About Me

Name: Tim Blessing
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Libertarian Republican #322

NATIONALISM.
 
What is Nationalism?
 
That's when the voters fire Jimmy Carter and put in Ronald Reagan in the White House.
 
It could be patriotism.
 
It could be a force for war.
 
Nationalism is about being proud of what your nation stand's for.
 
It is a necessary component of politics if you want to get elected and reelected.
 
Does that mean the French are anti-American?
 
I'd say no.  They are trying to pursue their own nationalism like we are everyday in the international arena.
 
Nationalism provides strength for a leader to pursue his country's national interest with the backing of his public.
 
Nationalism get's in the way when it become's a narrow ideological approach like Don Rumsfeld and George W. Bush practice it.
 
In essence, nationalism is more than patriotism, somewhere around national philosophy, and less than a ideology.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #321

IDEALISM.
 
What is Idealism?
 
Its a belief in the idea that we may belief in utopian dreams.
 
The best example of an idealist was John F. Kennedy.
 
He talked about how we should rise above everyday concerns.
 
He talked about Public Service rather than economic incentives.
 
That we should remake the world through war and peace.
 
That we should make sacrafices to the greater good of the country.
 
In George H. W. Bush's time, it was called Nobless Oblige or something to that effect.
 
What does it mean?  It means to those who are given much, much is to be expected.
 
Idealism: Giving more of yourself for the greater good rather than remaining in the shadows of life.
 
In essence, Idealism is about a higher existence of the good life, but reality can be harsher once the bills start pouring in the mailbox.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #320

THEOLOGY.
 
I do not know how many religions there are in the world, but it is a safe bet that they are all dramatically different.
 
It has created a lot of drama over the last 5000 years.
 
It is almost the most powerful force, except for politics, medicine, and human resources.
 
Which religion is the best suited to the individual or are you an atheist?
 
Nonbelievers say there is no God or Omnipotent Force in the Universe.
 
That were somehow here as part of an accident rather than by the will of some all powerful God.
 
Can you believe in Christianity without believing Jesus?
 
I'd say the answer is yes.
 
The Bible was written by mortal hands.  It is was not written by divine hands.
 
We like to believe in something bigger than ourselves, but stumble when we look at Christ.
 
I do not believe he existed as a divine being.  Maybe, he existed as a philosopher, but he never wrote anything down of his own.
 
Who says that Zeus, Odin, Vishnu, and other Gods did not exist?
 
Or who has the right to force some alien belief system on you when you know it is wrong.
 
I prefer to take an all encompassing approach in the philosophy book called The Middle Way.
 
That book lays to rest, Christ's claim to be center of our world's reality.
 
In essence, a little bit of this philosophy, a little bit of that, and maybe some of this lead's people to developh their own ideas outside the confines of theology.
 
Could it be?  That reality has a way of forcing us to confront evil and Jesus is evil.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #319

UTILITARIANISM.
 
This philosophy is simply based on what makes you feel good.
 
In the 1960s, you had this in extreme abundance on the liberal side of the political spectrum.
 
Free Love, illegal drugs, rioting, and other extreme versions of deviant behavior.
 
In the 1980s, you had this phenomenon on the right side of the political spectrum.
 
Cut taxes to the bone, drink up on Jesus, and tell the Russians you are going to bomb them back to the stone age.
 
Yes, its utilitarianism is what make's you feel good at the moment rather than what might be good for you even in the near future.
 
In essence, everyone looks not for Dr. Strangelove, but as Lee Iacoca said of Reagan, he's Dr. Feelgood.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #318

ANARCHY.
 
I do not know the exact definition of anarchy, but the abscence of government in any way, shape, or form.
 
That mean's people would have to fend for themselves in terms of everything.
 
That mean's there is no national security like in Iraq at the moment.
 
That mean's there is no law and order like in China prior to World War II.
 
That mean's food is grown on your own land and you have to find your own water.
 
That mean's disease will run rampant throughout the environment.
 
This is Social Darwinism at its finest.
 
An example of an anarchist would be the guy who shot and killed President William McKinley in 1901.
 
If this individual wanted to destroy the nation's economic, social, and military order then he achieved the opposite result than he intended.
 
Meaning, President Theodore Roosevelt brought the government's power to bear on our economy, social order, and in foreign affairs.
 
No President has been able to deviate from these themes since that time.
 
In essence, anarchy is the abscence of government in all of its forms.
 
It is perpetuated on the left and the right of the political spectrum.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #317

MARXISM.
 
What is Marxism?
 
It is mainly about government control of the economy.
 
It could be expanded to government control of the social issues realm.
 
It calls for world revolution to free the working class from the vagaries of capitalism.
 
It calls for confiscating the wealth from the rich to use in service of the poor.
 
It provide's a belief system for those who are involved in the class struggle.
 
Does it work?
 
I had a Training Instructor in the United States Air Force tell our unit in 1986 that he agreed with everything in Communism, but it did not work.
 
Meaning, on paper Marxism sound's like a philosophy that has an impenetrable logic, except it has never worked in reality.
 
Theory is great, reality is harsher.
 
In essence, like Winston Churchill might say Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the rest.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #316

THE PHILOSOPHY OF POLITICS CONTINUED.
 
Romanticism.
 
What is Romanticism?
 
The last romantic according to one biographer was Teddy Roosevelt.
 
What does that mean?
 
Teddy reveled in a lot of things throughout his life.
 
He loved every aspect of war, except when he was President where he practiced mainly diplomacy.
 
He loved public service in the domestic affairs area to the extreme.
 
He took a dim view of economic affairs.  It is said that he did not understand the money or dollar issue.  A book that had a statement of him making that point.
 
He loved culture in all of its myriad forms.
 
He loved the frontier.
 
He loved children.
 
He was married twice, but was loyal to both his wives to a fault.  The first one died.
 
Teddy seem to lose his romantic lust for war when he saw the carnage in Cuba during the Spanish-American War.
 
Romanticism is the love of life in all of its majestic splendar.
 
In essence, this philosophy used by people who have a grander view of reality rather than reality's drudgery.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #315

IRAN AND THE NUKE.
 
Does Iran want nuclear weapons?
 
Yes, but with qualifications.
 
I think they would use them for defensive purposes.
 
I do not think Iran would give them to Terrorists.
 
From what I have read on the subject, nuclear weapons are not easily transportable or mobile.
 
If Iran were to announce that they had nuclear weapons then our major partners might cut Iran off altogether.
 
We might not attack Iran, but we would isolate them even further.
 
Iran is surrounded by US Forces on 3 sides and they have for the most part been quiet since Iraq 2 has started.
 
Have they cooperated on issues related to the Middle East?
 
Has Bush pushed them into a corner with his bullying way?
Are those good enough questions to digest?
 
Is Israel going to attack Iran?
 
It could be done, but the logistics would be complicated.
 
Iran and the MOSSAD (Israeli Secret Service) cooperate behind the scenes.  Although I do not know how widely.
 
Israel makes the Arab Nations and Iran work together for public relations purposes.
 
Arabs and Persians have been rivals for centuries.
 
Iran with a nuke would lead a few Arab nations to consider getting nuclear weapons.
 
The Islamic Republic of Arabia would be a good bet for nukes.
 
Israel will pursue its own national interest if it destroy's these nuclear facilities.
 
The issue is how much death and destruction in terms of radiation within Iran the Israelis are willing to be responsible for in the aftermath of bombing Iran plus what Iran would do in retaliation.
 
Ehud Olmert may be following an old rule in politics.
 
If domestic affairs is bad then draw public attention to foreign affairs.  If foreign affairs is bad then draw public attention to domestic affairs.
 
In essence, in Israel's case the element of logistics may impede an attack on Iran, but a show of strength allows them to maintain a tuff image in international relations.
 
Just a theory mind you, but Israel lives in a dangerous neighborhood.  This time, however, they may have too settle for realpolitik.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #314

DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY
 
Obama is no dummy.  He is using Lincoln's approach as a roadmap for his election and administration.
 
The Doctrine of Necessity was Lincoln's answer to all of his actions.
 
It goes beyond the Constitution to what he claimed was the Common Law, to general legal maxims, and English Historical Precedent.
 
The Roman Law Maxim fit's it exactly "the well-being of the people is the supreme law".
 
Obama intends to prosecute the Terror War to the fullest extent and justify his actions through the doctrine of necessity.
 
He has a circular mentality like George W. Bush in that he is only one who represent's the nation's will.
 
I wonder what his game plan really is for the Terror War.
 
Lincoln pushed for total war that would destroy the Confederacy and then bring it back into the Union as quickly and mercifully as possible.
 
That's Obama's goal in the Terror War.  Destroy the Middle East and then integrate it into the wider world.
 
Simple, but Lincoln provide's him a road map.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #313

Abraham Lincoln and his Team of Rivals
 
I noticed that Abraham Lincoln is Obama's real hero.
 
I noticed recently he intend's to put all of his enemies in the cabinet like Lincoln.
 
Not out of any need for teamwork, but to keep an eye on his enemies.
 
Or so, Gore Vidal, wrote in his fantastic novel Lincoln.
 
That's a good book on Lincoln's administration.
 
Obama intend's to make himself absolute dictator by never letting on he is anything other than a timid backwoods lawyer given to fits of humility in front of all the strutting military and political peacocks.
 
For 3 years, a thousand voices had called for a dictator, a despot, a Cromwell never realizing from the beginning that there was a Lord Protector of the Union in the White House by whose will alone the war had been prosecuted.
 
Yes, he intends to put together a combination cabinet.
 
He intend's to play dumb all the way to the White House, through his administration, and to the end.
 
To be remembered in history as the greatest President since Lincoln.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #312

DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.
 
What issues drive voters on domestic affairs.
 
Consumer Affairs issues like poor quality Chineses Tools.
 
Credit Card Companies who offer enticing items then turn around and screw you with astronomical interest rates.
 
The politicians may not be able to stop these advertisements, but it would help if we could get some financial education.
 
You do not get that in Public School.
 
You get alot of Financial Management or Services Training in College.
 
Social Security provides a safety net, but it also has a glass ceiling in terms of what you can earn as an individual.
 
If you are disabled it provides a double amount of discrimination in that you have a fixed income and employers look down on you as an invalid.
 
Public Education should move back to a model that was prevalent in the 1930s and earlier.
 
More Vocational Schools, while leaving Bachelor Degrees to those more in the elite.
 
Its not dumbing down, more like a realignment of priorities.
 
I have four degrees, but I have rarely if ever used them in the work place.
 
Medicare and Medicaid are a joke in my opinion.
 
Again, you have earnings limits.
 
The jobs I am qualified for pay too much and have preexisting condition clauses in their benefits programs.
 
Sometimes it might be 30 days, 90 days, or even 1 year.
 
There is no standardization or rule of thumb for someone like me on how to go about getting a decent job.
 
I would end Medicaid and roll it over into Medicare.
 
The budget would remain the same, but the administrative complexity could be reduced.
 
From what I have seen in dealing with Medicaid is that there are multiple programs to chose from.
 
It would make sense to reduce the number of programs down to one for children.  One for working adults.  One for Senior Citizens.
 
One size does not fit all, but simplification of benefits programs would end a lot of confusion.
 
Crime is an ongoing problem.
 
I wonder if locking up violent offenders only would save the taxpayers money.
 
I wonder if nonviolent offenders were placed under house arrest for the first violation if that would save space.
 
I wonder if ILLEGAL Drug Laws should be simplified so that all drugs carry the same prison time or psychiatric care.
 
What to do about smoking?
 
You have my home state of North Carolina, heavily into tabacco being supported by the tabacco allotment pushed by the relevant Senators and Congressmen.
 
Whereas, the Surgeon General work's against this force of politics.
 
I wonder if it is time for Congress to give the FDA the power to regulate tabacco.
 
25% of the population is smoking so there would have to be some way to end the scourge.
 
Don Imus has used nicorrette gum for some 20 years or more.
 
He get's the nicotine fix without the side effects of smoking.
 
Their's that hand to mouth habit.  Its something that is rooted in nerve impulses.
 
I wonder if you could short circuit this problem through electric shock therapy.
 
There are a lot of issues that need to be addressed domestically.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #311

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND 2009
 
In 1992, Tom Brokaw appeared on Larry King Live talking about the election.
 
He said, that 1960 and 1980 were elections fought on issues instead of rumor, innuedoes, and personalities.
 
He hoped that the election of 1992 would turn out the same way.
 
I never saw him give his final analysis on 1992.
 
Such elections when they occur, the public is highly interested in the possible outcomes.
 
A rare occurrence that can be harnessed by the incoming President to get some things done.
 
That moves onto 2009.
 
A year that could bring about a legislative blitzkrieg not unlike 1981 or 1963 - 1965 or 1933.
 
It leads to radical change, but it is an opportunity.
 
The President on Domestic Policy.  A book that covers every administration going back to FDR.
 
If the Congress is open to change this book would provide a handy reference for getting a legislative locomotive started.
 
It depends if the Public is motivated enough to move forward.
 
Congress like's stability, but after Bush they may be more willing to work with a decent individual as President.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #310

UNILATERALISM.
 
When do you go it alone as a nation like the United States.
 
The answer is never.
 
General Fox Connor of the United States Army taught future General Dwight David Eisenhower three principles.
 
First, we go for short, decisive wars because the American People will not support long wars.
 
Second, we go to war with allies in terms of coalitions since they usually have more experience in this area.
 
Third, I do not know this principle, but any expert on Eisenhower can tell you this principle.
 
The idea is based on facts: Americans will fight, but it has to be on overwhelming force.
 
In essence, you fight when you have no other choice, you fight to win, and you have allies to help in the effort.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

LIbertarian Republican #309

ETHICS.
 
I know Congress has a problem with ethics.
 
Ethics to Congress is like kryptonite is to Superman.  Meaning ethics can kill a Public Servant's Career.
 
I think Ethics is too complex for members of Congress.  Meaning, you have to have an expert to analyze the rules.
 
I suggest ethics rules simplication.
 
It does not seem right that a Congressman or Senator of above the board effectiveness should have his or her career derailed by one incident.
 
If it becomes a pattern or the first case is extreme then there may be some need for correction.
 
In essence, ethics is too complex and there are too many grey areas.
 
Why not say that a Public Servant can take gifts up to $100000.
 
Too many nebulous grey areas with too many businessmen hanging around.
 
An impurity in the system, but not the death of a Congressman's or Senator's career.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libertarian Republican #308

CALIFORNIA MARRIAGE PRINCIPLES.
 
I know a lot of people are uncomfortable by California's experiment in domestic relations.
 
Is this different from the Civil Rights Revolution of Women and African Americans.
 
I would assume there are differences.
 
I think it may be a case of Realpolitik in Domestic Affairs.
 
We deal with the Practical and Material rather than the Theoretical or Ethical.
 
It is no longer a theory, but we do not know where it is going.
 
Do you open a pandora's box with this issue to let a whole range of other groups like the FLDS have legal marriages.
 
I guess the answer is, if you can afford it OK, if you do not push it into my face ok, if you pay taxes ok, if you perform all of your civic obligations ok, and if you do not ask more than the basics that other couples get.
 
In essence, they get equal protection of the laws along with due process, but they do not get special status.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive