Moonlapse's Private Blog

I don't understand don't the Republicans believe in a Capitalist economy? I mean I am a Conservative myself but this is ridiculous. How can you deny the 1st Ammendment rights, that is not Democracy that is Communism. Good thing is that not even the Republicans like Bush. With a decreasing and already dismal approval rating this guy's like the plague.

 

Could Democracy be failing us now? Then again even though Democracy is a beautiful thing, it must be put in the right person's hands. However under this Bush administration its terrible. The Romans had the right idea, they lasted for 1,000 years not a petty 100.

 

And the land of the free?...

It does sound anti-democracy, but hey, we're also a Republic. Anyways, I kinda support this rule because even if you witness things that seems corrupt to you, the laws clearly say it is illegal to whistleblow.

 

Also, most of the whistleblowing starts high up in the chain. It really doesn't affect the majority of workers who need not to worry about it.

Oh, geez. What is this country coming to? "land of the free" my...donkey.

A quote from the Nathaniel Branden article in one of my earlier blog posts - I find this incredibly relevant:

What needs to be challenged in our country today is not the desirability of helping people in difficulty (intelligently and without self-sacrifice), but rather the belief that it is permissible to abrogate individual rights to achieve our social goals. We must stop looking for some new use of force every time we encounter something that upsets us or arouses our pity.

 

As a first step toward a freer society, by stimulating new thinking about the best ways to solve social problems, here is one concrete suggestion. Let us bring the paying-attention-to-outcomes philosophy of the business world to our legislative practices. First, every piece of legislation and every government agency must spell out what it aims to accomplish and in what time frame. Next, it must be monitored periodically, and the public must be informed concerning its progress, or lack of progress, toward its goal. When the time set for the accomplishment of specific goals is up, the legislation or agency must go on trial for its life just as in business. It must not be allowed to remain in force merely because it exists. It must demonstrate results, and if it has failed in what it promised to deliver, it should be abolished. This policy alone will not lead us to a fully free society, and you do not have to be an unreserved advocate of laissez-faire to appreciate its merits. What it will do is raise public consciousness concerning the workings of our present system and perhaps introduce some element of accountability. As matters stand now, once a political institution is in place, it is notoriously difficult to get rid of, even when almost everyone agrees it is a disaster.

 

Now, employees of government agencies who legitimately attempt to hold the system accountable have technically had their First Amendment rights nullified for the sake of preventing the goverment from facing legal scrutiny, legitimate or illegitimate.

 

This is a horrible precedent to set as an example of solving problems. I'm dumbfounded that the Supreme Court, a supposed pinnacle of judgement and reasoning, cannot find a solution that does not infringe upon citizen's rights.

I tend to get depressed these days if I sit down and watch the news, or a political commentary. At the moment it's only when a person feels the pain of what is the result of their apathy that they decide to do something about it, and sadly that is so often too late.

True. I think another problem is that the world in general is an incredibly overwhelming thing for someone to try and figure out, let alone things so seemingly esoteric as philosophy and politics. Just the challenge of living successfully and enjoying life are so demanding, as it always has and always will be, that its almost necessary to pick some group or ideal to follow when it comes to these topics - rather than face the daunting task of processing all the available information and formulating your own viewpoint. I know that I, for one, have done this. I think the problem is that instead of defining their fundamental principles, people find a group to fit into and press themselves into a mental mould.

 

I mean, why do we put so much focus on the conservative/liberal dichotomy? Does it have more to do with the actual politics or the fact that we will naturally try to force everything to one side or the other? I don't know any free thinkers that wholly accept one side or the other, not to mention the variations within the two divisions. Its all a sham and people need to find out what they really believe in, as an individual and not a part of some social collective. I seriously hope, and I know the odds are extremely slim, that the next president is not partisan. The thing that matters most to me is that the whole 'politician' paradigm shifts from "We have to pass as much legislation for our group as possible and by any means!" to "We need to represent the smallest minority, the individual, and use legislation only as a tool to protect the individual if the need arises."

I think it's ironic, ever since the fall of communism, big government has been on the rise in the U.S. You would think we learnt something from big government power, secrecy, inefficiency and conspiracy; it can only comeback to bite us private citizens. This ruling sends a clear and loud message, that if you mess with the government, we'll come after you, so better to keep your mouth shut.

 

These kind of laws are made in Russia, China or Cuba.

The big problem is there are so many folks these days that for some reason completely fail to see that things aren't headed down the right road... They are completely snowed.

 

I got into a congenial, drunken argument with a very intelligent Aerospace engineer two weeks ago who completely failed to see any eyebrow raising activities coming from the current administration as of late.

 

I told him I wasn't worried over nothing! I said, look man, I'm saying this as a blue blooded American whose ancestor signed the damn Declaration of Independence (William Whipple), a Gulf War era veteran, GDm

I can't agree more with these comments. It seems to get worse every day. Computer and telephone survailance yesterday. Today, bank transactions. Unlawful FISA searches of anything. Is someone looking at these blogs? Will 'they' now search tax returns in retribution? I'd always thought that one of the functions of the Supreme Court was to expand upon OUR liberties and freedoms and not to curb them.

 

Legislation is written with the intent to obfuscate, and allow anyone who can afford the lawyer who wrote it, to find 'his' loop holes.

 

If one of the poloi goes to a traffic court, he is damned. If some politicos steal from the public treasury, or work a shakedown scheme, they get a slap on the wrist, at most, but even if the 'sentence' is a bit of soft time at a country club, they'll be out for good behavior or 'health' reasons in a trice.

 

How could our politicos find the time to oversee anything, or find the time to read the legislation they effect when they are much too busy filling their pockets with the gold from their shakedown operations?

 

Ever notice that the ones who prattle on the most about freedom and liberty and The Constitution are the same who trample on them the most?