It Pays To Be A Pelican
As the BP oil spill unfolds in the Gulf and in our living rooms through our television screens, the coverage has focused on two major problems that it has created. One is the flat-out brutal images of oil soaked pelicans; the other is the crisis of the Gulf fishermen who have been forced out of work. One thing is clear, if you had to choose between being a pelican or a fish your choice is an easy one. At the same time everyone is rightfully heartbroken about the pelicans, we can’t wait for the fishermen to get back in the water and cast their nets to catch and kill as many fish as possible. While I am not by any stretch a PETA guy and I grant the fact that this is largely because we don’t eat pelicans, the point it makes is that we constantly draw large subliminal differences between things. In this case, though both are “wildlife,†we subconsciously dismiss the plight of the fish while granting a level of sympathy to the pelicans that compels some of us to set about capturing them and hand rubbing them with Dawn dish detergent. The same point could be made by asking the questions: Why do we eat turkeys and chickens but not pelicans; why cows and not horses? Why are mice disgusting but gerbils and hamsters cute? In large part the answer is: that’s just the way it is.
I suppose you might be asking yourself a question right about now—how does this relate to politics? While I’m quite certain that indeed everything relates to politics, the specific answer is the power of the mentally presumed. The United States is now and has always been a relatively conservative country. Our Constitution, laws, and values, as well as every poll ever taken on the subject, prove this. The problem for Liberals is that well . . . they are not. This presents a huge political task for them. In order to get the [...]
Hitting A Moving Target
The two major forms of Republicanism each have a doctrine that is tied to actual documents. Religious social conservatives have The Bible, while fiscal and Constitutional conservatives have the Constitution. It is safe to say that the vast majority of Republicans have their political tenants supplied by one, if not both, of these documents. This type of textual anchor is a positive philosophically and morally but in a strictly political sense can be a liability. The resulting positives are what tend to be deep, time-tested convictions, stability, certainty and, when used, an effective measuring stick for candidates in primaries. However, in our current event driven and largely politically uninformed society the negative is that this rigidness makes it nearly impossible to adapt positions to individual situations and use current events for maximum political gain. This is a problem that the modern day liberal Democrat will not have anytime soon. They indeed stand in the starkest of contrast. Having left the Constitution behind decades ago, they move forward with no defined doctrine. No set of black and white documents that create, inform, or guide their ideology (and don’t even try to give me the party platform). This creates a situation in which changing party leadership sets an evolving standard as to what defines a Democrat. This not only allows them to easily tailor their political message to what they perceive to be popular at the moment, but grants them the option of playing the role of “lifeguard†and coming to the citizenry's rescue with politically crafted legislation. This, in tandem with the current perception that this is indeed the role of government, is extremely effective but thankfully also comes with disadvantages. First, the [...]So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
—Sun Tzu, The Art of War
The Case Against Financial Institutions Regulation (and other sundry items)
The news events of the last few months have certainly put the Obama Administration in a peculiar position. The Gulf crisis notwithstanding, most of these events have been created by this president and his staff. Team Obama went the the G20 Summit in Toronto this weekend to chide the other 19 nations to continue to stimulate their economy through Keynsian economic principles. "Not so fast", said the other countries. "We have to make choices, and right now, we choose fiscal solvency and prudence". What a concept! Passage of the Financial Institutions Reform package was always tenuous, at best, but the death of Senator Robert Byrd over the weekend makes passage more difficult. One less Democratic vote means that it's more likely that Republicans can filibuster this package, and this is a good thing. Here's why: Any bill that increases regulation, drives up costs to the consumer, and squeezes financial services companies' margins will negatively affect the economy. The costs of increased regulation always get passed along to the consumer in some way, shape or form. Limiting profits also limit tax revenues [...]Levin v. Goldman: Big Solution For a Big Problem?
When Senator Levin says “Goldman made a lot of money by betting against the mortgage market†what do we think he might have meant? Knowing some of the political philosophy of the esteemed senator from Michigan, it is obvious that his inference was that Goldman was acting in a fashion that was either illegal or immoral. How could any American institution bet against motherhood, apple pie or the American dream of universal home ownership? And certainly the notion of â€making a lot of money†is of dubious quality on its face. The Senator is literally screaming “These people are the enemy of the state, and they need to be leashed, or chained, or imprisoned, or tortured…all for the good of the system of the people.â€
It is always amusing when a single statement contains such a large number of fallacies. Let us count the ways.
First, Goldman was acting in their role as an investment broker. Everything they do is essentially either a bet for or against something…or the facilitating of someone else doing the same thing. More technically, they are simply acting as brokers, and not as agents. Agents represent a buyer or seller. Brokers facilitate the transaction. This is the “market mechanism†and it is what guides the whole system of the effective allocation of resources. It is fundamental to our material progress. As significantly, if people [...]
The Tea Party Movement: The New Civil Rights?
The Civil Rights Movement that culminated in the 1960’s was an important movement towards the advancement of equality for all Americans. While artificial and fundamental hatreds will likely always exist between disparate people groups, the relative harmony that has been experienced in this country over the last forty years is likely unprecedented in the history of the world. To create equality of opportunity for all of a society’s individuals and to simultaneously provide an environment free of the expression of abusive power of one group of people over another is a seldom seen accomplishment. America has been a place where these goals are thought by many to actually be within reach.
Last week, the former President, Bill Clinton, made comments linking the Tea Party Movement to the worst act of domestic terror that has ever been experienced in our country’s history. The Oklahoma City bombing was a tragedy of massive proportion. Apparently, Mr. Clinton believes that the same ideological forces that motivated the bombers of the Federal Building are those that now motivate those that gather under the Tea Party banner. To consider this comment reckless and irresponsible is to understate its vitriolic intent. It is almost impossible to adequately underscore the complete [...]
Which Universe Are We In?
In a recent conversation with a friend of mine, his comment was something like, “Those people on the far left must be from a different solar system.†Another friend said, “We are living in Alternative Reality B†(referencing the line from the movie Back to the Future) where we momentarily leave the time-space continuum. My personal take is that the far left is simply the result of a nasty turn taken on the path of evolutionary biology. While we may still appear to be part of the same human species, liberals and conservatives will ultimately be seen as fundamentally different members of the mammilia branch. And while I jest (but just a little), the question of what separates the “thinking†of liberals and the principles of conservatives is befuddling for many of us.
Most adults in America today (other than the most senior amongst us) have never had to directly face the ideology of the N. Pelosi’s, C. Schumer’s, J. Wright’s and E. Holder’s of the world. Even the 1960’s form of “progressivism†was set against the backdrop of the known evil of an outwardly racist system, and an equally controversial war in Vietnam. Today is different. What we face today is an unforced and radical progressivism without any of the supporting historical props. The problem with the interpretive thinking of conservatives today is that we are attempting to see the logic in the ideology of the left (or at least some form of semi-coherent palliative) that will allow us to understand the apparent vacuity. But herein we are seeking to see that which simply does not exist.
When we look at the notion [...]
Democrats Took A Gamble – Republicans Need To Take Care
Question #1 during much of the Health Care Debate was: "Why the rush?".
I should have seen it at the time, but now, it is clear to me just how important it was for Democrats to pass Health Care Reform, in any condition. Even torn to shreds. Getting it done early in 2010 was absolutely essential.
Because that was the one chance that Democrats had of holding seats in November.
It's a gambit that tries our souls and puts folks on both the left and right on edge. By completing the effort early in the year, Democrats have essentially taken ownership of the election, or at least taken a position that gives them a stronger political advantage. That is, stronger than they would have had if they had tried and failed to complete the work, or completed it in late summer or early fall.
The manner in which Republicans play this out over the next several months will have a greater impact than anything. Even though a majority of Americans opposed the Democrats plan, ultimately the tide will shift on the perceived benefit of those in the middle. Already, some Republicans are seeing the challenge of continuing to fight this head on.
Now, instead of fighting against a bad idea, instead of promoting a smarter model for Americans to address the real Health Care issues at hand, Republicans who go all in with [...]
What’s Really Wrong With Today’s Government?
In the February 16th, 2010 Wall Street Journal, Gerald F. Seib wrote an article called Senate Woes Flag Wider Disease. The premise of the article is that the center of the political continuum has been eroded and that the bridge historically connecting the left and the right is being dismantled. He goes on to indicate that the result is a Senate without an ability to accomplish anything. The Framers, along with many who have followed, have long-since understood the power of the majority in a democracy. Accordingly, they have inserted safeguards against the potential “tyranny of the majority†that are now coming into clear view. Mr. Seib also points to the rapidly expanding use, over the last twenty years, of filibusters and cloture votes used to end those filibusters. In the end, the article concludes, “The broader political system, more than the filibuster, is the problem.â€
The notion of the “broader political system†is an interesting focal point for the current situation. And while I am not certain what Mr. Seib intended by his use of the words, I am certain that the problem we have is much greater than a purely political problem. To cast blame on the system is to address a second-order cause, as opposed to any level of fundamental or first-order cause. The issues we face today are simply a proxy for the broader existential and self-identification issues we face as a nation. We face an array of ontological problems that have been emerging over several decades, but are now, for the first time, exhibited for everyone to see. The fundamental issue we face today is one of determining whether we as a nation are going to be governed by the use of power, or whether we will continue to be governed via “authority.†The distinction is becoming essentially clearer with every passing day. And the distinction could not be more significant.
Our nation was built on [...]
Is It About Health Care or Partisan Gridlock?
Today we introduce our newest writer at The Conservative Reader, Brian Nygaard. Brian and his wife Mary live in San Rafael, California. - Ed.
As the Healthcare debate in Congress was drawing to a close, Americans were asking themselves “Why can’t we seem to make any progress on the healthcare issue?†We watch in disbelieving awe as we observe nothing getting done over seemingly very long periods of time. We covet answers, but our perception is that what we are receiving from Washington is just gridlock and petty partisan politics. We cannot even agree on such a simple notion as the need for the portability of individual insurance coverage. Amazing, isn’t it? It looks like a mess, and it is. But it is a mess for reasons completely separated from the issue of healthcare. The problem with the healthcare issue is that the issue has never been about healthcare, or insurance companies, or patient’s rights, or universal coverage.
Over the course of our American history, a small number of windows of opportunity have presented themselves to the radical leftists amongst us. Andrew Jackson, FDR, Lyndon [...]
Stay in Touch
