Category: political challengers

Categories
media and media people national politics & policies political challengers

The A‑Word

The n‑word got dropped on MSNBC’s The Cycle this week. The show’s co-​host [No First Name] Touré called Mitt Romney’s use of the word “angry” to describe some of the rhetoric coming out of the White House as “the ‘niggerization’ of Obama”:

“You are not one of us, you are like the scary black man who we’ve been trained to fear.”

Naturally this led to a battle between Touré and conservative co-​host S.E. Cupp. She took particular issue with the fact that Touré admitted that VP Joe Biden‘s “chains” comments were divisive, but is now calling Romney a “racist” for saying the Obama campaign is “angry.”

“Do you see how dishonest that is?” she asked.

Good question. But here’s a better one: Doesn’t talk of race and code-​words obscure the real issue here, anger?

Romney shouldn’t be calling for the Obama administration to be less angry. He should be angry himself, and castigating the president and his crew for being angry at the wrong things.

We should be angry at the continuation of wars, foreign (the Middle East) and domestic (on psychoactive drug use), to the detriment of fiscal stability as well as our civil liberties.

We should be angry that the nation’s pension system has been systematically stripped of its surpluses for 77 years — by politicians in Washington.

We should be angry that federal (along with state) policy has interfered with medicine to such an extent that the most idiotic ideas around — nationalization/​socialization — almost seemed plausible to a sizable minority of Americans.

We should be angry that the Democrats pushed through yet another expensive entitlement, “Obamacare,” while the rest of the federal government sunk further into insolvency.

And yes, we should be angry that our leaders can’t stick to decent issues.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers too much government

Somewhere Short of Salvation

When I heard that Mitt Romney had chosen Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan to be his vice-​presidential running mate, I thought, “Wow. It could have been worse.”

I like Paul Ryan. You know, for a politician.

Rep. Ryan, at least, appears to be serious about our country’s 16 trillion debt and the fact that yearly we’re still credit-​carding a trillion more onto that tab. Ryan has crunched the numbers and written a budget blueprint that offers a more-​or-​less responsible way to restructure in-​the-​red programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security that drive the government’s debt.

The “professional left” will argue that Paul Ryan wants to throw grandma off a cliff by slashing Medicare, but I think the problem is that his budget doesn’t go far enough. Under Ryan’s own optimistic predictions of economic growth, his balanced budget is still a decade away. According to analyses by the Congressional Budget Office and others, the Ryan “Path to Prosperity” won’t bring the federal budget into balance for many decades – 30 to 50 years.

Which, the way Washington works, means never.

And that’s even before the plan goes through Congress, where far too few share Ryan’s hawkishness on budgetary matters.

Paul Ryan is a breath of fresh air compared to mealy-​mouthed politicians such as Obama and Biden … and Romney. But even if the Romney-​Ryan ticket wins, Ryan will only occupy what John Adams called “the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived.”

Sounds like we’re still somewhere short of salvation.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

The Solon of Smear

If political dishonesty were an Olympic sport, Missouri State Rep. Scott Largent would qualify for the medal round.

In a campaign mailer sent to voters in Missouri’s 31st state senate district just ahead of the August 7th GOP primary, Largent’s campaign attacks opponent Ed Emery for “Standing With Barack Obama and Missouri Democrats.”

How specifically did constitutional conservative Republican Ed Emery “stand” with the opposition?

Emery voted for a non-​binding resolution condemning Obamacare, sure, but on one amendment to that resolution he sided against fellow Republicans. As an analysis on the Missouri First website puts it: “Emery voted against” that particular amendment because it “urged Congress to replace Obamacare with another federal scheme.”

Apparently no more fond of “we have to pass it to find out what’s in it” legislation when proposed by Republicans rather than Democrats, Emery refused to blindly endorse a new, undefined nationalized “solution.”

A badge of honor.

But Scott Largent, the Solon of Smear, sent voters a copy of a letter on White House stationary purportedly from President Barack Obama to Ed Emery:

I wanted to personally thank you for your “no” vote yesterday on the amendment to HCR 18 regarding Obamacare.… The fact that you stood against every one of your Republican colleagues to support Democrats really impressed me. I truly hope you will be as willing to stand against your party in your future elected positions.

Only thing is, the letter is a fake.

There is no Olympic medal for political dishonesty. Let’s hope Show-​Me State voters show Largent the agony of defeat.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access insider corruption political challengers

Sore Insiders

Party politics is often underhanded.

Many of our country’s founders knew this all too well, and tried to avoid the factionalism of party politics. But still, two political factions emerged, and our politics has been dominated by two parties ever since.

And believe me, the two insider parties work mightily to rig the system in their favor. The presence of “sore-​loser laws” is a case in point.Gary Johnson

Now, political parties are private entities. They can choose whomever they want. Ideally, the ballots wouldn’t even list party affiliation. But “sore-​loser laws” stretch in the other direction, preventing individuals from running in one party after losing a primary as a candidate for another party.

In this way, the parties use the law to secure their own positions. It has nothing to do with “democracy” or “voting rights,” everything to do with privilege.

In Michigan, whilom New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson ran in the primary as a Republican candidate for the presidency. Now, the Secretary of State is disallowing him from running as a Libertarian. You see, he’d filed some paperwork withdrawing his candidacy three minutes too late last November.

An amusing work-​around may be in the offing, with a Texas businessman named Gary Johnson being groomed for the Michigan nomination. Take that, partisan insiders!

But regarding the Secretary of State’s ruling, the Libertarians smell a partisan rat, and are suing. It turns out they may have precedence on their side, since John Anderson had technically run afoul of the same law back in 1980, but nothing had been done to exclude him.

This time, Johnson’s more feared than Anderson was then. And, this time, the Secretary of State is a Republican.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies political challengers too much government

The Monkey on Their Backs

The “war on drugs” is not a mere metaphorical war, like the “war on poverty.”

The biggest problem with the term is not the subject, but the object: Our forces don’t shoot at pills and pipes and chemicals and syringes.

They shoot at people.

Sometimes dealers. Often just users. Too often innocents … “collateral damage” in a war that seems never to end, because impossible to win.

But if the war seems bad in America — now a land with the world’s largest gulag — it’s far, far worse in Mexico, especially since President Felipe Calderón turned the military on his own people, in the vain hope of subduing the drug traffickers.

What did he get for his efforts? Blood, death and terror.

The body count is over 50,000.

I’ve long advocated drug legalization. I don’t need to elaborate the reasons, not after 50,000 deaths have been weighed in on the pro-​drug war side, but I probably should mention a few notions that the drug-​war mentality suppresses: individual responsibility, a rule of law, and peace.

In America, our politicians slowly awake to the truth that killing people to prevent them from ruining their lives with drugs is a fool’s mission. But few yet commit to actual change.

In Mexico, on the other hand, the top three candidates to replace Calderón — whose service is limited, by law, to just the one term — go a step further: All agree that the drug war has to be scaled down.

Little talk, so far, of legalization, but hey: The addiction to war is a tough monkey to shrug off.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

Send in the Clones

As scientists spend grant money attempting to bring into modern times the extinct Woolly Mammoth, conscientious citizens should be concerned about a more pressing matter: cloning our few good leaders before they go extinct. Ron Paul in particular.

The mammoth is a hard thing to clone: DNA breaks down over time.

Leadership requires candidates of good character combined with the right ideas.

The ideas are the DNA. Ron Paul’s have been nicely identified by Nassim Taleb as “The Big Four”: opposition to (1) deficits and metastatic government, (2) Federal Reserve flirting with hyperinflation, (3) self-​feeding militarism, and (4) bailouts that undermine economic resilience (“what is fragile should break early and not too late”).Ron Paul's Revolution

Such notions have been available to Americans since the Founding.

But folks with the right character?

That’s more difficult, because each of us is embedded in the institutions we grow up in, and accepting those institutions is natural. This isn’t a problem for leadership to maintain the current system. It is, however, a bit of a snag for producing leaders to help greatly alter the system. The rewards for bucking the system are less immediate than for supporting it.

Ron Paul has been running for the presidency largely to promote real, substantial change. His son, Rand Paul, has taken his ideas and added some successful and politic twists.

There are other, younger leaders emerging in the Ron Paul mode. A few are discussed in the current book, Ron Paul’s Revolution, by Brian Doherty.

But consider: Maybe we don’t want to “send in the clones” — maybe you want to take up the mission. Don’t dismiss the idea out of hand.

Or laugh in a friend’s face if he or she indicates interest, a calling.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.