The Piercing Truth

This is right from the dictionary and seems to describe Albuquerque, Berry and Schultz. Fascism (f ash ,izem) noun An authoritarian right wing system of government and/or social organization. (in general use) extreme right wing, authoritarian, chauvinistic and/or intolerant views or practices. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one group over another, national, ethnic, especially social strata or monetarily; a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach. Compliments of one of our Eyes

May 13, 2008

Campaign Clichés

As the never ending Democratic primary enters its 7,435th day and the local races begin to heat up for June's primary, two catch phrases have grabbed our attention - on the right "conservative values" and on the left "change." We can't tell how often we've heard or read either one of these campaign clichés and felt that the candidate involved has no idea what either means.

Ronald Regan was a champion of conservative values - he was able to articulate what it meant to be a conservative and why it was important for government and society to embrace the concepts of liberty, freedom, and limited government. Too many of today's Republican candidates rely solely on the cliché without a working understanding of the underlying meaning. The result is a whole slate of candidates relying on empty rhetoric devoid of meaning or inspiration. When these bumper sticker candidates become elected officials their lack of understanding makes them poor examples of the very values they ran on.

Meanwhile over on the left, we've got a whole group of bobble-head dolls chanting "change, change, change" without explaining to what - as if change in and of itself is a good thing. Before advocating change it would be a good idea to have a clear vision and preferably some idea of how to get there. Democrats are busy talking change, but the change they describe is the change they promised in the last election cycle - change which they have utterly failed to deliver despite controlling both houses of Congress.
Changing to a system where government is boundless and freedom is limited should give anyone pause. We refuse to believe that anyone - liberal or conservative - wants a group of government officials telling them how to live their lives.
(End Sidebar)
In a hotly contested national election we count ourselves lucky to get a 25% voter turnout. Of those 25% we'd bet that less than 5% have taken the time to research the candidates and even less than that have taken the time to meet a candidate. Unfortunately, voters pick their candidate by their favorite cliché. Or perhaps they pick their favorite cliché by their favorite candidate. It really doesn't matter because all too often both are meaningless.


Anonymous said...

I find it amusing your perception of yourself is a well-informed voter with control of ideas. I remember reading your blog and you stated the housing crisis was not a crisis. You claimed it was nothing and would not have much if any impact on the economy. Now we know the crisis has devastated some cities and it is partially responsible for the current budget problems in our city.

Before the almighty conservative elitists criticize the “average” voter, I think you should do some research to better understand issues. Had you done your homework you might not have looked so stupid. Get an econ book and study or stay silent about economic issues, because it is better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and prove it. You are no better than the average voter is because you vote along party lines. Republicans and Democrats are not always right but only an informed person would understand this.

Tax cuts are not a panacea for our countries problems and current economic theory explains why. Read about dynamic optimization or optimal control theory, read Finn Kydland and Edward Prescott’s Contribution to Dynamic Macroeconomics. Do not assume meeting a candidate gives you the knowledge that will allow you to understand policy implications.

Anonymous said...

I wish I could believe my vote counts for anything anymore. I wish that the people of authority I was raised to trust could be trustworthy. It appears that candidates I vote for are the lesser of two evils rather than the best person for the job. Elections seem to be more about the “delegates” or “super delegates” instead of “We The People” and the issues that are important to us. The right to vote should matter. We now have an example of the Supreme Court deciding an election reminding me that judges also make mistakes regarding their rulings; after all, they are only human.

As for changing from where we have come to, compare how it used to be. I would like us to change back to the way it was when our forefathers drafted the United States Constitution. Take for example the fourth amendment; The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. If anyone reads these simple words, they would realize how wrong operations like DWI checkpoints are! We are not all automatic criminals just because we drive a vehicle and should not be unreasonably seized. Where is the probable cause to stop or search us unwarranted? It appears that these days we should all be afraid and not feel secure in our persons. The story on the front page of today’s Albuquerque Journal pretty much puts it into perspective. Before the graduating class of Albuquerque High went into the “Pit” to be congratulated and receive their well-earned diplomas, they had to pass through a “pat-down search” before entering the ceremonies. Either change is imperative or our kids had better get used to being treated like they are not important citizens in our society.

Anonymous said...

"change which they have utterly failed to deliver despite controlling both houses of Congress"

Not true. While the democrats had a majority, they didn't control: the republicans were able to block umpteen bills by filibustering. Without the 60 votes for cloture, which they didn't have, the democrats were stymied.

joe schmedlap said...

Well if you guys were to Google this bill "Global Poverty Act (S.2433)", you will get a wakeup call about what some members have been working on. If you thought the war was expensive imagine what this hunk of dreck will cost us while we are trying to find money to fill our tanks and buy food.

Anonymous said...

"Ronald Regan was a champion of conservative values..."

Horseshit: Bailing out Chrysler, firing air traffic controllers, negotiating with the same Iranians that took our diplomats hostage and who now want nukes, supported oligarchies and fascists in Central and South America, a pervert known as Meese as AG, hidden war in Nicaragua, geometric growth of deficits and spending, perjury, and on and on and on...