Skip navigation

Tag Archives: fundamental principles

I am a young person, who is just starting out in life and trying to gain practical real world experience. That much…I hope is obvious. I try to give my opinions based on the facts and the information I receive and present them to you. I give my own insight of what is necessary to save the Republic, get back to fundamental principles, and try to hold the line. I try to encourage debate, and modes of behavior from my own limited perspective.

But in that vein, I often may be a little over my head.

Now is such a moment.

I am not a General…a politician, a President, a chief of staff, a Secretary Defense or a military pundit. I am woefully unequipped to render an opinion on this most delicate of topics. Even more so than in most of the other topics I discuss on this blog.

But that has never stopped me before, and I do think there are a few key points that I can bring up and discuss. A few points that I can make.

If the United States is to do any good on the World Stage we must learn to look at things from a fresh perspective. We must learn how to look at the world, our role in it, our allies, and the very future of war with new eyes.

Because we are the most powerful Military in the History of man. We have the technology, the ships, planes, equipment, and soldiers that can dominate many of the Militaries around the world.

But this military has come at a price. In blood, in money, and with our men and women of our armed forces being put in harm’s way around the world. Where if a crisis is to break out anywhere, it is likely that we will be spending more blood and money to try to put it out and scramble.

We have way too many hot zones around the world, way too many areas that we are invested in, we are spread way too thin.

And we are doing this in the middle of a massive recession, massive spending problems, massive problems around the world, and with politicians that do not know how to properly use our Military when they are sent into harms way.

We simply cannot afford it, and with the weaknesses in our Government it just causes the lives of hundreds and thousands of American to be lost needlessly.

We do not have to, and it does not seem that we can afford to, be the World’s Policeman…if you will forgive me for using such a ridiculous term. And while I do like American Power and think we can use it for great good around the world, we do not have to do that either.

Because we are spending so much on Military, and so invested, that it is dragging us down. I appreciate the sacrifice and danger of our men and women, but there is so much fat that can be cut from the military.

We can still give them the equipment and the training they need to survive, and be the dominant Military on the Planet…or one of them. But we have to begin to cut away the fat.

The Military bases everywhere, the Military bureaucracy…etc.

And this is to not suggest either that we do the absolutist solution of not having a Foreign Policy or to be a force on the World Stage. I do not favor Isolationism.

What I do favor is that we can pick a few places to keep Military bases and Military funding around the world, the best places and most strategic places to support our allies.

In Europe, in Asia, and in Japan. One or two countries that will want our presence and we can work with. Close the rest.

We will then move from a dominant force in any war to a supporting role. Let the Koreans and the Israelis, for example, fight their own battles and their own wars on their soil. Let them do most of the fighting. We can be there to support. We can be there to use our Fighters, our Airforce, our Navy, and our Missiles to strategically help.

Which will limit the danger to our servicemen, and hopefully still support and defend our allies.

We can use our Special Forces and our Air dominance, and we can be a helpful force on the world stage.

But if we are to save the Republic, we do need to take steps back.

Advertisements

Time for me to weigh in on this issue. Two things happened to me over this last week that led to this blog.

One was I listened to an interview on the Sean Hannity show between him and three other women about Islam and Sharia law. It was a forum, two against, and one more or less for. In relation to the Imam and his opinions and the Mosque.

The second thing was this video on the Libertarian Facebook page:

Now I want to cover the video first because it was interesting…especially since I just found out the identity of the person who made that video.

Now first off I disagree with many of his assertions and think he did an unfair portrayal of the debate.

In fact I believe he committed the same crime that he accused the ‘Conservative Leaders’ of doing.

Bigotry.

He assumed that the only reason that anyone can be against this Mosque was because those persons are bigots, that they hate Muslims and anyone with brown skin. Even daring to suggest and compare this as being akin to a brown free zone and suggesting that is what the big beef is.

Sure there might be a few people who believe that rushing to condemn this Mosque, but how can he assume this of the entire group and anyone who is against this Mosque?

How can he even go into the hearts and minds of the leader and draw the conclusion that they want a white only zone, when they have not made the assertion themselves. Please show me if I am wrong.

That is bigotry, the same exact thing that he accuses them of doing.

And it is disgusting.

Apparently no one can have legitimate concerns about this Mosque, this cultural center, this whatever.

No one can raise concerns over the rhetoric of the Imam, of the Muslims who are building this, of the funding, of whatever, regardless of their opinion on whether it should be built or not or whether or not they have the right to their property.

But this is especially shocking when Sarah Palin, Newt, and a lot of the ‘leaders’ here are taking the Libertarian way of doing things. Especially in the case of Glenn Beck.

Well mostly. I mean some of the protesters here want the Government to take action and stop this, declare imminent domain, make up a new law prohibiting it, or declare a store a historic site.

But the person making this video is quick to point out that there are many Mosques in New York, in the general area, and there is a Pussy Cat Lounge or whatever also in the vicinity. Why are they even any better to put in an area then a Mosque? He declares.

People are looking at this wrong.

Again shocking because I thought these were Libertarians I was dealing with and not Collectivists.

They (the ‘leaders’ in question) are dealing with this as the individual.

They are dealing with this Imam, with this, Mosque, with this funding base, and with this group of followers.

As an individual. Protesting and trying to apply their own pressure and declaring that they will not help in the building of this Mosque.

No one asks why they are doing it, all they ask, because I guess they assume that they are bigots, is that why are they not protesting the other 100? Now why is that?

Could it be they have concerns about that specific Mosque? About the rhetoric and the funding and all that?

They could be wrong, they could be wrong in their methods (getting the Government to enforce their will), they could be wrong in their opinions about this guy, he could be an angel.

But it is their right and they are dealing with this properly.

Individuals coming together in a group and protesting something that they consider to be a threat.

And also wondering why a Greek Orthodox Church will not be built in the area and why the Government of NY is steam rolling them but so hell bent on extending the rights to these Muslims.

Which brings up that it seems in cases like this that Libertarians are so hell bent on rushing into a situation to ‘save’ people from the evil Conservatives and the evil religious bigots, and rushing into a situation without thinking about that they could be bigots themselves. Such a rush to judgment without thinking or looking at the actual facts of the case or the reasons, just assuming anyone other then them are state-ist, fascist, bigots.

And while they are doing what we should be doing, what any of them should be doing.

You see we have a right to ask questions and form opinions. It is the right and the responsibility of any responsible Journalist, opinion maker, or truth seeker to ask the questions.

Because in the Sean Hannity interview I think he missed the point.

You see he was asking the women about Sharia law, their opinions on what it was.

And over the week two different versions of the Imam have come out.

Either he is a man who believes America is evil and is trying to slap us in the face and make us Sharia Compliant with this Mosque and preach radical views of Islam.

Or he is an agent of our Government, speaking at the FBI about Islam to try to be a force for good, and an agent of our Government going abroad to preach tolerance and bridge building.

Either Sharia law is a radical sect of Islam that preaches the molestation, the rape, and the stoning of women and children who step out of line.

Or it is the Islamic version of Christian Law, the faith, the peace, the tolerance, the building of bridges.

You see Hanity missed the boat. Big time.

You see instead of worrying about the opinion of the three women, instead of worrying about a general consensus of what Islam believes Sharia law to be, we should be worrying about the opinions of the Imam. Ask him the questions, and then form the opinions from those answers.

Are you good? Are you evil? Are you an agent of darkness or an agent of bridge building?

Are you trying to build this Mosque as a symbol to preach faith, to build bridges, or are you doing it as a slap in the face of the American people?

Never mind your opinion about the Jews, or about the United States or their role in ‘creating’ terrorism, never mind any of this, will you join us in condemning Hamas, and any other terrorist network? Will you stand with us in condemning evil or are you going to stand by and be silent? Or worse are you complicate?

We deserve answers to these opinions and these questions, and if you waffle we just might take your silence…well whatever way we want.

We need to find this out, whether they have the right to that piece of property or not. Whether they have a right to build that Mosque is in the end irrelevant.

Because we can still form an opinion and know what we are up against.

And on a sort of btw unrelated note, but not really, I was given a link to an article by a friend of mine called ‘Foxworthy Authoritarians’

Now I disagreed with most of the opinions and the points, good article but one thing gave me a great chuckle.

In his article he made asked the question:

If your world view allows you to make endless exceptions for Israel’s national police to bash heads, erect walls, and turn the Gaza Strip into a concentration camp, you might be an authoritarian.

Now you would think that since the Israelis have been the most conspicuous victims of ‘Concentration Camps’ you think they would know how to build them better.

Because its funny I did not know that the Germans could not control the area or let weapons and missiles through.

It’s funny that I did not also realize know that the Jews could have launched rockets out of their concentration camps and kill thousands of German Civilians.

Or that they pledged to wipe Germany off the map.

Its funny, I know. (not really, tragic comes to mind)

A while back I read a comment in the Libertarian Facebook group where a person basically said ‘I call myself a Libertarian because I would rather, and it is easier, to be for Liberty then to call myself an Anarchist which is against Government.’

Now this did not get me thinking at the time but in thinking about this blog, I realized that it is all apart of a point.

A little later a quote had suddenly shot into my head, it was for one of my Novel projects, but it was about two types of people.

Now for a pseudo sort-of good guy but maybe not a nice dude with a really dark background, the quote in question makes sense. But for the purpose of a blog trying to make a point, oh well I do not want to get into trouble now do I? *shivers*

But I still realized, with the basic point raised in the initial statement in the blog, that you can still make the blog work. Just take out any generalizations and just roll with it.

It is better to fight for something, then to fight against it.

And oh have I realized how I have been trying to live my life this way.

You see fighting against something is a path to hate and anger. You are fighting against the forces of X or the group of Y.

You are fighting against a specific thing and that unites you.

But its sort of meaningless.

Like the Whig Party of old. They were against Andrew Jackson.

Sure they may have had their platforms, their ideals, and their principles. But the one unifying feature of the party was a want to fight against Jackson, that was the only thing holding them together. And oh I probably would have been one.

But no wonder the party did not last long. This is just a microcosim of the point actually. In this case once the enemy vanished, they quickly dissolved.

Which of course leads us to today, and to me.

I am not the enemy of anyone. Heck I do not want to hate, I do not want to exclude someone from my circle because they are of one ideology or another, I do not want to be against anyone and fight against them, I want to be friends with all and judge you based on your own personal character.

Heck I have even had an…uh…crushes on liberals. Well probably more than one.

It does not matter to me.

People make a big deal about a defensive war, about just waiting around and waiting for your enemy to act. And in life and death wars that can be a point, sometimes to prevent being nuked you want to strike first. (oh I wish I could blog about that.)

But the point is for liberty, and standing on principle that is exactly what you must do.

Because you often do not have to act to defend your Government, your principles, and your freedoms until after they try and take them.

After all I would not be ‘woken up’ if they did not try to take our rights, if the last two administrations were not messing with us so much, if we did not need to get the Government off of our backs in so many cases, then this blog probably would not exist and I could watch me some Doctor Who and worry about my date. (I find as I edit this that is exactly what I am doing.)

I would not want to, have the desire to be, a radio host, or be a political writer or write novels with such political and social points about our times in Galaxies far far away.

At the best I would be a Conservative and at the worse I would have been a progressive to get along. I would most certainly not be a Libertarian.

And I would not care so much, or be so concerned about others and my liberal…uh…crushes.

If they did not come after us. After all I hold sacred and dear.

Even the founders said it, Thomas Jefferson himself said this about the second amendment.

“The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”

It is better to know where you stand, to know what you stand for.

What principles and morals, what documents and foundations, your sense of honor and sticking to your guns in the best of your ability. To know where you stand, for your God, your Government, your Liberties.

To know where the line is so that they must never cross it.

Because fighting for something, whether it is a woman, a country, or an ideology is a statement of love. Because that is so sacred for it that you are willing to live, to die for, that you are willing to sacrifice your life, your time, your wealth, your what ever in its defense.

And if you are fighting against something that is a statement of hate about it. Whether it is a woman, a country, or a political ideology. That you hate it enough where you want to tear it down, transform it, control it, and then enforce your will on others.

I mean we see it all the time even in our movies and throughout human history.

You have people fighting against the dirty huns, the ragheads, but is it not better that you are fighting for something?

For freedom, to set other people’s lives free and give them a better life.

I do think restoring this principle is one of the most important of them.

After all in the quote above we are the defendersof our own freedom when Governments and people get out of control.

We are not the attackers, we are not the enforcers we are the people who needs to say, ‘hold on, time out, what? What do you want to do to me?’.

And it is one of the fundamental ways when you can tell if someone is a friend of liberty and principle and morality, and if someone is hateful and mistrustful of groups and people.

That is one of the most fundamental ways to tell the good, from the bad.

I want to start off on a personal note. I love blogging, it’s what I do and how I spend, too much of my time really. But I love it, love getting my ideas out there and many other reasons.

But I also love it because sometimes I can do this to people. Write a catchy or creative or interesting title that will make people pause and go, has he lost his mind, has he fallen to the dark side? It causes more people to read it. And it also causes more people on the ‘left’ to read it who says, oh someone is saying Michelle Obama is right? Lets go read his wise words of awesome wisdom, to discover just how the pillar of magnificence was right.

Sorry to all of you I am going to have to disappoint you.

Now way back, in a speech in Puerto Rico…interesting…Michelle Obama was talking to a group of people.

Now I am going to post a video clip and the battle in my mind was, shall I listen to the entire clip and make my ears bleed or should I find a more short one that can serve the purpose.

I chose the short one, but just so you know there still exists the much longer version of this on YouTube.

Now what she is talking about is fundamentally changing the way we view our history. What facts are to be presented.

She would be a moron….heh…if she actually believed that you could change our history.

History is History. It is there in the past and you cannot change it, ours, the Latinos, the Germans, it does not matter. It is History, it is there, it is truth and waiting for you to discover it.

What she is suggesting is altering what we learn in history. What our facts are, what the perceptions of it are. That we will have to cut ourselves off from our past by not learning about it, and viewing our silly traditions as outlandish, wild, and antiquated. The last refuse of a bygone age of hate and bigotry.

That we continue a process that has been a long time in the making.

Well she was right, and…well two can play at this game.

But instead of a fundamental transformation, we need a fundamental restoration.

Instead of feeding people what information that they want us to have to score political points and isolate us from the goodness of our past and the founding principles, we need to not be afraid of information.

To share it and channel it. Warts and all.

Instead of hiding from our history and only peaking at the convenient parts, lets look at all of it and then learn the appropriate lessons and make our own interpretation.

Instead of listening to the honeyed words of the people in the ‘know’ lets go back to them, their ideals, their principles, their works.

And then we can read others opinions when we want.

Because our history is far too important to be left in the hands of the elite, the corrupt or the people who are trying to control us.

It is the sacred right of all Americans. Because it is ours, our shared history.

Yes we made mistakes, yes we have done terrible evil as a nation, but lets recognize that and move on instead of having it tie us down or be beholden to it.

We must have a restoration of our history to see where we have come from, where we are, and where maybe we are going. And to avoid our mistakes, hopefully.

So yes Michelle, you were right, we need to wise up again.

And the best way to do that is with original sources, the Constitution, and what our Founders said about the subjects that they faced themselves.

I do not know why I have not blogged on it, but now is the time.

End of the week, new month, new time, new era, have things to do as always.

And it provides the perfect segue into what is going to be happening next month.

Cases about morality, (buckle up) and about fundamental principles. About Government and the roles of such, and then the Political blogs leading up to the election.

I spend a lot of time debating, a lot of time talking to people from all walks of political life.

Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians, it does not matter.

One of the things that has surprised me the most is the regularity of it.

A lot of the complaints do sound similar to one another.

Whether it is the deficit, wasteful spending, bad and corrupt politicians, and other irregularities of the political process.

It is usually the blame and the solutions that are different depending on your political perspectives. It’s George Bush’s fault Obama is completely blameless in the debt and in fact he has had to clean up after Bush’s mess is a favorite among… well I am sure you can guess.

But the point is the fundamental principles is what is the same, they are across party lines, across political boundaries, most of the things that we do not like are universal no matter what.

We can all agree on those simple issues of what we like to see. Just that our positions on exactly how we expect to go about it, or what we expect from Government, is what gets in the way.

Whether it is strong law and order or welfare and health care and Government providing things for us.

That is what divides us.

And it is easy to be divided up it seems. Especially when you advocate that the Government must do this and take, or take away from another to do it.

What we need to do is unify, find those commonalities that we can all unite upon and then have the conversation.

Too often we approach from a position of how we are different, what divides us.

As I have pointed out you cannot build anything out of that, that is not unity. Only our likenesses can lead to unity, common ground, and then going from there.

Just then maybe we can rebuild our nation when we go from the fundamental principles to the solutions, not the solutions to the fundamental principles.

A lot has been happening to me that has led to the formation and creating of this blog.

Talking to friends, talking about various political issues with them and votes on certain things have effected the way I view things.

First of all, probably the cornerstone of this blog and the rest of my ideology is a complicated notion.  I was told by one of my friends on the forum that I frequent that I tend to look for a ‘political solution’ after saying…erroneously..that I hated politics.

This was funny but it was also sigh worthy and just shows me the state my own life in and the country is in.

I am not looking for a political solution, I think…and have been shown, that is not inherently the answer to all the country’s ills.

But it says something about our current state of affairs that we have to have, at least in part, a political solution.  Because we do need the politicians, at least in part…some of them..a small number of them in order to fix the problem that they started.  Because it seems like We the People are going one way and the Politicians are going another, at least in part, at least in this country.

The second part, perhaps the most ironic part is that I was talking to a friend from England, about that country’s recent elections was interesting.

He said that he would change politics based on what party was in power and what party was against them.  Now I know what he meant, but I just found the statement to be of some interest.

I would never change policies just because of some party in power or what not.  An ironic statement given that President Obama has outed me as a Libertarian and has made me a lot more weary on things that I was not weary about in the previous eight years of the Bush administration.

But it is not because of Obama so much.

It is about all of it, the whole issues that are raised to us.

There was an interesting bill that just came before the Senate.  One of the ‘audit the fed bills.’  Now I do not know the exact details of the bill, or if there was something buried in the heart of it that might have made the bill not that good.

But on the face of it is like the twilight zone.  Scott Brown voted against it, Kyl voted against it, and I thought he was a pretty strong Senator in such things.  But regardless it finally got me to a place and a position and a realization that I have not been before.

It’s not about the parties, it is about the individual and the fundamental principles.

The parties are quite meaningless, irrelevant and not that good for America.

It’s about the individual, and not the party.  I know I said awhile back, I think I did anyways, on this blog, that the parties are fighting over this and it is no longer really about the Government, but about the parties, about the party, and that just smacks about the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

Well there is nothing more European or more ‘European Tracks’ then just having to choose a party or a power base in order to be led.

Nazis and Communists.  All with the same basic idea, just that there slight variation on the theme of big Government.

And here we are, because honestly the more time goes on the more I am beginning to feel like we are being sold down the river by both parties.  That both parties keep on betraying us and our ideals and our principles and the will of the people.

The Democrats certainly would not be where they are without Republican help, certainly now and even through some of the past expansions of Government.

Sure there are some good individuals in our Governments and in our system, some great individuals.

But that is the point I think.  We need, generally, a party structure.  But it should not be about the parties.

Our founders gave us a system of individual rights, not collective rights, that the individual and ultimately the individual states have all the power and all the rights over our own lives.

That we are endowed by our creator by certain inalienable rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and then the other rights in our Bill of Rights.

So if this is so great a system for us and how we are supposed to be as a country and as a Government then why is it not a good system for those we elect as our representatives?

If we stick with just looking at the parties that is a path to insanity and frustration, the only hope we have is if we concentrate on the individual and his or her greatness, and his or her commitment to liberty.

Only then do we have a chance, and by restoring our responsibilities to Government, that we have a chance as a people.