The Divided States of America
Torn apart by ideology
Individuals that hunger for knowledge, never settle for what they know in the here and now, and are open to expanding their mind, always actively seeking new ideas by engaging with minds that are not necessarily sympatico when it comes to thoughts and ideas. The hostile political environment has made this kind of interaction near impossible, with polarization and attacks against opposing views by both sides, and two political parties that want to govern from opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. It is important to realize, that both of these parties support government control in some form. They will argue the contrary to their last breath, but their words fail to hold up in the presence of their blatant hypocrisy. This hypocrisy is evident, if you take off the red or blue party goggles that you are wearing, long enough to look at issues with a clear head, and at the same time, keep in mind that people are not always going to agree with you 100%, and that they shouldn’t have to. This is the key to understanding liberty and freedom. We are all individuals, and we have our own views on issues, that vary depending on our world view. This world view differs from one individual to another, because it is the sum of all life experiences of an individual. Our experiences make us who we are, and we should be able to live as we choose, and make our own decisions, as long as it does not take that ability away from anyone else. That is true liberty, and it is almost non existent in America today. We need to unite as a country. We need to find common ground as a starting point, and work from there, and we need to remember that as Americans we have much more in common than the mainstream media would have you believe. We all want the same for our children, but we have different ideas and solutions to the problems that we face as a nation. We all recognize the issues of the day, so rather than dish out ridicule and hatred toward the opposing party, we need to listen and put to use the great minds that we have here. Instead, we only hear name calling, and other childish behavior from both sides of the aisle, that makes for counterproductivity, and in the end produces no results. That is why Washington is in gridlock. However, I do want to make clear, I am not condoning going against your principles, nor do I favor capitulation, for the sole purpose of “go along to get along”. Principle first, compromise is OK, as long as you are not leaving your principles behind. Our elected leaders lack principle, so there is no standard and they are easily persuaded. That is the reason why our laws are based on Judeo-Christian principles and values, in the form of “Natural Law”. The idea of a creator, is essential to understanding the founding of the country, and in how Judeo-Christian laws serve an important function in creating a moral standard that can be used to govern, and at the same time not allowing any human on the planet to supersede that authority.
We live in a warped alternate version of reality
In our twisted, modern day version of the “land of the free”, lawmakers and other elected and unelected officials, make spur of the moment decisions sometimes based on only emotion, without a shred of factual information, and completely void of common sense. After all, some say that common sense is no longer common. Either politicians are aloof, when it comes to law, and American government’s role in making law, or they know darn well what they are doIng, and the adverse effects of legislation on the economy, and liberty in general, are part of the plan.
One has to acknowledge, that good intentions do not excuse bad policy, and when mistakes are made, a scapegoat is not needed, just an admission that someone screwed up, and a good plan to correct it. We have none of this today, just two parties made up of spoiled brat hypocrites, that are only out to line their own pockets, and save face by passing on the blame, when they screw up, Conservatives claim that they are for small government, but they are obsessed with the war on drugs, and they think that they need to license people before they are “allowed” to get married. Our society has made marriage into a legal contract, rather than a religious institution. Marriage belongs in church, not in a courthouse, and it should not be subject to the world view of a judge or clerk of court. Democrats have gone full socialist, and there is no difference anymore between a Democrat, and a socialist. The Democrat party, ceased to exist after the Assassination of JFK. It is now made up of politicians that are multi millionaires, that receive millions in political donations from millionaires that are in a quid pro quo type of relationship with these candidates. These rich politicians are then able to convince a huge portion of the electorate, that rich people must be hated, and punished by way of excessive taxation, and that Uncle Sam should be the one dishing out the pain. Hypocrisy much?
Unity is needed
Regime change and nation building from the right
To get this ball rolling, we will start with the conservative policy of nation building, via regime change. First, we start with the case of an oppressed people that reside in a country, ruled by a dictator, that in most cases, does not fall into the “nice guy” category. America sees this, and calls on the military because “these people need our help”. After all, America has a “moral obligation to stamp out evil wherever it exists”, right? This may seem like a no brainer, but the most important thing to understand when it comes to this type of situation, is that people tend to neglect, the question as to whether or not this dictator is an immediate, potential, or otherwise existential threat to America. Saddam, was taken out because the US had intelligence that suggested WMD’s were present, and in Hussein’s possession. We could argue all day, as to whether or not the intelligence was faulty, accurate, or somewhere in between. However legitimate the reason for going in, and removing the leader of Iraq (Saddam), the ousting of this leader, lead to instability, and created a vacuum. We had a plan to rebuild Iraq, and elections were held, everything is great. Not so much. After the fact, Obama became President, and eventually pulled out of Iraq, and ISIS has achieved a great deal since then, by making gains in strategic cities like Mosul, where they took possession of many valuable assets, including natural resources, that they have used to fund their operation. Unlike terrorist organizations that we have seen before, ISIS thinks and operates like a business and they use these resources keep the money flowing in, giving them the ability to expand. We tend to blame the President that we didn’t vote for, most often from the opposing party, when attempting to explain or rationalize, a series of adverse events that we think were incorrect in hindsight. Democrats blame Bush, Republicans blame Obama for pulling out prematurely, but they each share blame. However, The situation would not exist at all, if it had not been for the overthrow of Saddam, and his regime. Let’s move forward to Egypt. Hosni Mubarak was the leader of Egypt, that was for all intents and purposes, a dictator, but also a close friend and ally of America. President Obama supported and helped facilitate Mubarak’s ousting by the people. Obama sided with the people of Egypt, touting the so called “Arab Spring”, and gave everything he could to advancing the cause of Mubarak’s removal. Mubarak left Egypt, and the people claimed victory. President Obama claims that democracy had prevailed. Once again, a vacuum was created, and in an attempt to force a leader to abandon his position of power, The Muslim Brotherhood, eventually filled the void through a so called, “Democratic election”, that gave Egypt President Morsi. In January 2013, President Obama sent four F-16’s, to Morsi in Egypt as part of a foreign aid package. So, as you can see, we spend a great deal of time going in and trying to fix problems that we are partly responsible for through actions that were carried out by our military, in cases where consequences were not taken into account. Muammar Gaddafi in Libya was taken out by his own people, with assistance from the United States that was spearheaded by Hillary Clinton and the US State Department. Present day Libya is a disaster, and a terrorist hotbed. This is due to the vacuum that was created with the ousting of Gaddafi. The overthrow of a dictator, creates instability and usually leads to a chain reaction of events that is not favorable, for the middle eastern region or the US. Now Obama wants to take out Assad in Syria? Are we expecting a different result? The definition of insanity comes to mind.
The other side of the coin
Leftist policy is just as hypocritical in its assumptions, and implementation. Liberals say that they want to help the little guy, but they champion policies that feed poverty, and do nothing to assist an individual in becoming self sufficient. They throw government money at poverty, which empowers those impoverished to be stagnant when it comes to their careers and/or income. The liberal argument is always recognizing a individual victim or class of victims, that they turn into a militant group of activists, that double as a voting bloc for the liberal "golden child" candidate. Leftists are known for using Saul Alinsky tactics to shut down opposing views, using ridicule and diversion. It is not what liberals believe, it is the tactics that they use to impose those beliefs on others. I am not trying to make either party sound evil or wrong, I am just trying to show the disconnect between people of these very different ideologies. We must come together as a country, and that means sometimes agreeing to disagree. We all have differences in opinion, but that does not warrant name calling, and it does not suggest that those that have different views, are demonic in nature because they believe something that may appear unfamiliar, or foreign. We cannot continue to prosper as a country if we are constantly at each others' throats.