Progressives, is this what you call “Progress”?

Standard

When watching, hearing or reading the news, the things that make me feel good are usually the things that drive Liberal-Progressive Democrats nuts.

Liberals recently have been calling themselves, for some logic defying reason, “Progressives.” Interestingly, since they began calling themselves Progressives they seem to have lost most elections, on state and local levels, have focused on maintaining the status quo rather then finding and fixing what’s wrong with our country and have rejected almost anything and everything proposed, not only by Conservative thinkers but by ‘plain vanilla’ Republicans. Hello Progressives, is that what you call “progress”?

Some of you might be beginning to realize that the mainstream of America has not joined your ‘parade’. The mainstream of America seems to feel that: living in this country is a privilege earned by those who were born here and by those who entered the country legally; that the country has run very well and efficiently with bathrooms and locker rooms labeled and designated for males and females and that if a male or female wants to change his or her sex (or locker room) it takes more than a desire or a belief, it takes a series of operations and a lot of pain as price of admission; that almost anyone can find work if they seriously want work; yes that may, in most cases, mean a drastic change of lifestyle and an acceptance of personal responsibility, but that’s what it takes if you want to live with dignity as a free person in a free country; that if you want a better life for your children you had better start now by encouraging them to work hard, respect the law, respect the rights of others and never pass up an opportunity to enhance their skill and knowledge.

Not to gloss over “personal responsibility”, it is the key to a civilized, fair and productive society.

I know that the Hillary Clinton loss in the last presidential election was a terrible blow to the hopes and dreams of Democrats, Liberals and Progressives but that really doesn’t excuse your rebellion against the legitimate presidency of Donald Trump. As much as you may want to deny it, he IS the duly elected President of the United States, a majority of the people in the majority of county’s across the United States selected him over Hillary Clinton (or Bernie Sanders). That, by the way, is how we do it in the United States and how we have always done it since the beginning. We are NOT a pure democracy, we are a Representative Republic ruled by the states. Under Obama we moved away from that position but under Trump, with or without your obstructionist tactics and mindless hate, we will continue to try and reduce the power and scope of the Federal Government and return the decision making to the people.

Not Enough Government Control? Here’s More!

Standard

Movin' On Up!

Do you like the idea of a bank that works for you, one that can create specialized financial products that suit your needs? Well your president says ‘fugetaboutit’! Under Obama’s newly proposed Federal Consumer Protection Agency, banks will no longer be in business to meet meet your individual needs, they will be under strict control of the Federal government and will be directed to only meet the needs of the Americans who know the least about financial matters.

Why this drastic measure? Well, the government thinks that most people may be too dumb to know when they can or can’t afford something and too dumb to be able to make individual decisions about their finances. They may be right — most people were dumb enough to elect a president who made it very clear during his campaign that individuals are much less important than the masses.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says “This agency will have only one mission — to protect consumers,” but that’s a lie! This agency has another, more important mission: to gain complete control of the banking industry. Under the Federal Consumer Protection Agency, in the words of Ed Yingling, president and chief executive of the American Bankers Association, “Basically, the government is deciding what every bank in every circumstance should offer.”

There are cases, of course, where individuals ARE too ignorant about financial matters to know what’s best for them but the problem with this new agency — as well as EVERY government agency — is, we will ALL, once the legislation passes, be in the same category. No individuality is allowed, no risk taking allowed for those who enjoy taking risks and another step in the direction that got this country way off course in the beginning, no personal responsibility.

A milestone in this trend of doing away with personal responsibility was when the government decided to buckle under to the insurance industry and force, under penalty of law, every driver to wear a seatbelt. The thought process was that the government’s role was not only to protect people from other people — people must be protected from themselves.

I guess, on a personal note, what bothers and depresses me most about this agency and this ‘no personal responsibility’ trend are that most people seem to be OK with it!

Here are links that will help you learn more about the Federal Consumer Protection Agency:

From Injuryboard.com: New Agency – One Mission- To Protect Consumers

From the Wall Street Journal: Consumer Protection on Wide Scale

The Creeping Socialism of Barack Obama, Part II

Standard

Over 1-1/2 years ago, on February 10, 2007, I posted an article in this blog titled “The Creeping Socialism of Barack Obama”. I’ve had several comments posted, both positive and negative, during all those months and the latest was today (11/6/08). I’d like to share this last comment because both the comment and my reply might interest those of you who have feelings about this election victory for Barack Obama:

Kylelee writes:

“America has spoken and despite the republicans attempt at striking fear in the hearts of the voters, Obama is now our 44th president. I’m confident he will get the job done, and I’m proud of my country for not falling for the cheap tricks that were thrown at them. I’m glad my country has matured enough to elect a man of African decent to the office of president. It shows that Barack has true vision and leadership which is why the American public was able to overcome their prejudices to vote him into office.
Finally, Barack is NOT a socialist. His idea of putting a heavier tax burden on the rich only makes sense. He is not taking their money and giving it to the poor. He only wants to lessen the burden on individuals who are struggling right now. The rich will not become poor and the poor will not become rich. The rich will stay rich and the poor will have more of an opportunity achieve their dreams.”

Yes indeed, America has spoken and Sen. Obama will soon become our 44th president.

While Kylelee is “confident” Sen. Obama can get the job done I remain only hopeful that he doesn’t do too much damage to our country. He will be my president too and I will support him when I believe he’s right but I will attack and vilify him when I feel he’s wrong.

Race ‘seems” to have been a big issue in this election (as it was in this comment) but I believe that’s overstated. I believe that Obama’s race had *almost* nothing to do with his winning the election! The “almost” is because the majority of black voters DID vote for him ‘specifically’ because he’s black and they felt this was some kind of racial milestone. I can certainly understand that and I’m sure that helped his vote total but it doesn’t look like that was a deciding factor. On the other side of the imagined racial divide, I believe there are only a very few white Americans who would have voted against Obama because he’s black (or almost black anyway). There will always be a few bigots (on both sides) — if I believed that there was a Hell, I would gladly wish them there.

The major factors in Obama’s win over McCain, as I see them, were 1) The overwhelming hatred for President Bush which most likely would have doomed any Republican candidate to defeat; 2) the severe economic downturn which can in part be placed at the feet of the Bush administration but in a much larger part be placed on the Congress and Senate which have been dominated by Democrats for the past two years (funny how that wasn’t publicized more in the media!) and 3) would be the media itself who gave Obama a much easier ride than they could have, if they had not, for whatever reason, wanted him to win the presidency.

Let me repeat two specific portions of Kylelee’s comment:

1) “It shows that Barack has true vision and leadership which is why the American public was able to overcome their prejudices to vote him into office.”

What this election shows is NOT that; what it shows is that the majority of the American people are foolish enough to want to tamper with principles that made this country great, principles that mean nothing to Obama, principles such as self-sufficiency and personal responsibility.

2) “Finally, Barack is NOT a socialist. His idea of putting a heavier tax burden on the rich only makes sense. He is not taking their money and giving it to the poor. He only wants to lessen the burden on individuals who are struggling right now.”

Well apparently Kylelee is herself a socialist thinker — so she’s a poor judge of what is and what isn’t socialism.

Taking people’s money by force and giving it to someone else is, on its face, illegal but in Obama’s thinking (and Kylelee’s) its perfectly acceptable and, on top of that, “it only makes sense”.

We are already living in a virtual ‘nanny-state’ and Obama just wants to make it larger and more all-encompassing. He said this himself in a TV interview; this is not a direct quote but it is very close: ‘we live in a culture where its every man for himself, we have to change that so that everyone is responsible for looking out for each other.’

That sentiment is wonderful on a community level and on a *voluntary* basis but it has no business coming out of the mouth of a man running for president of this *once proud* nation. No longer can we be proud because every level of government, in far too many places in this country, is infested with people like you Kylelee — people who really believe that we can, with impunity, take from those who earned their money and give it to those who did not.

The United States of America, with your help, may well be on its way to becoming a third-world country, not only because we have lost the pride and dignity we once had but because the kind of thinking displayed by Barack Obama (and Kylelee) will certainly destroy our economy.

(NOTE: I come down hard on those who want to “take from the rich” not because I’m anywhere near rich — I make very little and live from paycheck to paycheck — but because I love what this country used to stand for: individualism, personal responsibility, opportunity, volunterism and pride in our strength, freedom and liberty.)