Feel the Need, the need to Secede?
It has been coming to my mind more and more as of late, that the central government has grown out of control and has become a cancerous mass of politics. What used to be the binding glue of commonality between the states has evolved into an oppression of power run amok in our name’s sake. The people seem to have less and less of a voice as those who are in power are securing it more firmly than ever by creating a protective wall of courtiers in the government bureaucracy who wish only to continue their sense of entitlement to their current way of life. Our suffering does not matter as long as they maintain power. What used to be only a sensation only felt by radical fringes is becoming a creeping note of unease in the populace as a whole.
When Governor Rick Perry, stood on the steps of the Austin, Texas City Hall and reminded people that Texas may at some point feel the need to secede from the union, it was like a loud warning bell. Trust me, although people are trying to shout down this statement as the act of a crazed right wing radical, it is far from true. Governor Perry is putting into speech for the first time, from a respected office, a feeling that has long since been growing. After all, how long had secession fever grown in Colonial America with our founders wishing to shake off the shackles of Mother England? How many decades of the Anti-Bellum period of the US were there fights over who has the final say of how we live our lives in the form of states rights?
We have now entered our own second Anti-Bellum phase I suspect, where the stresses build and the players choose sides. The War on Terror not withstanding. We are seeing our economy collapse, with possible hyper-inflation to come. States rights having been trampled, realistically speaking, since 1865. The speed and severity of this trampling only increasing as time wears on. People who were once willing to get along with what was happening because it did not affect them, or, because they had had their senses dulled by the opiate of the masses purveyed by the media, are waking up.
What are they waking up to? Simply put? The end of their life as they know it. A consolidated central government that has franchised itself over states rights, forming a homogenous whole. You will no longer be able to “vote with your feet” to another state, for the laws there will be the same. You may be able to emigrate to another nation, but then the question becomes, who is better? Unfortunately, there almost is none better, evening this insane state of creeping oppression. Yes, we face a soft constriction of our lives to the oppression and total power of the central government.
You may ask, ‘what is there to fear?’ from this creeping ‘consolidationism’. The fears are many actually. If you disagree with a law that legalizes homosexual marriage or drug use or prayer in school, you will have no where to go. You cannot change states, you would have to become an expatriate because of this franchising of the American Way ™ over the whole land instead of allowing the 10th Amendment to take affect in it’s proper place. And of course, with a remote and insulated central government, you have very little avenue to redress your grievances. Much better paying and organized interests will be able to bury your voice without worry of reprisal. Your local authorities will be bound by central law.
That leaves the final response of the states, secession, as the only line of defense. You don’t like the way the federal government is oppressing your rights in violation of the constitution, you have to, as a population of a state, fight to leave the union. Unfortunately, precedent is not on your side, as the confederacy has shown. Although the factors then do not mirror the troubles and factors now. Secession is the final protest and threat of a state to the federal government: Change course or we will leave you, by force if necessary. I do believe we are rapidly coming to that point in some parts of this country, but we are not there yet.
To combat secession fever, the consolidationists will employ many tools to try and quash this natural flow towards the dissolution of the union. The first is already in play en masse: mockery. Yes, the traditional media outlets are in full discredit mode. They are mocking those who have the audacity to foist such statements. They are smearing character of those who even mumble such words as being treasonous, or lunatics devoid of all rational thought. They will get louder and louder as time goes by too till it is either clear that words alone will not stop people from saying it. This is the point when government will start criminalizing these words and crack down on those who push for redress of grievances in an effort to head off secession fever, at the cost of consolidated power. This will be the equivalent of John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry or the Bleeding Kansas affair. They will push tensions even higher and more acutely drawing lines between friends and kin.
The question remains what would be the tipping point. That was given to me tonight by Jason Lewis in one of his monologues. The central government could dissolve any state legislature by declaring a state a disaster area and declare martial law. This I think is the key point. Trying to silence leaders of the rhetorical revolution will fail as it often causes a “hydra” like effect. For every one head cut off, two will rise. Same will most likely hold true if human character remains the same. But dissolving state governments with military force I think will be the point that goes to far. Of course a crisis of some sort will have to be manufactured or exaggerated. The willing accomplices in the major media will be all too happy to do this. They are the consolidationist’s mouthpiece. Like Pulitzer and Hearst before, they can manufacture a war out of pictures and their own elaborate exaggerations. The media are nothing if not experts at wagging the dog.
So here we sit, staring at the opening symptoms of what could ultimately become our next Civil War. What worries me the most is that instead of mirroring the American Revolution or Civil War, it will take its inspiration more from the French Revolution. When classes turned on each other with frightening ferocity, and the guillotine’s reign of terror fell heavy on all. Can we dodge such a result? Absolutely, but not until the American people stand up and take back the electoral process and political parties from the consolidationists and socialist radicals who wish to make us in Europe’s or even Asia’s image.
Those who stand on the founding principles need to fight to get back into the system they have neglected for other duties or desires. Those who see this attempt to pave over the constitution with consolidationist clap-trap need to be opposed at every turn. Their arguments debunked at even the local level. The fraud of benevolent socialism must be exposed for what it is. Run for local office, get involved in party politics, or if your party is abandoned to the consolidationist goals, join a new party willing to fight them.
If we do not stand up for what is right now, when will we ever be able to?
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Unsolicited Punditry #2
Earning Money the Old Fashioned Way
The Sunday morning news shows prattle on about the AIG bonuses today and the proposed 90% redacto tax that congress is looking to file on them. I started thinking about these events going on about the Congress voting, knowingly, deliberately trying to "game" the Constitution and finding a loophole in which to violate it.
Then I had a conversation with someone that started me considering the question of how does one actually "earn" their wages? What entitles someone to the pay they get? I realized quickly that this is not an easily determined question and is highly subject to opinion, conjecture and personal involvement. So how can government, or even individual citizens say, with a straight face that someone has actually "earned" his living? I don't think they should be allowed to continue with these statements unchallenged anymore.
There is a serious flaw in the argument that someone does or does not earn a wage. The best way that I can concieve to illustrate it is to ask them what they do for a living and why they actually DO earn their wage. Most people when confronted with how much pay they are recieving from their employer is that they are underpaid for the amount of work they put in. Almost everyone believes that they are worth more than what they are paid for their time and effort. This is the foundation of the flaw in the argument. Nobody, except for a small few, believe they do not deserve higher pay.
Now, when you look at the situation of someone ELSE'S pay, often the statement is that they are overpaid. This sentiment is usually shared by everyone who is underpaid or a congenial busybody, concerned more with what's going on in other people's lives than their own. They discount, by near reflex, duties of the job as not worthy of pay, when they themselves would count the effort as needing even more pay if they were doing the job. This requires a certain level of intellectual dishonesty and/or a lack of self awareness. Unfortunately, these diseases are totally rampant in today's society as well as highly difficult to cure because the process is painful and often transformative.
So, here we are, stuck between those who believe they deserve more when they are doing it, but everyone else deserves less if they do a job. But the complications do not end there. We must also look at the entrepreneur who's arbiter of pay is not based on what an employer pays based on the negotiating prowess of the employee, what the competition is paying and market pressures. No, the self-made businessman's only arbiter of earnings is his own personal greed and success of business versus what the market is willing to pay for his services. In some regard this is the case for all employees, it is just more evident in the case of an entrepreneur because the market is much more visible.
If a product is overpriced, people will buy it less or not at all, directly affecting the bottom line. The owner may decide to turn down his current profits from the work he does for future, larger gains. Growing his business over growing his own wallet. Where the issue becomes almost a monstrous joke is when a company becomes SO successful, that the profits cannot be helped but be considered extreme due to the relative scale compared to other businesses. Most people cannot relate or even sympathize with a business owner that is suddenly faced with tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars in profit due to it's sudden popularity or success. Now, the money's there, goods and services have been traded fairly on the open market, and his business has EARNED them. Then in come the jealous saying... but does he really DESERVE them? Yet often, if this level of growth occurred over an extended period of time, the question would nary come to the fore. People think that it is only "natural". Sudden change seems to be a major catalyst in this level of jealousy.
But flip the argument and put the person who questions the justification of keeping earnings in the same position, a vast, vast, vast super-duper majority of them would say yes! I made the company, I own it, I deserve it. It's only "fair" after all I should profit from my hard work. Of course, this requires a level of intellectual honesty that is rapidly failing in this society at large. It gets back to the general hypocrisy of "I deserve it but they do not" for the same job; and unless that basic hypocrisy is expunged, you can never win the discussion.
With corporations, this is a much harder path to follow, but a similar one none the less. You have shareholders to consider as well. Hence why, till the Clinton Administration, you could compensate your executives with massive salaries and perks to keep them, and make sure you had the best and brightest running your company. Talent costs. And talent that can run a massive global corporation costs much more than most poeple can concieve. These people make decisions that affect thousands, if not millions of lives. One signature can make or break whole economies. It's the law of scale in action. Yet now, thanks to the perception that large salaries are not deserved, companies must find other ways to compensate fairly for the talent they hire. When wage and price controls were enacted by FDR, we suddenly had the creation of "benefits" like paid, health insurance, vacation time, perks like cars and homes. It was the only way to retain the people who could do and had done so well, even in times of crisis. Today, it's stock options and outright "performance" bonuses.
Unfortunately, we have government interference in executive pay in the form of wage controls that is considered to be ineffective. They were all negotiated and both sides agreed (Board of Directors and potential executive) that they were fair. This is the capitalist system at it's finest. You want how much? This is what we want to pay. You and I negotiate to X amount and find it agreeable. It's only the monday morning quarterbacks, busibodies and the jealous who complain and lobby government to stop others from getting what they deserve or negotiate for. Harming the earnings of others is never a recipe for personal satisfaction (unless you are particularly sociopatic or malicious) or incentive to keep those who have skills others will pay the massive salaries for that you cannot control.
Now, the politicians and society at large are trying to use shame and austerity as the new values to force people, personally (sometimes also through threats of death and violence) refuse taking what they worked so hard to earn. Intimidation is a horrible weapon to aim at common citizens for doing what they can for their family and personal life. Working hard and being rewarded fairly. Now yes, there can be times of unfair compensation, but of what harm is it to the public unless it is a service they are all forced to use, or a product they cannot avoid? It is a company's fault for bad negotiation, or failure to factor in changes that could adversely affect them in the public sector of opinion or to their bottom line.
So, here we sit. Those who can't are not only criticizing, but attempting to insert themselves into the equation to STEAL from those who can, and have, and are contractually owed for their work. The politicians, who many knew well in advance, of AIG bonuses being contractual obligations, are having a tantrum and furor over something they should have no problem with or should have taken into account before public money became involved. Yes, the government now owns 80% of the company, but it is still illegal to go back and take from those people what is owed them and was negotiated out. It is in fact a direct violation of the Constitution for them to do so. The matter that it is also not the Constitutionally mandated business of the government doesn't seem to even enter into their thoughts. I leave that aspect for a future column.
But no, their political dander is up in an effort to redistribute wealth from those who deserve to those who do not. Their clarion call is one of "Fairness" and "Equality" and "Earned Wages". They are so blind to their lust for riches and power, that they cannot see that they are the ones being unequal and unfair, and the people they wish to give the money back to (which they never will to begin with) do not deserve it either. What makes matters worse is that the overall tenor of the government is that it has become one vast charitable organization, backed with guns and law requiring you to participate and be complicit with it's desires. A far cry from the original intent of the Constitution.
These are the words of those who wish to end a nation where we are all free to pursue, life, liberty and happiness. No, we enslave ourselves to the opinion of others who through some arbitrary and nebulous personal formula decide for themselves when we've had enough life, liberty and happiness.
The mob is trying to rule, and unless stopped, we all will suffer.
The Sunday morning news shows prattle on about the AIG bonuses today and the proposed 90% redacto tax that congress is looking to file on them. I started thinking about these events going on about the Congress voting, knowingly, deliberately trying to "game" the Constitution and finding a loophole in which to violate it.
Then I had a conversation with someone that started me considering the question of how does one actually "earn" their wages? What entitles someone to the pay they get? I realized quickly that this is not an easily determined question and is highly subject to opinion, conjecture and personal involvement. So how can government, or even individual citizens say, with a straight face that someone has actually "earned" his living? I don't think they should be allowed to continue with these statements unchallenged anymore.
There is a serious flaw in the argument that someone does or does not earn a wage. The best way that I can concieve to illustrate it is to ask them what they do for a living and why they actually DO earn their wage. Most people when confronted with how much pay they are recieving from their employer is that they are underpaid for the amount of work they put in. Almost everyone believes that they are worth more than what they are paid for their time and effort. This is the foundation of the flaw in the argument. Nobody, except for a small few, believe they do not deserve higher pay.
Now, when you look at the situation of someone ELSE'S pay, often the statement is that they are overpaid. This sentiment is usually shared by everyone who is underpaid or a congenial busybody, concerned more with what's going on in other people's lives than their own. They discount, by near reflex, duties of the job as not worthy of pay, when they themselves would count the effort as needing even more pay if they were doing the job. This requires a certain level of intellectual dishonesty and/or a lack of self awareness. Unfortunately, these diseases are totally rampant in today's society as well as highly difficult to cure because the process is painful and often transformative.
So, here we are, stuck between those who believe they deserve more when they are doing it, but everyone else deserves less if they do a job. But the complications do not end there. We must also look at the entrepreneur who's arbiter of pay is not based on what an employer pays based on the negotiating prowess of the employee, what the competition is paying and market pressures. No, the self-made businessman's only arbiter of earnings is his own personal greed and success of business versus what the market is willing to pay for his services. In some regard this is the case for all employees, it is just more evident in the case of an entrepreneur because the market is much more visible.
If a product is overpriced, people will buy it less or not at all, directly affecting the bottom line. The owner may decide to turn down his current profits from the work he does for future, larger gains. Growing his business over growing his own wallet. Where the issue becomes almost a monstrous joke is when a company becomes SO successful, that the profits cannot be helped but be considered extreme due to the relative scale compared to other businesses. Most people cannot relate or even sympathize with a business owner that is suddenly faced with tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars in profit due to it's sudden popularity or success. Now, the money's there, goods and services have been traded fairly on the open market, and his business has EARNED them. Then in come the jealous saying... but does he really DESERVE them? Yet often, if this level of growth occurred over an extended period of time, the question would nary come to the fore. People think that it is only "natural". Sudden change seems to be a major catalyst in this level of jealousy.
But flip the argument and put the person who questions the justification of keeping earnings in the same position, a vast, vast, vast super-duper majority of them would say yes! I made the company, I own it, I deserve it. It's only "fair" after all I should profit from my hard work. Of course, this requires a level of intellectual honesty that is rapidly failing in this society at large. It gets back to the general hypocrisy of "I deserve it but they do not" for the same job; and unless that basic hypocrisy is expunged, you can never win the discussion.
With corporations, this is a much harder path to follow, but a similar one none the less. You have shareholders to consider as well. Hence why, till the Clinton Administration, you could compensate your executives with massive salaries and perks to keep them, and make sure you had the best and brightest running your company. Talent costs. And talent that can run a massive global corporation costs much more than most poeple can concieve. These people make decisions that affect thousands, if not millions of lives. One signature can make or break whole economies. It's the law of scale in action. Yet now, thanks to the perception that large salaries are not deserved, companies must find other ways to compensate fairly for the talent they hire. When wage and price controls were enacted by FDR, we suddenly had the creation of "benefits" like paid, health insurance, vacation time, perks like cars and homes. It was the only way to retain the people who could do and had done so well, even in times of crisis. Today, it's stock options and outright "performance" bonuses.
Unfortunately, we have government interference in executive pay in the form of wage controls that is considered to be ineffective. They were all negotiated and both sides agreed (Board of Directors and potential executive) that they were fair. This is the capitalist system at it's finest. You want how much? This is what we want to pay. You and I negotiate to X amount and find it agreeable. It's only the monday morning quarterbacks, busibodies and the jealous who complain and lobby government to stop others from getting what they deserve or negotiate for. Harming the earnings of others is never a recipe for personal satisfaction (unless you are particularly sociopatic or malicious) or incentive to keep those who have skills others will pay the massive salaries for that you cannot control.
Now, the politicians and society at large are trying to use shame and austerity as the new values to force people, personally (sometimes also through threats of death and violence) refuse taking what they worked so hard to earn. Intimidation is a horrible weapon to aim at common citizens for doing what they can for their family and personal life. Working hard and being rewarded fairly. Now yes, there can be times of unfair compensation, but of what harm is it to the public unless it is a service they are all forced to use, or a product they cannot avoid? It is a company's fault for bad negotiation, or failure to factor in changes that could adversely affect them in the public sector of opinion or to their bottom line.
So, here we sit. Those who can't are not only criticizing, but attempting to insert themselves into the equation to STEAL from those who can, and have, and are contractually owed for their work. The politicians, who many knew well in advance, of AIG bonuses being contractual obligations, are having a tantrum and furor over something they should have no problem with or should have taken into account before public money became involved. Yes, the government now owns 80% of the company, but it is still illegal to go back and take from those people what is owed them and was negotiated out. It is in fact a direct violation of the Constitution for them to do so. The matter that it is also not the Constitutionally mandated business of the government doesn't seem to even enter into their thoughts. I leave that aspect for a future column.
But no, their political dander is up in an effort to redistribute wealth from those who deserve to those who do not. Their clarion call is one of "Fairness" and "Equality" and "Earned Wages". They are so blind to their lust for riches and power, that they cannot see that they are the ones being unequal and unfair, and the people they wish to give the money back to (which they never will to begin with) do not deserve it either. What makes matters worse is that the overall tenor of the government is that it has become one vast charitable organization, backed with guns and law requiring you to participate and be complicit with it's desires. A far cry from the original intent of the Constitution.
These are the words of those who wish to end a nation where we are all free to pursue, life, liberty and happiness. No, we enslave ourselves to the opinion of others who through some arbitrary and nebulous personal formula decide for themselves when we've had enough life, liberty and happiness.
The mob is trying to rule, and unless stopped, we all will suffer.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Unsoliscited Punditry #1
Hard Choices, Blame and the Price of Liberty
What is the sound of freedom dying?
Is there a color to tyranny rising?
Can you smell the death of your rights?
Do you feel the Constitution shredding?
The instant that Congress moved to enact a tax of 90% against AIG and other corporate bonus recipients, we became a dictatorial state with the trappings of a democracy just like any other banana republic like Venezuela and Cuba. It is only a matter of time before we become the targets of such avarice and greed by the political class. The war against the common citizenry of America has begun, and this was our 'Boston Massacre'.
The Congress of the United States, or at least select members of it in charge of running the system. Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi seem to be prime movers in this economic debacle, but many more are stretching from it's epicenter and roots are complicit as well. The new administration is far from innocent with P-BO and Hillary also being tied to strings of corruption and payola to the source of the economic collapse. Whatever could I mean? Just this:
AIG, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae all were massive donors to each one of these people's campaigns. Chris Dodd recieved sweetheart loan deals from Countrywide due to his collusion and illicit protection of corruption and probably illegal activities in Freddie and Fannie. Combine this with Dodd being the largest recipiant of AIG "contributions" to his campaign. Next in line behind Dodd for buy off "contributions" would be Clinton, Obama and Frank. If their actions following this monetary assistance to their campaigns present past and future is not conspiracy to defraud as well, it is at least a conflict of interest and bordering on bribery. There needs to be ethics and potentially criminal investigations going on right now into the involvement with these people. If they are willing to tie AIG to the stake and burn it, they need to be considered as well.
Now these are people currently in power to blame for this mess. Some, are continuing to make it worse to protect their own personal agendas and power. Unfortunately this collapse was long in the making, with origins stretching back to the Carter administration and "Community Reinvestment Act" and the creation of sub-prime loans. The administrations and congresses since then are not out of the woods either, for many of them expanded and or protected the continuing problem as the fundamental flaws of this crisis grew, fertilized by greed and personal ambition. Heads of Freddie and Fannie mistating earings so they could gain big bonuses like Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick are to blame as well for covering up the eventual collapse with fancy accounting and outright lies on the real situation.
At least the W Administration tried to rein in Freddy and Fannie... but too late. The question was only of when it would collapse by then. It would have collapsed at a particularly inopportune time for all involved, and the protectors of Freddie and Fannie by those Congressmen and Senators currently in charge of this disaster were never going to do anything to threaten this power structure for their own re-election.
So now, we the people, look at the smoking financial ruin of our nation, in a strange form of freefall. As if somehow it had a velocity of it's own and is still being kept aloft in a floating miasm of it's own disintegrating wreck, beginning to fall to earth. We have to figure a way to make this a controlled crash or impact. Something to walk away from. The issue is one of who should be at the controls. Those currently there are either at fault for this and are fighting for their phoney baloney jobs, or incompetant, or attempting to use policies created 80 years before that failed. FDR was a cataclysmic failure, and the current admin wishes to return to these??
No, we need to stop this. We, as a people... as a NATION... need to stand up together and demand accountability for mismanagement. For corruption. For greed. For personal power grabs of the most heinous sort... from our representatives in government. We need to shake ourselves from shock and deal with this crisis, shoving those who are trying to protect themselves and their friends from righteous blame and anger, out of the way.
This is no longer a time for children to play, but a matter for men and women to deal with the horrible realities we now face, as a way to save ourselves and those we love from true hardship not seen since the 1930s.
This means assessing problems and fixing them post haste. Credit and blame can be assigned after we are safe again. Those that hamper real solutions by offering convoluted fixes to cover their own agendas and illicit gains need to be bulldozed to the side and dealt with appropriately after this is over.
The ultimate question is: Are we a people capable of doing such hard choices and tasks on our own, or have we softened to the point of permanent victim status till someone else takes us over?
Time will tell.
What is the sound of freedom dying?
Is there a color to tyranny rising?
Can you smell the death of your rights?
Do you feel the Constitution shredding?
The instant that Congress moved to enact a tax of 90% against AIG and other corporate bonus recipients, we became a dictatorial state with the trappings of a democracy just like any other banana republic like Venezuela and Cuba. It is only a matter of time before we become the targets of such avarice and greed by the political class. The war against the common citizenry of America has begun, and this was our 'Boston Massacre'.
The Congress of the United States, or at least select members of it in charge of running the system. Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi seem to be prime movers in this economic debacle, but many more are stretching from it's epicenter and roots are complicit as well. The new administration is far from innocent with P-BO and Hillary also being tied to strings of corruption and payola to the source of the economic collapse. Whatever could I mean? Just this:
AIG, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae all were massive donors to each one of these people's campaigns. Chris Dodd recieved sweetheart loan deals from Countrywide due to his collusion and illicit protection of corruption and probably illegal activities in Freddie and Fannie. Combine this with Dodd being the largest recipiant of AIG "contributions" to his campaign. Next in line behind Dodd for buy off "contributions" would be Clinton, Obama and Frank. If their actions following this monetary assistance to their campaigns present past and future is not conspiracy to defraud as well, it is at least a conflict of interest and bordering on bribery. There needs to be ethics and potentially criminal investigations going on right now into the involvement with these people. If they are willing to tie AIG to the stake and burn it, they need to be considered as well.
Now these are people currently in power to blame for this mess. Some, are continuing to make it worse to protect their own personal agendas and power. Unfortunately this collapse was long in the making, with origins stretching back to the Carter administration and "Community Reinvestment Act" and the creation of sub-prime loans. The administrations and congresses since then are not out of the woods either, for many of them expanded and or protected the continuing problem as the fundamental flaws of this crisis grew, fertilized by greed and personal ambition. Heads of Freddie and Fannie mistating earings so they could gain big bonuses like Franklin Raines and Jamie Gorelick are to blame as well for covering up the eventual collapse with fancy accounting and outright lies on the real situation.
At least the W Administration tried to rein in Freddy and Fannie... but too late. The question was only of when it would collapse by then. It would have collapsed at a particularly inopportune time for all involved, and the protectors of Freddie and Fannie by those Congressmen and Senators currently in charge of this disaster were never going to do anything to threaten this power structure for their own re-election.
So now, we the people, look at the smoking financial ruin of our nation, in a strange form of freefall. As if somehow it had a velocity of it's own and is still being kept aloft in a floating miasm of it's own disintegrating wreck, beginning to fall to earth. We have to figure a way to make this a controlled crash or impact. Something to walk away from. The issue is one of who should be at the controls. Those currently there are either at fault for this and are fighting for their phoney baloney jobs, or incompetant, or attempting to use policies created 80 years before that failed. FDR was a cataclysmic failure, and the current admin wishes to return to these??
No, we need to stop this. We, as a people... as a NATION... need to stand up together and demand accountability for mismanagement. For corruption. For greed. For personal power grabs of the most heinous sort... from our representatives in government. We need to shake ourselves from shock and deal with this crisis, shoving those who are trying to protect themselves and their friends from righteous blame and anger, out of the way.
This is no longer a time for children to play, but a matter for men and women to deal with the horrible realities we now face, as a way to save ourselves and those we love from true hardship not seen since the 1930s.
This means assessing problems and fixing them post haste. Credit and blame can be assigned after we are safe again. Those that hamper real solutions by offering convoluted fixes to cover their own agendas and illicit gains need to be bulldozed to the side and dealt with appropriately after this is over.
The ultimate question is: Are we a people capable of doing such hard choices and tasks on our own, or have we softened to the point of permanent victim status till someone else takes us over?
Time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
