Sunday, December 26, 2010

An Open Letter to Tom Schatz and CAGW

Dear Tom;

Why are you defending the status quo with regards to “Defense Spending”? From your materials (e.g., the survey), you appear to subscribe to the idea that, other than a few expensive toilets and hammers, “Defense Spending” is sacrosanct. I urge you to reposition CAGW on this issue!

Spending for our national defense is something conscious Americans can fully support. However, you and I both know that this bears little resemblance to “Defense Spending.” We have military bases all over the world, located in countries who are by and large our allies. Why? I am not interested in defending Israel or Germany – they have ample resources to do this on their own. Why are we taking food out of our poor, under-educated American children’s mouths (cue the soft violins) to monitor air traffic coming into Israel and Germany?

If we are providing a service to these countries, let them pay for it – IN FULL. Otherwise, close the bases and installations and bring our American Service Members home.

Why are we wasting our blood and money in Iraq and Afghanistan? We went into Iraq on a set of lies – we should be getting the hell out of there on the wings of the truth - Iraq has never had a damned thing to do with our national defense! Along the same lines, the Afghans insist on electing feudal lords and mullahs, so let them be. Get us the hell out of there too - just make them aware that if they ever again allow terrorist training camps back in we will bomb them the hell out of existence.

My proposed positions free up funds for and promote our national defense. The current positions and policies are related to empire-building and are a waste of American money and goodwill.

Our State Department and intelligence gathering apparatuses are a disgrace, a huge waster of funds, and in some case, a danger to our liberty. There should be more accountability in the funds that are spent for these activities.

The huge growth of the federal government implied by the health care bill is indeed a priority. But what about the massive waste represented by the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, the FDA with the so-called food safety bill and a dozen other chunks of bloated bureaucracy?

Finally, where is the call for pay and benefit equity with the private sector? Where is the call for the illegalization of public unions - how much sense does it make for public service employees to organize to lobby for their collective self-interests against those of the general public? This is a travesty, and you have not had the integrity to speak up in this matter all the years which I have been following CAGW.

I am not interested in a laundry list of expensive toilets and the occasional bridge to nowhere. I want to see some real change – some change I can bank on. Stop getting balled up in the little details and fight the big fights! If federal bureaucrats are forced to take pay and benefit cuts, they will have less time to overpay for toilets.

Sincerely,
David Rogers

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Should We Join with Today's Conservatives?

The FaceBook group "Being Conservative' reminds us that “The Constitution remains under constant attack! We must be prepared to make a difference! ‘Like’ if you will be standing with us!!!”

Just remember, while you are standing there thinking that you are standing with patriots who love our Constitution, you are also standing with men and woman who would empower the state to bring "men with guns" to enforce prohibition (anti-drug laws, etc.), to force pregnancies (anti-choice laws), and to dictate which groups of consenting adults can call themselves married (so-called "defense of marriage" laws).

Are you sure that you are so callous about the rights of individuals that you can bear to support today's conservatives? Do you think that their definition of "limited government" is worth the devil's bargain they have made with the Religious Right which invites these intrusions by the state upon individual rights? Do you think that an entity that acts to shred the Declaration of Independence, and the understanding of Individual Rights and Liberty therein, is worthy of your support?

I don't!

How can we reconcile these differences, between true Libertarians and the new conservatives? You can start by recognizing the difference between convictions and policies.

You may have the conviction that drugs are evil, but making that a policy infringes on the rights of other individuals.

You may have the conviction that abortion is morally wrong, but making it a policy subjugates a woman's body to the State and infringes on the rights of other individuals.

You may have the conviction that homosexual marriage will destroy the institution of marriage and should be banned, but making it a policy violates the "equal protection" clause and infringes on the rights of other individuals.

Notice that nowhere am I telling you that your convictions are wrong! But I am telling you that if you advocate these policies, you are acting in a way that is un-American, in that you are supporting the right of the state to infringe on the rights of individuals!

Do you hear me Didier? Do you hear me Rossi? Do you hear me Dr Paul?

Friday, July 23, 2010

Should Libertarians Support the GOP or the Tea Party?

In a word, "No!" The conservative movement has been subverted by the Religious Right. No self-respecting Libertarian should ever embrace the homophobic, anti-choice, and anti-individual liberty positions inherent today in both the Republican and Tea parties. Libertarians should instead make it clear that their position on all of these social issues is "Our bodies, our choices" and that the social moderates in the Republican party need to get up off their backsides and muzzle the “social nanny state” pretenders that are currently running their parties, before we will join with them.

I would rather see Obama win again than to elect someone who thinks that what I put in my body, how I choose to end my life, how my daughter, wife or friend deals with an unwanted pregnancy, or who my friend Jim wants to get married to is any of their goddamned business, or is anywhere near the proper place of government to determine or to interfere with in any way.

Libertarians used to be up in arms about "men with guns" dictating how you live your life, but somewhere along with the discussion about charter schools, we became infected with some of the rhetoric of the Religious Right. I say "Bullshit!"

You can't be pro-prohibition and be Libertarian! You can't be against assisted suicide and be Libertarian! You can't be anti-choice and be a Libertarian! You can't be against same-sex marriage and be Libertarian!

Monday, July 12, 2010

Tea Party Versus Republican Party

Listening to their positions, I have to say that the Tea Party candidates are pretty much the same as the rest of the Republican candidates. They are all cut from the same cloth, woven by the Religious Right ("Your body, my choice,") which fails to understand the sanctity of Individual Rights, and which supports the un-American idea of putting Individual Rights up to a vote of the people.

They are the American Taliban and they deserve to lose their respective races. They will deserve consideration by Liberty-minded Americans only when they understand that their social conservatism is their choice, for themselves and for their families, but when they attempt to force their religious beliefs on others and conspire to abuse the power of government in this way, they are diametrically opposed to the intent of our founding fathers and are guilty of nothing less than Treason.

David Rogers

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Will "Turning Back to God" Save Our Nation?

Some say that “God gave us this nation and we need to turn back to God to save it.” Wrong! If anything, America the land, was "given" to the Indians, not to us.

America the Beautiful, the country and the idea, was given to us by our founding fathers and the founding documents they created, while standing on the intellectual shoulders of men and women who led the way before them. That gift has been preserved since with the blood, sweat, and tears of many, and while some of these men and women drew their inspiration from religion, “praising the Lord” has never directly contributed a damned thing to this earthly creation called the United States of America.

It is, after all, an earthly creation. What is directly responsible for our success as a nation is a collection of ideals and principles, involving equality, freedom, and responsibility, and the resolution to live in accordance with them. It matters not if you live these principles in the name of God, Allah, Christ, the Buddha, Krishna, Humanity, or the FSM. It matters not if you live them in the name and company of wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, or gluttony. Living a life resolved to those ideals and principles is a necessary and sufficient condition to work toward saving our nation.

Turning to God is something that might help motivate and focus the efforts of some Americans, but not all – belief is not universal. For this reason alone, it will not save our nation. Insisting that "turning to God" is the answer for all America is parochial and divisive. I hold that this insistence is one of the most un-American forces at play in politics today.

Many living today are too young to remember, but up until the 50's we pledged allegiance to this country without invoking religion. Arguably, the country has gone to crap since the words "under God" were added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 50's. Why is that?

The flag (and “the country for which it stands”) is an earthly creation, not a heavenly one. This creation is based on the reality of our living together and prospering as a nation, rather than on any belief system about creation and eternity. Conflating the two has been the source of much evil, and much of the division today between people of good will is due to those who insist that their religious views should somehow have precedence over the founding documents and guiding principles which created this “Shining city upon a hill.”

All we need to do as a people to save this nation is to live a life in accordance with our founding ideals and principles. We need no reason or justification other than the fact of who we are - we are Americans.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address

I think Obama made a powerful speech - he was a great leader tonight. However, he needs to walk the walk as well as he talks the talk. He needs to realize that Nancy Pelosi is much more of a threat to his presidency than John Boehner. Hopefully he now understands what happens to his initiatives if his own party walks all over the opposition - he gets "bills we can't believe in."

If he can deliver on his promise of bipartisanship, if he can make that happen as a leader, then he will go down in history as a great president – the first great president since Ronald Reagan.

The Republican response was tepid, but better tepid than rabid. There seemed to be some effort to recognize the numerous areas President Obama mentioned where bipartisan cooperation is feasible. Republicans should immediately try to bring to the floor bills on each and every issue where Obama's vision coincides with limited government, civil rights (including those of homosexuals), individual liberty (including that of pregnant women) and national security, which includes energy independence, reductions in our military presence around the world, border control, immigration enforcement, environmental protection, and fiscal conservatism.

Let's see a Republican introduce a funding bill to start building modern, nuclear power plants. Let's see immediate action to enable offshore drilling to get us through until those nuclear power plants, solar plants, and wind farms come online. Let's see a national energy grid renewal project, of the scope and scale of the interstate highway program, to get ready for distributing that new power.

Let's see bills with the incentives Obama mentioned for small business and community banking. Let's see regulation to break up or eliminate any business institution which is "too big to fail." Any such entity is a clear threat to the American people and to democracy itself.

In short, Republicans have been handed a list of items which the President has told the American people he is willing to move forward on. They should jump at the opportunity to either 1) get some real work done for the American people or 2) prove to everyone that “Obama is a sweet-talking liar.” Either way, the Republicans will win big in 2012, potentially taking back both the House and the Senate, and, in the later case, likely taking back the presidency.

These Republican initiatives must be clear, immediate, and resolute. Americans are tired of dissent – they want leadership. Republicans should stop wasting their time trying to knock down Obama. They should get on with the work we sent them to Washington to do. And if the Republicans don’t put forth an effort to take Obama at his word and meet him halfway, then I for one will say, “Yes, he may be a liar, but you are a do-nothing leech on the body of America.”

David

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Deflation or Inflation

Some say the bubble will deflate,
Some predict inflation.
From what I've heard on debt of late
I hold with those who say "deflate."
But to steal the soul of our nation,
And bring about her sure defeat
To destroy the middle class inflation
Can be discreet
With no salvation.

David W. Rogers
(with apologies to Robert Frost)