the nation people are celebrating that achievement. I'm not. Instead I am mad as hell. Click the read more link to learn why.

If I've heard it once I have heard it a million times, "We can put a man on the moon... but we can't (insert gripe here)". For me, that gripe just about sums it up. I grew up on playgrounds where we were astronauts. No one doubted that by 2000 we'd have cities in space and a base on the moon.

In the world of tomorrow power was cheap and beamed from satellites. Everyone understood basic science. Air cars (remember the Jetsons?) were the norm and vacations to the moon were routine. Instead we are in yet another energy hostage situation and our kids are not exactly breaking records in the math and science literacy category.

Who's to blame for this mess? Folks it's a 50/50 deal. The .gov gets half the blame for not pursuing a government/industrial partnership which could have lowered the infrastructure costs enough to allow private enterprise into the picture without taxpayer subsidies. By now, such a system would have paid for itself and free enterprise use of space would be a given. We shouldn't be mining coal. We should have the united mine workers gutting the asteroid belt.

The other half of the anger goes to you, me, and our parents for not pushing space flight and exploration to the point that the .gov had to listen. If Congress really wanted a balanced budget, we'd have one. If Congress really wanted to get the big government out of the space business in favor of private enterprise, we would have. Instead Uncle Sugar has a lock and NASA has no budget to speak of.

So yeah, instead of celebrating the achievement I am pissed off that we in fact didn't take it any further.

Is Freedom in Irans Future?

It's been a long month and a lot of things have happened. I'm watching the Iran situation unfold just like a lot of you. The way I see it, if there is a moral need to promote anything it would be worldwide liberty. The people of Iran and China (to a lesser extent) need to know that America stands with them on the issue of increased personal liberties and the decrease of oppressive governments. It isn't left or right wing. It is right and wrong.

That doesn't mean we have to invade Iran. It does mean that the person sitting in the oval office needs to stop waffling and answering in sound bytes. He needs to place the entire state department on the task of applying pressure to exploit the cracks in the Iranian facade.

States Rights Revisited

There is a growing movement afoot called the Patrick Henry Caucus. If you read my blog with any kind of regularity then you know I advocate a smaller fed and a more independent state. And, within my state of Texas I like our state government and it's general relationship with the local government. Nothings perfect, but it is a dang sight better than the Fed/State relationship.

A group of State Legislators appeared on Mike Church's talk radio show and advocated getting together and creating "Tenth Amendment Resolutions". One of his guests, a Dr. Kevin Gutzman, author of Who Killed the Constitution? suggested that ten or fifteen states band together and simultaneously introduce legislation to say "We are not taking any Federal funding related to the No Child Left Behind law."

I like the idea. But something was nagging at me. So, I double checked my own trusty Constitution. Look at Art I, Sec 10. I think that Dr. Gutzmans' idea would be invalidated by the courts. Check it out and tell me what you think.

Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

The part I am concerned with is the "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress,...enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State".

I'm a literal minded guy. So I read that exactly as written. No one can tell me that it is to be interpreted to apply to military actions either since the "lay any duty..." is in there. But since I am not (don't tell my wife) perfect all opinions would be welcomed.