Liberal Views I Can't Resist -- Sorry if I Offend!

Sorry -- I couldn't resist this one. I think it's interesting because it's backed up by statistics. Whether they are actually true or not, I don't really know, but even with its air of superiority, it reinforces my liberal state of mind. I got it from a comment on a web site called funnyordie.com. Check out the Ron Howard video there with his endorsement of Obama.

"Dear Red States: We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and the entire Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cellresearch and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines, 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the war, the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Finally, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

Peace out, Blue States

PS - You can keep your KKK and shove it straight up your A**!!!"

Politopia

I know many of you have seen this quiz before. I actually posted about it last year, but it really is a good way to see how your political beliefs line up with others.

POLITOPIA

The quiz only takes a couple of minutes. It will then plot where you are on the political map. The star is where I ended up when I took the test last year. I just retook the test and ended up almost exactly in the same place. At least I am consistent about some things...

An Old Article

I frequently get funny looks from people when I tell them I am a registered Libertarian. What's funny, though, is how easy it is for me to explain my beliefs to Republicans and Democrats alike, but they often can't simply define what their beliefs are based on. In fact, they are more likely to explain what their particular party is against.

Being a Libertarian means that I believe in freedom above all else. It is as simple as that.

I have spent a lot of time on David Carlson's Political Blog lately. It is usually one of the first things I check when I turn my computer on in the morning. Now I see he has been occasionally checking in on ours.

In a comment in one of my last posts, David pointed out how becoming libertarian in requires making an intellectual choice. That was something I picked up from an Op/Ed piece in the AZ Republic a few years ago. It was written by a former AZ Libertarian Gubernatorial candidate. It is pretty short and worth the time to check out:

Libertarians Manning The Only Life Raft

Majority of One

I'm paraphrasing this a bit, but when I was in seventh grade, our English teacher Mrs. Lutz taught us the concept of the "Majority of One". If I remember correctly, Emerson was visiting Thoreau, who was in jail for a civil disobedient act of refusing to pay a poll tax that was supporting slavery and a war with Mexico.

Emerson asked something like, "Henry, why are you here?" And Thoreau replied, "Waldo, why are you not here?"

Thoreau felt he was correct in his convictions, even if everyone else felt otherwise, (or probably more accurately, were just apathetic). He was a Majority of One.

I mailed in my early ballot yesterday. I am very comfortable with my Presidential choice. In fact, I think it may the most confident I have ever been about my choice. I wrote in the good doctor, Ron Paul.

I am confident I am right. Ron Paul will never be President, but that doesn't mean I wasted my vote. Most people are mindless sheep, casting their votes for who will better fill their wallets or have government do their bidding for them. But a vote for Ron Paul was a vote for Liberty. Our government has been manipulated far too long by the interest groups of both the Right and Left, ignoring the rights of common Americans or the Constitution that protects them.

My Majority of One does not depend on the support of others, nor on convincing others that I am correct. Instead, it is based on the simple conviction I have that the liberty of all is more important than the "security" the Republicans can give us from the "terrorists" or the "support" Democrats can give us by redistributing the wealth of others.

I had to choose between an old man that promises to keep my taxes in check or a charismatic pop star who wants America to be a better place by making us all feel more "hopeful".

Well they can keep their tax promises and feel-good sermons. From now on, I am only voting for those who actually believe the best way to keep this country great is to stick to the founders' principles of personal liberty, not the promises of politicians who will say anything to fit their constituency's desires.

We as Americans will never be great again until we get past our own self interests and change our view of what role government should have in our lives. But that is an intellectual choice, one I am not sure most people can make. Regardless, I will make my choices confidently, even if it means remaining a Majority of One.

Am I "Joe"?

I wonder if "Joe The Plummer" is any relation to "Joe Six-Pack"?

The use of both of those monikers, even though the former has a basis in a real person, boils my blood a bit. I've spent most of my life living in the world that these two are supposed to personify. And I find the use of these names condescending at best.

This "I feel your pain" bullshit doesn't hold water. It is merely a ploy used by those who really have no understanding of the lower middle class to make us believe they are really in touch.

If they really were in touch (that goes for anyone in Congress) they would not have approved a bail out. They would have just cut me a check.

Random Stuff

You will all be glad to know it is Global Hand-washing Day. It sure is good to know the UN is looking out for us...

I have been listening to some older stuff lately: Goo Goo Dolls, Vertical Horizon, Extreme. I am feeling a bit guilty about it, though. Not because it is old, but because it is the kind of stuff I would have never admitted liking when it was new. I guess getting older has made me less of a music snob, and I can't be too embarrassed about it since I am posting it on the Internet...

I am still really annoyed about the Federal bailout of our banking system. I can't help but feel we are witnessing the end of our free market system. Government is here to rescue us again (by taking our money and giving it to idiots who have already shown how good they are at losing billions).

On a personal note, I have been building a bit more debt than I would like. Where is my government? They should take care of me. They should pay off my debt. Okay, I am being facetious...

Ever get those emails telling you Bill Gates is trying to give you some of his money (or some other outrageous claim)? I like to peruse Snopes.com to check out everything I come across that seems a bit over the top. It is actually kind of fun just to look around on their site. The Obama section is particularly interesting. Check it out. People are idiots and will believe anything...

Did you see the old McCain?

John McCain is back. At least the John McCain I remember seemed to get his shit together this week.

Long before he threw his hat in the ring for president, I always held some admiration for McCain in the sense that he always seemed to be his own man. I felt he had an air of honor about him that was lately nonexistant and, he was once a beath of fresh air in Washington politics. But the antics of scare tactics, lies, and general garbage coming out of his campaign have been a major disappointment to me.

Yesterday he corrected his some of his supporters when they blasted the character of Obama. It just goes to show you where the scare tactics of campaign workers can lead. The one that really struck me was the lady who stood up at a rally in Minnesota and told McCain she was afraid of Obama because he was an Arab.

McCain told his audience that was wrong and, people did not need to fear Obama because he was a good and decent man. That was the old McCain I remember, telling people the facts.

I am still not going to vote for him. The damage has been done. He too easily slid his honorable personna to the side and let his campaign managers and sleazy party workers run his game and campaign. But I was glad to finally see him shake his head and attempt to dispell the garbage that has been spewing out of his own campaign.

I have to wonder what impact that had on the generators of all of the scare garbage inside his campaign.

I Missed SNL This Weekend

But one of my new favorite blogs didn't:

http://www.davidcarlsonpolitics.com/

Tina Fey is brilliant...And she definitely portrays Palin as Marna sees her! (See her "Twit" post from September.)

And I am a bit surprised Gwen Ifill's book (centered on, but not directly about Obama) didn't disqualify her as a moderator. Not saying there is anything wrong with her doing the book, I just felt there are 300,000,000 people in this country who AREN'T writing a book about Obama. Wouldn't it have made more sense to use one of those people with a less obvious potential bias?

I Don't Care

I know it may sound defeatist, but I really don't care who wins the White House in November. The closer it gets, the more I realize the two most likely choices are worthless. A wise man (Bruce Cockburn) once said, "everybody wants justice...they just want it done onto somebody else." I think that sums up the finger pointing the Dems and Repubs spend most of their time wallowing in.

Every four years, I feel like I am reliving a political version of Groundhog Day, listening to similar politicians spouting the same rhetoric and the same talking heads filling us with useless information that has nothing to do with fixing any of our nation's problems.

But, I do have to say, I have made my decision of who I am voting for this year. I am writing in Ron Paul. I regret I didn't support him when it really mattered. I won't make that mistake again. He is the only politician that dares to demand that we take responsibility for ourselves and our own actions. That responsibility is not a burden. It is what allows us the liberty to freely pursue our own happiness.

The Dems are partially right about civil liberty (except when it doesn't fit their agenda) and the Repubs are partially right about economic liberty (except they seem to more frequently vote the other way). Civil liberty, economic liberty. Why can't we have both?

Most of this country's problems derive from a lack of anyone taking any responsibility for themselves. Take the current financial crisis. Taxpayers are bailing out a bunch of greedy institutions that will fail if not propped up by government. They SHOULD fail. That is how capitalism works. Economically unsound institutions SHOULD be allowed to perish so that better ones can take their place. Instead, the government is going to use your money to prop up crappy, greedy, unfit institutions that do not deserve to exist another day. If they were allowed to fail, would the economy suffer? Yes. But by not letting them fail, we are setting ourselves up for an even bigger crisis down the road. And no matter who takes over, Dems or Repubs, I will be the first one to be shouting "I told you so!" when it happens...

"Something New" (Or, "More to Read on the Internet")

I’m putting out my much-abbreviated weekly blog a little early (no martini, either), as I won’t be able to really get to it this weekend. My whole week (well, I should say, the last couple of weeks) seem to have been filled with all things dealing with the bailout bill.

Oh, excuse me – my mistake. The rescue bill. (Same shit – different name.)

Anyway, I’m pretty much against it no matter how much they try to spit polish it. Plain and simple. Don’t understand why a bill needs to pass within one week, why more research cannot be completed into the situation prior to passing a bill, and where the hell the amount of $700 billion came from! (Someone's hind-end must hurt from pulling that amount out of it!) Until someone can guarantee me that I (a taxpayer) won’t take it in the shorts even more than I currently am in the stock market, I won’t ever support it.

Anyway, for you political-types out there, I have a blog site that might be of interest to you. My niece’s boyfriend, David Carlson (more commonly known as DC), authors it. He is about as nice a kid as you will ever find. He goes to college at St. Thomas, and is a very smart guy. I’m thinking that most of the contributors are about his age – early 20’s – college age (except for me – of course). I appreciate reading his point of view on issues. Take a peek sometime.

http://www.davidcarlsonpolitics.com/

I watched the Veep debate last night really not knowing what to expect.

I seriously didn’t believe all of the pundits who were fantasizing about Backwoods Barbie “freezing like a moose in the headlights”, or getting backed into some corner where she would be a total flop. She did quite well, and seemed quite polished in the sense that she answered most of the questions just like any other politician might - by not answering and moving quickly to another subject while she had command of the floor.

As for Sen. Joe, no surprises there either. Except that he may have been a bit more brief in his remarks than I was expecting. He has a reputation of droning an at length.

Although I did find parts of the debate interesting, as a whole it seemed boring. And as a tool to help me make a decision about who may get the pleasure of my ballot, it did nothing at all.

All in all, it seemed a waste of time, money and my attention. Especially since I will be casting a ballot for president, not the vice president.

So, I watched the voting on the bailout bill last night on C-Span, and was lucky enough to catch a re-play of a speech given earlier in the day by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I – Vermont). Here is the link to the text of the speech.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=303980

It is lengthy, but work the read. After seeing Amy Klobuchar yuk it up on the Senate floor after the vote (I used to work with Amy at a large lawfirm in Minneapolis, and – Oh, I can tell you some stories! Not one of my favorite people!), I’m thankful that SOMEONE is looking out for people who don’t want this bill to pass.

McCain's great if you can afford him

For a long time I was a little torn as to where to place my vote in the Presidential election.

I consider myself a life-long Liberal (with clandestine conservative tendencies at times). My personal political philosophies tend to lie a little more in line with Liberals than with Conservatives.

But being a vet and a Vietnam vet like McCain, I do have a lot of respect for him, what he went through as a POW, and how it shaped his politics.

One big area where I keep have difficulty is, how can McCain, a guy with 11 houses and 16 cars, understand what it is like to make less than what most of this country calls middle class income? He stumbled when he tried to describe middle class, calling it people who make less than 2 million dollars a year. If that is the case, I belong in the abject poor classification.

Something that falls in line with the rich vs poor is health care. McCain’s solution is to make more and varied policies available for people to purchase. That’s great IF you can afford to purchase them. The crux of the problem is the great number of people who cannot AFFORD the insurance. Creating more policies won’t cure that problem.

Maybe this is important because I have reached an age where I see docs on a more regular basis than when I was younger.

I’ve heard all the arguments about the “terrible” Canadian system, or the problems with British health programs. But who says we can’t do better? Why do we have to model it after something that already exists and doesn’t work?

The simple answer is, we don’t.

Got little off the track here.

I do agree with Dane’s concept of voting principle over expediency, but I have to balk at Barr. He’s just a little too much off the deep end, and there seems to little substance there and a lot of rhetorical posturing.

So it looks like one of two choices: either Obama, or the old standby (you want to talk about principle over expediency)...Mickey Mouse.

It wouldn’t be the first time Mickey got a write-in from me.