I’m with the faction of think for yourself politics

The latest in letters and editorials—George Nethercutt, David Broder, letter to the editor the Spokesman-Review and letter to the editor in The Inlander

 


 

If there is one thing I have to lead this latest post off with that would be to discuss a few things that I and a neighbor of Dalton Gardens, Idaho get engaged in when it comes to the politics of thinking people if the (old left) is the idealist before he was bit by reality the “conservative” becomes more pro-government and what it can do for him when he is bitten by reality.  So my neighbor told me when it came to his friend suffering from Non Hodgkin’s Lymphoma and what it would ultimately cost him without “Obamacare.”  The guy is otherwise an opponent of “big government,” right?  Especially a big government led by a Democratic president.  The point being, that a guy who is truly sick from a potentially fatal disease suddenly finds the cost to treat it to be more than he can manage.  Friend of my neighbor, meet George Nethercutt.  The man who sees very little of “Obamacare” worth salvaging.  Especially the vast majority of “government health care” that might just help the friend of my neighbor.  Which seems to be the biggest point, Nethercutt may in fact bemoan a “rigid ideology” that leaves little room to actually govern and get things done; but he is also all about the rigid ideology that continues to oppose a government led by the likes of President Obama.  (Inlander editorial for the week of 11 November — 17 November 2010.)  A case of, you can’t have it both ways, Nethercutt; without ultimately undermining the very people you whipped up into a fury to go vote GOP.

Yes, I am a Republican and I believe fairly conservative.  However, one would have to write a library of books to describe exactly just how much government involvement actually exists in this society regardless of what party actually heads the executive branch.  Much has been made of TARP.  The GOP ran against TARP.  The “TEA Party” foamed at the mouth over TARP.  How many of these same people go to banks?  What would they know of the FDIC anyway?  Without it, without a guaranteed federal bailout that literally keeps banks afloat and their customers’ money safe, just how many banks would still be operating on pure “market principles?”  You can be sure that the GOP won’t shrink the government that removes forever the FDIC and the costs to keep it funded plus the guarantees it provides to keep the financial system afloat.  TARP was an emergency measure during the bank/financial collapse of 2008, the FDIC has existed and been kept funded for decades.  A “socialist program,” readers, literally a big government intervention that even Republican presidents weren’t prepared to bring to an end.  Sometime, when you go to your bank, look for the acronym FDIC.  Yes, the Federal Government insures your deposits.

David Broder in his republished editorial (11 November 2010 Spokesman-Review) keeps wanting to put the recent history of the 2010 mid-term elections in full view.  As opposed to the rear-view mirrors.  The lame-duck session of Congress, what can they pass in about two months that the next session of Congress that convenes in January wouldn’t try to speedily undo?  What needs to be learned is to have paid close attention to ugly political attack ads, “debates” that offered “no substance” (reference Nethercutt), people who think they can govern based entirely on no understanding of governing at all let alone a bizarre view of the U.S. Constitution that isn’t found in the strict reading of the language of the document.  Or for that matter, any sense of history of what the founders intended when they wrote it.  Paying attention to what got them elected in the first place is what Broder (“dean” of journalists) should really be doing.

Unlike Broder however, Ted S. McGregor, jr who writes the “Common Ground” column for “The Inlander,” stated in his latest column:  Identity Crisis; exactly what the GOP really do face in the near term political future.  I think that McGregor is entirely correct.  The “TEA Party” has nothing to crow about when you consider what McGregor said, in part:  that “TEA Party” favored candidates won in races where a Republican would have won anyway, and lost in races where a mainstream Republican could have won.  It also says to people like myself, that reason did not prevail on 2 November 2010.

The William Slusher letter to the editor in the Spokesman-Review for 11 November 2010, was actually quite correct about the “rigid ideology” that Nethercutt only “bemoaned” in his editorial.  That the ideal of political compromise was only possible up and until the various members of the legislatures or the U.S. Congress started hearing from their rigidly ideological constituents.  What Slusher didn’t choose to go one step further on, is that it is  the parties themselves that are made up of various special interest factions who actually do not think in terms of what is best for the nation as a whole but rather what is best for their self-interests.  It is from this position of self-interest that ideological conflicts begin.  Just as it is from a position of self-interest that any so-called “smaller government” aficionado will ultimately turn to government with hat in hand and demand something from it.

I absolutely loved the letter to the editor in “The Inlander” by an Ed Simpson.  He had to totally agree with Robert Herold’s assessment of the ignorance among the “TEA Party” set.  His letter is exactly the reason why the latest post to this blog is headlined as it is, Mr. Simpson went to college and learned to think for himself rather than letting a willful ignorance keep him following blindly the preferred political ideology.  (Find it at “The Inlander“)

Speaking of those who go to college and then rant about the “left-leaning institutions” that are only there to indoctrinate…  If any student comes to a college or university with a pre-existing political bias, then what exactly is he or she likely to learn?  Unlike, apparently, Mr. Simpson who went to college to actually learn something.  So, what exactly should anyone reading this blog come away with?  My political ideology must actually stand in the way of getting an education?  Sounds like these are students who did nothing more than waste my money (if any taxpayers’ money funded their university education), their parents money, or their own if they were actually trying to work their way through college.

Thus, for anyone who truly is fed up with the way things went during the mid-term elections; consider joining the “I’m thinking for myself” faction.  You can be a Libertarian or Constitutionalist.  You can be a Republican or Democrat.  You can even be an Independent.  But to be a qualified member of the “I’m thinking for myself” faction, it means you do need to get educated.  Start with knowing about American history, no matter how gritty it gets.  Check out and read the U.S. Constitution, it can actually be found on-line.  Check in and know the names of various members of Congress.  Yes, that roster can actually be found on-line.  Visit their websites and learn what they support and what they did to oppose something.  Vent at them if they actually supported something you disagreed with or opposed something that you felt would have helped the country.  Read something besides the sports pages.  Even if you have an issue with the “liberal media,” it still provides a lot of information.  Read various political history books, Bob Woodward is at least one source of political reporting that comes to mind.  Above all, pay attention.  Ugly attack ads that seem to divorce themselves from recent history as those showing the ads wish to divorce themselves from any kind of responsibility for partisan failures in government just so they can be elected/re-elected should be jeered at and rejected.  As the “I’m thinking for myself” faction will hold all parties accountable for any continuing miserable failures in this nation.  I’ll ultimately agree with Jon Stewart on this, let us restore reason and sanity to American politics.

Advertisements

4 Responses to “I’m with the faction of think for yourself politics”

  1. The Inlander Visits SpoCon 2010 :: LARP Costumes, LARP kit, LARP FTW Says:

    […] I'm with the faction of think for yourself politics « Jeh15′s Weblog […]

  2. Info-Lines.com Says:

    Groups Compete to Talk to House Freshmen…

    A national Tea Party group is accusing the Republican Party of plotting to undermine a two-day training session the group has organized this weekend for newly elected members of Congress. The Tea Party Patriots announced the session immediatel…

  3. บริการ seo Says:

    good molly Jeh15

  4. bet365 Says:

    hello I was fortunate to search your Topics in baidu
    your topic is quality
    I learn much in your blog really thank your very much
    btw the theme of you site is really splendid
    where can find it

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: