Category: Society & Politics

George Bush: better than a poke in the eye.

But just a little better. Keep in mind that any of the clowns running for the Democratic nomination would be a lot worse than a poke in the eye. We’re talking worse like a hundred pokes in each eye. Plus a tax on each poke. So don’t get me wrong.

But lately I’ve concluded that although Bush is a respectable guy and I agree with much of his policy, he simply isn’t “all that and a bag of chips” as the kids say. (That is, as the kids said when I was a kid, not too long ago. Some people still think I am a kid at 28. Most 28 year-olds are probably still kids, come to think of it. Kids with adult bodies and adult legal rights, but with pre-teen conceptions of what it means to be an actual adult.)

Anyway, Bush is by no means a true Conservative. And that’s not good, because a lot of people voted for Bush expecting that he would push a generally conservative agenda. Yes yes, I am thankful that he made sure the government would take less of my money. And I am very thankful that he is actually engaged in fighting terrorism, and not going the appeasement route that we would be with an Al Gore as president (talk about dodging a bullet).

But what’s up with the gargantuan education spending increases? What’s up with spending even more money researching AIDS, an extremely preventable disease, shoveling this cash into other countries to boot? What’s up with asking Congress to give illegal aliens amnesty (but just not calling it amnesty), rewarding law-breaking with legal status? It must be that he’s dead set on giving his political adversaries as many things as they want, rather than the people that put him in office!

And now it’s space exploration. Ever since I was a kid, I’ve loved learning about space. I’ve dreamt as a child of being able to travel through outer space in my lifetime. But as an adult, I now realize that it would cost a boatload of money to even get started. Bush thinks we need to start working on getting a lunar base for an eventual trip to Mars. Well, that’s fun an all, but in case someone hasn’t noticed, the government is already spending more money than it takes in. That’s fine with me. I don’t buy the doom-and-gloom prophecies of deficit spending critics. But there is a point where it should stop. Even considering spending the trillions of dollars it would take to maintain a lunar base and make trips to Mars is insane. To borrow verbiage from W’s dad, “it’s wouldn’t be prudent at this juncture.” So we start spending money left and right to get to the moon again and set up shop there… then what? I’ll tell you what: we keep spending money to get resources there to keep people alive, for one thing. The moon isn’t exactly “the New World.” You can’t exactly pitch a tent while you build a house. Then what? The idea is to go to Mars from the moon. Okay, so we go from one totally uninhabitable place to another so that someone can bring back a pocket full of Mars surface dust. And then what? Let’s say that after spending trillions of dollars getting to Mars and coming back, and in the process we find some evidence that a single-celled organism once lived on Mars (I doubt it!). Okay…. so what? Let’s say that we spend trillions of dollars and find that there never was any kind of life there. Still, so what? Exactly how is it in the interest of the US government to bother finding this out? It’s bad enough that half the unmanned probes we send to Mars end up not working… now we’re going to start spending money trying to get people there? WHY?

1968: The Collapse of Liberalism

The Collapse of Liberalism : This article, written in 1968, is just as valid today as it was then. Unfortunately, even though the editorial gives all the right reasons why liberalism (which is really just Americanized socio-fascism) should have collapsed, it obviously did not collapse. Over-optimistic conservatives of our day should take note: the current quasi-rejection of left-wing politics is no more a signal of the permanent demise of those politics than it was 35 years ago.

For one example, in the editorial: “Very few citizens any longer believe the current batch of national problems can be solved by domestic policies emphasizing big spending, Federal bureaucracy and liberal emotions.” Nevertheless, since the article was written, Federal spending and bureaucracy have bloated grotesquely and continue to surpass elephantine proportions. The government is still regarded by more and more as a trough, and politicians of all points on the spectrum continue to pander to those who want to feed at the trough by buying their votes with taxpayer-funded programs and entitlements. Prescription drug program, anyone?

I hate to be the “glass is half-empty” guy, but there it is!

Congress: Spam is bad, unless it comes from us.

Congress likes free speech, except when they are running for re-election. That much was made clear when they passed the McCain-Feingold bill, otherwise known as the Incumbent Protection Act, that limits political speech during the late stages of an election. Now Congress is saying they hate spam. Except, of course, if that spam comes from them. [Article] What’s interesting about this is that it isn’t just another example of congressional hypocrisy, it shows how abusive Congress is of the power of incumbency, and how willing they are to make law making it harder for someone to challenge their positions of power.

Clark: Let’s get permission from Europeans to defend ourselves

Democrat presidential hopeful Wesley Clark thinks that the USA should subject its national security concerns to the whims of Europe. He said: “And I would say to the Europeans, I pledge to you as the American president that we’ll consult with you first. You get the right of first refusal on the security concerns that we have. We’ll bring you in.” [Article] It’s almost too ridiculous a statement to even comment on.