Patrick’s last blog post..Okay, So It’s Over…

Michael/Rod…will try to comment if I have time. Hard to respond to essay-length comments!!!!

This is a link to a website following the legislation of the Ammunition Accountability Act. New Jersey is pushing it, might want to let your readers know about it.

I also have a blog, isn’t the Internet great. This is why the libs are pushing for total media control. They hate the fact that there are people out there spreading the truth.

Great work!

Jen Kuznicki’s last blog post..Deep Compromises?

First, as you said, we in this country compromise Right and Left, however, we are mostly RIGHT of center. The bulk of our population believes in capitalism and the freedoms it supplies. DEMOCRATS are not socialists, they are CAPITALISTS, they just don’t cling to the extremes of the CONSERVATIVE concept. LIBERAL is not socialist, it is, in fact, the MIDDLE, the center, a compromise between RIGHT and LEFT. Frankly, almost ever democratic candidate,save Kuchinich, was quite LEFT of center. Progressive as we call it. In the US we often refer to the MIDDLE as LEFT because that’s as far as we GO.

How does one compromise abortion. If you do not believe in abortion, it is not your problem. What is a problem is when groups believe in different morals. We are not a pure democracy. It is not our way to criminalize one group for their convictions simply because 51% of the population believes they are immoral, or wrong, or even committing a crime. Especially if the “crime” is not a direct burden, cost or injury to the society. History tells us that abortion has been around for millenia. There is no statement against abortion in the bible. If it is so wrong, why didn’t Moses, or God, or Jesus or Paul make any specific statement to that point. In the Jewish faith, a child is not a person until it is one month old. A Jew is not to mourn over a child born dead or one that dies before it is one month old. It is not your right to judge me by your moral structure so long as it causes no injury to you or society directly.

Is Obama moving away from extreme market capitalism, yes, but only slightly. What created this mess is multifaceted. The prime point as I see it are -

1. Ill advised market deregulation that confused investments, hid risk and put higher leverage on banks.

2. Greed in the market. A lot of this coming from Hedge Funds used to insure these investments. Bernie Maddoff is an example.

3. The sub prime mortgage laws. Probably what tipped the apple cart. These sub primes were insured via Hedge funds. Oh, and since the sellers of these mortgages usually sold them off in bulk to banks and financial institution. It became another source of greed. Stretching the laws and often breaking them simply to gain the commission. Incidently, none of the sub prime mortgages were via the FNMA or FHLMC (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), they were funded by private investors, and commercial and investment banks all over the world.

4. Certainly there are more factors, for instance, allowing investment banks to act as normal banking institutions, etc. Still, the first 3 seem to be of most importance.

Yes, we were deregulating and approaching a more lassez-faire position and it was this deregulation and “let it fall as it will” attitude that created this economic mess. We MUST re-regulate the system to an extent or the same situation will happen again. Certainly overregulation is just as ill advised.

Some people believe that economies self regulate. Money and economics are NOT natural systems. They are man made system. Money and economics do NOT self regulate, they must be controlled. The theories and concepts of this types of regulation complex and often involves higher mathematics to prove. Economics must be CONSTANTLY monitored and adjusted as the environment and systems change around it. This is why Lassez-Faire economics fails for most of the society while making a few people rich beyond their dreams.

As far as OBAMA being American? After the BUSH fiasco, and the recent findings that he had pretty much rescinded the the BILL OF RIGHTS, I wonder how you can say such a thing. America is a society, a diversified group of people. Obama was elected to run this country by a substantial majority of the population. Being AMERICAN is giving this man the time, the patience and the trust so he can prove his concepts. When and IF they fail, then you can criticize his actions.

Certainly the market is not going to like what Obama is doing. It’s not about the market and their profit levels, it’s about getting this country back to work. It’s about bringing this country together. We can no longer be divided by idealogs and devisive political childishness. We can no longer allow the country to be run for special interests, making laws so that a few people can profit in the market place. We can no longer allow this country to be controlled by a MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY political direction.

Now, I certainly won’t say this is all the fault of the GOP, Democrats have made their share of mistakes and many of them also believed the SUPPLY SIDE LIE. We have backed ourselves into a corner and it will take the minds of a good leader like Obama and the work of the most intelligent economists in the nation to pull us out. What we need is what Obama requested.. UNITY.. if you don’t understand that, then you’re not in the boat.

“And how are they any better than “conservative” ideas?”
Conservatism outside of its religious influences is a great concept. Unfortunately like socialism, such idealism on a topic only works on paper. I’m not saying conservatism is a paper only concept, but I’m saying a balanced/realistic conservative party that represents a nation on a global scale cannot serve its people if it serves religious tones first. Now take those words as they are — Don’t misconstrue or infer poorly on them.

“In others, you most hold on principle.”
Principle and ideology grow as people grow. And principles emerge and stay relevant within the context of their settings.

“How does one compromise on abortion?”
I absolutely detest abortion. I think it is disgusting, and I personally believe its wrong. However, I believe it should remain an option. What we need is real sex ed. No fear mongering, no abstinence-only education, no gingerly shaped ‘education’ as it is set-up today — In which it is criminal for an educator to answer many of the questions that don’t line up perfectly on guidelines. Condoms and other forms of contraception need to stop being shunned and obtaining them shouldn’t be a moment of shame as most of the ‘religious right’ has done by the various stigmas attached to them. What I think needs to be done is to shift the stigma: Make it shameful to not use protection, encourage the personal responsibility to protect yourself and your partner if you are going to make the decision to engage in sexual activities. Get parents involved.

Many people love the mantra that it is a parent’s right to teach their children — The issue is that most parents want no role in that today. School is daycare, something they use to get away from their children. Sure you can ostracize those who don’t conform to your standards, but the problem is that ultimately we will only be divided as nation and as a people on a global level. While some divisions are fine, even encouraged, driving wedges by having an all or nothing stance never accomplishes anything for us and only empowers those who wish us to further be divided.

“How does one compromise between capitalism and socialism?”
Socialism is a paper idea. As is capitalism. What we have in America is a mix between the two. Which is what we should have. Social programs allow for reasonable assistance/provisions for citizenry while a laissez-faire economy gives us competitiveness and gives greater incentive for the best/brightest to lay their claim to their own rewards. The issue we really are arguing is balance. I don’t like the idea of a welfare state. There are too many people truly mooching off the system, those people give the truly stricken and downtrodden a bad name, and they are a hemorrhaging drain on each and every one of us. I don’t like an economy that exploits every possible loophole out there, like the 100 billion+ a year in tax evasion through foreign banks, and the segment of the population who is willing to let people rot in order to pinch pennies.

“By the way, as an example, here in New Jersey our government has pretty much been either “moderate” (Whitman) or crazy Left (Corzine, McGreevey for the past decade). All it’s given us is the absolute worst state in the nations for taxes and business. And a budget that has almost doubled since the beginning of the decade. People are leaving the state in droves.”
I personally don’t know about New Jersey’s situation. I can’t truthfully comment on it.

“One that cuts government and cuts spending and puts taxpayers before unions and special interests.”
This is a large subject. I’m going to skip spending/interests and go straight to unions. I’m the son of a single mother who raised me off of her teaching salary. I’ve worked in the classrooms, seen the things the districts do to the teachers, and I’ve worked hand-in-hand with some of those terrible teachers everybody loves to point at. My mother had to forfeit her social security when she became her teacher. She will only get her pension and nothing more. All teachers in our state have to do that. She has had to deal with classrooms of 35+, with no aids (unlike the one part-time aid she would be able to have a decade ago), nearly no materials, strict state-mandated guidelines in order to get adequate funding, and a tyrannical district that holds them under their thumb.

They have to stay 2-3+ hours a day, without pay, in order to prepare for the next day as well as grade the numerous papers for each child. I’ve graded several thousand papers, it isn’t a fun task even if you do it in the most efficient set-ups possible. And every day the districts dump more of their work-load onto the schools administration, which in turn dumps it all onto the teachers. If the teachers complain or even try to speak up do you know what happens? The funding for that school ‘coincidentally’ gets cut a little further, or that school gets a surprise inspection. Unfortunately the teacher’s unions have been demonized as huge spenders of money when the real problem are the districts. The district buildings, which in our state nearly have triple the staff of an average school, run the A/C 24/7, have their own cafes in-building, spend ludicrous amounts of money on on trips for themselves and other ridiculous luxuries. Did you know that the teachers have to clean the floors of their classrooms now? They can’t even afford janitors to vacuum. And for the past decade I personally know every teacher that I have ever met has spent hundreds of dollars of their yearly paycheck in order to buy supplies for their students so they would at least have the bare minimum to learn. If you want to point a finger — Point it at the management not the teachers. They break their backs for their students, its the districts who scrape a little more off the top in terms of funding every year.

Now for the autoworkers union — They’ve become like the districts. They are bloated, and use their union as a weapon to beat the horribly managed American car companies to the point where both of those things combined creates disaster. The biggest issue here are the idiots who play generational business games with their children getting high level positions, ultimately running the companies, without any actual knowledge of whats going on. The next biggest issue is the unreasonable levels of compensation the auto workers union is getting in overtime pay. That is where the UAW bullied the American car companies.

Unions can be a great tool so the little guy can get reasonable benefits. However, when a union becomes a weapon to threaten and bully unfairly it loses its original purpose and becomes something bad for a companies economic well being.

“Where should we compromise on them knowing that moderate and left-wing ideas and policies have failed us miserably?”
You need to remember that as time has progressed the basic standards that you personally expect today were obtained by unions and other similar establishments that existed decades ago. Most people seem to not realize that, as well as most haven’t read The Jungle to see how far things have changed and the reasoning for that change. I believe we should aim for an economically viable betterment of our standards as time progresses. Companies shouldn’t revel in ridiculous profits without the brunt of the workforce getting the benefits they’ve duly earned. I’m not saying they should walk away with money bags, but they deserve the basic necessities.

“Michael…you’re refutation is kind of weak.”
I disagree. My retort in regards to the original comment was short.

“Failing is the exact same thing as not succeeding and you know it.”
If you were to not read the context in which the questions were asked and the method of how they were obtained I would agree. However, it would be silly it not consider the context.

“There was no “good two years of support,” nor was support from the vast majority of Americans.”
Maybe the ultra-ridiculous crazy ‘liberals’ didn’t give him his two years but the rest of us sure did. See the chart I posted earlier from the BBC that measured his approval ratings. He got a vast majority of support.

“When Bush took office approval ratings were generally around 50%, and probably would have remained around there, barring any major blunders.”
We aren’t discussing would-haves. We are discussing what happened.

“His approval rating skyrocketing and remaining relatively high for about a year was a direct result of 9/11. You know that. It has nothing to do with giving him a chance.”
Yes it does. He got an amazing chance from 9/11. He was given leeway unlike no other. If you want to grind your teeth and claim otherwise, feel free to, but that doesn’t change what he got.

“I can’t believe you deny the hypocrisy. What we want is for YOU to be reasonable.”
I made several short statements — Something too little for you to greater infer into what I had said. I did not deny any hypocrisy, I merely made slight comments based off of the aim of the article’s writer and his response. And to be straight to you: I am reasonable. I’ll tear somebody down, of any affiliation, if they are too hard line and try to force their views when around me. I understand moderation and I understand compromise. I also understand not wanting to compromise and gritting your teeth to disbelief at how somebody of a differing view can be so short-sighted in their reasoning.

“So, Bob, is dissent suddenly not the highest form of patriotism anymore?”
Dissent is a beautiful thing. And it should be encouraged and appreciated by both sides. The issue is when things are spun and misconstrued from their true aspects to something that is merely political fodder.

Rod in post #36 is more or less correct. He could phrase it better, but the gist is true.

“Rod, Obama most certainly is moving away from free market principles. There’s a reason the market has tanked since his election.”
Garden I suggest you look up other times when the economy has tanked in the past. I believe the ‘Daily Show’ had a segment on this that I saw online.

“The folks on Wall Street don’t like his big spending, big government agenda.”
Wall Street has their portfolios set-up around the system in place. Their profits are built around the broken and out of date regulations that allow for loopholes.

“From government run health care, to punishing cap and trade proposals, the prospects for prosperity are bleak if he gets what he wants.”
The issue is that those two things are not in place nor are they even remotely about to be in place. Go with the things Obama is doing now and what he has done. Despite your opinion on them working or not working, they are far from socialism. Anybody with a dictionary knows what socialism really is. Hannity/Rush just throw it out there like they are masquerading as McCarthy.

“Secondly, laissez faire economics did not bring about our current economic problems. it was bad government policy in the way of easy money from the Fed and the push to make it easier for those who could not afford homes to get mortgages.”
This is where most people get lost. The subprime mortgages were mostly fine. The issue is what they lead to. ‘Preferred’ investments, sorry I do not remember their exact term, is what caused most of this shamble. Subprime mortgages is just what burst the bubble. The cascade and everything else associated with it is related to that. And that was due to the banks choosing to do that. Wells Fargo’s President was interviewed last year for an article about that. He clearly explains exactly how almost everybody, but his company, got into this fiasco.

“It was greed at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (where liberals mainly ruled the roost — and Barack Obama was Fannie and Freddie’s #1 recipient of donations I might remind you.)”
And everybody else was there too. As well as every candidate gets donations from every corporation, hoping to gain favor. Now I won’t say Obama’s administration is completely free from all of this, but it isn’t on the size or scale that you are portraying it as. Again — See that Well’s Fargo article. I’d give you the name… but I was reading it in the lobby of an office while I was waiting for an appointment a few days ago.

“We believe in maximum freedom and limited governent control and interference.”
I’m being an ass with this comment but it still rings true: Banning abortion. That is government interference.

“An agenda that aggressively increases the size of government and its control over our lives is most certainly more fascist.”
I agree with Eisenhower’s warning of the military industrial complex. However, I must ask: Why are republicans for bolstering our military spending every year? Is that not an increased size of government? Both parties need to get off of their stupid pedestals and work together on something reasonable that addresses the global concerns that plague us.

“Lastly, I’ll start supporting Obama when he stops pursuing an un-American, anti-capitalist agenda — and when he stops spending trillions of dollars on garbage.”
Now you are sounding like Hannity. And Hannity is a lunatic who doesn’t even check the facts of the information he presents.