I am extremely upset with the Conservative movement.
For the last three years, conservative clowns shoved everyone else aside as they claimed to be the defenders of freedom. They told us to hold on until 2012 when there would be a big campaign to restore freedom.
But what do we find in their precious Republican Primary? We find that the Republican Establishment seeks to capture the centralized Health Exchange of PPACA and not free us from state controlled health care.
Notice how the Republicans actively suppress discussion of real free market reform while ignoring the fact that the center piece of ObamaCare are Centralized Health Exchanges implemented at the state level.
The central idea of both RomneyCare and ObamaCare is to create a centralized health exchange through which an unelected ruling elite controls health care and all of the resources we put aside for health care.
PPACA is a collection of Health Exchanges implemented at the state level wrapped in Federal Regulation.
The Republican Establishment seeks to capture this aperatus and not restore health freedom.
The only way the liberty movement can prevent this from happening is by engaging in a discussion of real free market health care reform.
If people engaged in a discussion of real free market health care reform, they would realize that people cannot be free if their health and health resources are controlled through a captured and corrupt centralized exchange.
I've exhausted myself and my personal resources trying to find a group to discuss free market health care reform.
Both the Democratic and Republican Party are on the path to implement centralized exchanges. Unless someone stands in opposition to the exchanges, freedom is lost in this nation for the foreseeable future.
PPACA is a Health Care Exchange. It is bad legislation because a captured exchange that controls your health and your health care resources is a corrupt and bad idea.
The conservative media has never allowed and never will allow a discussion of real free market health care reform. Members of the Tea Party have as much to fear from the Republicans and they do the Democrats.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Sunday, February 26, 2012
When Does Cute Become Scary?
Every a group called Freedom Festival gathers 5,000 to 6,000 elementary school students at the BYU stadium in Provo where they stand in the formation of the US flag and sing patriotic songs.
I admit. It is kind of cute.
The video claims that this is the biggest youth rally of its type in the US ... which is amazing when you consider that Utah is a sparsely populated state in a desert.
A lot of work and training goes into this production where people sing songs of freedom while dressed in uniform and engaging in group think. It is a paradoxical experience. People engaged in this type of overwhelming group process develop a mantality where they try to push out the people who do not belong in the group. (This group project is but one of many that go on in the Beehive state where everyone who is part of the state religion is kept busy as bees by the state's religion.
The next video shows the same demographic group at a college game. People in spectator sports these days wear the same uniform and try to make really loud noises. There are people who coordinate and record the noise to judge crowd reaction.
This group think is not just a Conservative Utah thing. Who can forget the rally in Madison in which public schools organized tens of thousands in support of the right of a small unelected group of union leaders to dictate its whims on the people. Again ... notice the singing songs of liberty to enforce group think.
For the last several months, Occupy Wall Street has been trying to build this group think paradigm into a full life style where people actually live 24/7 in compounds that occupy city parks.
I admit, I am more into individual discovery and personal advancement. I am uncomfortable with group rallies on both left and right. I love ideas and people actively engaged in thinking.
When I am confronted with a problem, I like to think about it and discuss solutions. For the last several years, I've been trying to argue that our health care woes are the result of group funding of individual consumption and that a better form of reform is to create a funding mechanism built around the individual. This is the goal of the Medical Savings and Loan.
What I've discovered in Utah is the people weened on group think (both left and right) are adamantly opposed to talking about the health of individuals. They are not responding to the freedom songs, but the power of the group.
The conservatives raised on the group think of the freedom festival simply say: You are not part of our group and slam the door the second they realize that I am talking about substantive liberty.
The left is even more irate when I opine that individuals (and not their precious unelected bureaucrats) should have control of their own body.
The classical liberal ideals of freedom really start with Jesus's sermon on the mount (Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself) and Aristotle's distaste of absolutes and the reflexive paradox.
A free society cannot allow people the right to deny others their freedom. This concept extends to groups. This game of forming groups to lock out the people they don't like undermines the freedom in the society.
When I look at the Conservative/Progressive split, I simply see two political camps playing the same game of using freedom rhetoric in their attempts to take control of the group.
The progressive/conservative dialectics which has dominated American politics throughout my life is not advancing the cause of freedom. It is has all been about which political party captures control of the group that will suppress the people.
So far, the 2012 election has not been about restoring health freedom. It has been about which group will control the socialized group health pool. ObamaCare wants the group controlled by progressives at the Federal level. RomneyCare wants socialized controls returned to the state level and no one is willing to talk about returning control of health to the individual.
For one last video ... let's go to the birthplace of Democracy and see how the modern Greeks do group think:
I admit. It is kind of cute.
The video claims that this is the biggest youth rally of its type in the US ... which is amazing when you consider that Utah is a sparsely populated state in a desert.
A lot of work and training goes into this production where people sing songs of freedom while dressed in uniform and engaging in group think. It is a paradoxical experience. People engaged in this type of overwhelming group process develop a mantality where they try to push out the people who do not belong in the group. (This group project is but one of many that go on in the Beehive state where everyone who is part of the state religion is kept busy as bees by the state's religion.
The next video shows the same demographic group at a college game. People in spectator sports these days wear the same uniform and try to make really loud noises. There are people who coordinate and record the noise to judge crowd reaction.
This group think is not just a Conservative Utah thing. Who can forget the rally in Madison in which public schools organized tens of thousands in support of the right of a small unelected group of union leaders to dictate its whims on the people. Again ... notice the singing songs of liberty to enforce group think.
For the last several months, Occupy Wall Street has been trying to build this group think paradigm into a full life style where people actually live 24/7 in compounds that occupy city parks.
I admit, I am more into individual discovery and personal advancement. I am uncomfortable with group rallies on both left and right. I love ideas and people actively engaged in thinking.
When I am confronted with a problem, I like to think about it and discuss solutions. For the last several years, I've been trying to argue that our health care woes are the result of group funding of individual consumption and that a better form of reform is to create a funding mechanism built around the individual. This is the goal of the Medical Savings and Loan.
What I've discovered in Utah is the people weened on group think (both left and right) are adamantly opposed to talking about the health of individuals. They are not responding to the freedom songs, but the power of the group.
The conservatives raised on the group think of the freedom festival simply say: You are not part of our group and slam the door the second they realize that I am talking about substantive liberty.
The left is even more irate when I opine that individuals (and not their precious unelected bureaucrats) should have control of their own body.
The classical liberal ideals of freedom really start with Jesus's sermon on the mount (Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself) and Aristotle's distaste of absolutes and the reflexive paradox.
A free society cannot allow people the right to deny others their freedom. This concept extends to groups. This game of forming groups to lock out the people they don't like undermines the freedom in the society.
When I look at the Conservative/Progressive split, I simply see two political camps playing the same game of using freedom rhetoric in their attempts to take control of the group.
The progressive/conservative dialectics which has dominated American politics throughout my life is not advancing the cause of freedom. It is has all been about which political party captures control of the group that will suppress the people.
So far, the 2012 election has not been about restoring health freedom. It has been about which group will control the socialized group health pool. ObamaCare wants the group controlled by progressives at the Federal level. RomneyCare wants socialized controls returned to the state level and no one is willing to talk about returning control of health to the individual.
For one last video ... let's go to the birthplace of Democracy and see how the modern Greeks do group think:
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Compromise
In modern dialectics, each compromise is seen as a set up for the next conflict.
Progressives seek to engineer society with a controlled series of conflicts that progresses a free society through a series of conflicts into a totalitarian state.
The left will use nebulously stated positions to rise to power. Once in power, they force radical change on society (screaming all the while that the right never compromises). When the right compromises, the right ends up taking ownership of the new status quo and the left launches in on the next radical change ... screaming that the right never compromises.
The Founders of the United States were trained in classical reasoning. In classical reasoning, people sought to bring clearly stated positions to the table. When classical thinkers reached a compromise, they were expected to adhere to the compromise.
In the video below, Thomas Wood talks about how Madison, who wanted a strong central government, had made statements favoring a strong central government before the convention. After the convention he was a stalwart defender of the Constitution.
The Insulting Compromise came about because slave owners wanted to be able to vote on behalf of their slaves. The insulting compromise counted those people who were not voting as only 3/5th of a person. This insulting compromise did not lead to anything better. It is just plain insulting.
Compromises can lead to something better. The insulting compromise shows that the compromised position is not always good.
The dialectics of Hegel and Marx are systems of radicalized conflict. One uses manufactured conflict to manipulate opinion to the desires of the ruling class. Sadly, it is impossible to engage in a system of compromise when only one half of the conflict commits to the compromise.
We have a president who was trained in the Alinsky Method (an updated version of Hegelian/Marxist dialectics) and discourse in the nation deteriorated.
The founding fathers were great statesmen. Madison shows classical reasoning at its finest. He went to the table with clearly stated positions. Conceded points to others at the table and committed fully to the compromises in the Consitution.
Unfortunately, this style of reasoning cannot work in a world ruled by the progressive mindset where each compromise is seen as a set up for the next conflict.
Progressives seek to engineer society with a controlled series of conflicts that progresses a free society through a series of conflicts into a totalitarian state.
The left will use nebulously stated positions to rise to power. Once in power, they force radical change on society (screaming all the while that the right never compromises). When the right compromises, the right ends up taking ownership of the new status quo and the left launches in on the next radical change ... screaming that the right never compromises.
The Founders of the United States were trained in classical reasoning. In classical reasoning, people sought to bring clearly stated positions to the table. When classical thinkers reached a compromise, they were expected to adhere to the compromise.
In the video below, Thomas Wood talks about how Madison, who wanted a strong central government, had made statements favoring a strong central government before the convention. After the convention he was a stalwart defender of the Constitution.
A Tale of Two Compromises
The Constitution of the United States had two notable compromises which I will call the Great Compromise and the Insulting compromise. The small states wanted each state to have equal representation. The larger states wanted the number of representatives based on the population of the people. The great compromise created two bodies of Congress. The Senate has two senators from each state and the House is proportioned by the population. This compromise led to something greater. It created a government with two legislatures that express different perspectives.The Insulting Compromise came about because slave owners wanted to be able to vote on behalf of their slaves. The insulting compromise counted those people who were not voting as only 3/5th of a person. This insulting compromise did not lead to anything better. It is just plain insulting.
Compromises can lead to something better. The insulting compromise shows that the compromised position is not always good.
It is Impossible to Compromise with a Progressive
The Founders of the United States believed in the process of compromise. But compromise only works if the parties involved are willing to concede points.The dialectics of Hegel and Marx are systems of radicalized conflict. One uses manufactured conflict to manipulate opinion to the desires of the ruling class. Sadly, it is impossible to engage in a system of compromise when only one half of the conflict commits to the compromise.
We have a president who was trained in the Alinsky Method (an updated version of Hegelian/Marxist dialectics) and discourse in the nation deteriorated.
The founding fathers were great statesmen. Madison shows classical reasoning at its finest. He went to the table with clearly stated positions. Conceded points to others at the table and committed fully to the compromises in the Consitution.
Unfortunately, this style of reasoning cannot work in a world ruled by the progressive mindset where each compromise is seen as a set up for the next conflict.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Speaking of Arizona ...
I got back from my trip to Idaho where I had a meeting with my grand nephew.
I tried to explain to him the vagaries of domestic politics.
His whole future is at stake, but he fell asleep during the discussion.
I noticed that the Arizona primary debates are scheduled for tonight.
I've been toying with the idea of driving down to Arizona to draw up interest in the Medical Savings and Loan.
The Medical Savings and Loan argues that the problem in health care is that we are using group funding for individual consumption and that, to restore the pricing mechanism in health care, we need to restore a system of self funded health care.
The MS&L is an alternative to insurance that expects those who can self-fund their care to do so. It will create a grants program to help those who cannot.
The program strikes directly at the insurance mandates in ObamaCare and could help in the cause of restoring the American system of limited government.
It is a really good presentation.
If any Arizona Campaign for Liberty or Tea Party group is interested in the presentation, please contact me.
I tried to explain to him the vagaries of domestic politics.
His whole future is at stake, but he fell asleep during the discussion.
I noticed that the Arizona primary debates are scheduled for tonight.
I've been toying with the idea of driving down to Arizona to draw up interest in the Medical Savings and Loan.
The Medical Savings and Loan argues that the problem in health care is that we are using group funding for individual consumption and that, to restore the pricing mechanism in health care, we need to restore a system of self funded health care.
The MS&L is an alternative to insurance that expects those who can self-fund their care to do so. It will create a grants program to help those who cannot.
The program strikes directly at the insurance mandates in ObamaCare and could help in the cause of restoring the American system of limited government.
It is a really good presentation.
If any Arizona Campaign for Liberty or Tea Party group is interested in the presentation, please contact me.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
An Animated Conversation
The makers of the video below have captured the animated conversation this is in a continuous loop in my head. I actually listen to the voice on the right and see myself as the doltish fool on the left.
My great frustration is that, although all sorts of people claim to be my betters, there is a good chance my ideas on free market reform are correct.
My great frustration is that, although all sorts of people claim to be my betters, there is a good chance my ideas on free market reform are correct.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Conservatives, Arrgggghhhhhhhhh!
I care deeply about freedom. I've basically reduced myself to poverty trying to fight the cause of restoring freedom in American.
At every turn, I've been shoved asided by thuggish half witted brutes who call themselves conservatives. Conservatives are people who make a shrill noise about how they are the soul defenders of freedom in the universe, then beat down their neighbors in the grub for power.
Just like liberals, Conservative businesses line up at the government trough asking for favors and power. Any complaint leads to immediate rebuke.
The Republican debate is filled with shrill monologues about who is and who is not "conservative."
My direct experience and the definition that most my friends hold is that a "conservative is a person who uses free market rhetoric in the grub for power. Power used to push others aside."
Romney is the spitting image of every conservative I've ever known. He uses free market rhetoric, then spends his every action consolidating political and business power in the hands of his few well-connected friends.
If my every experience with conservatism is true, then the Tea Party destroyed itself by an insane desire to associate itself with a captured and compromised term. I wrote the follow rebuke to a person, who has yet to figure out that words often have more than one definition, and that clinging to the term "conservativism" allows the elite to destroy our freedom through equivocation.
At every turn, I've been shoved asided by thuggish half witted brutes who call themselves conservatives. Conservatives are people who make a shrill noise about how they are the soul defenders of freedom in the universe, then beat down their neighbors in the grub for power.
Just like liberals, Conservative businesses line up at the government trough asking for favors and power. Any complaint leads to immediate rebuke.
The Republican debate is filled with shrill monologues about who is and who is not "conservative."
My direct experience and the definition that most my friends hold is that a "conservative is a person who uses free market rhetoric in the grub for power. Power used to push others aside."
Romney is the spitting image of every conservative I've ever known. He uses free market rhetoric, then spends his every action consolidating political and business power in the hands of his few well-connected friends.
If my every experience with conservatism is true, then the Tea Party destroyed itself by an insane desire to associate itself with a captured and compromised term. I wrote the follow rebuke to a person, who has yet to figure out that words often have more than one definition, and that clinging to the term "conservativism" allows the elite to destroy our freedom through equivocation.
You did not get my point. Romney doesn't fit your definition of "conservative."
Romney fits the common definition of conservative which essentially is: "a cynical political opportunist, a base political animal, who uses the language of conservatism or liberalism to get himself elected."
The first conservatives in the US were the Tories. The left/right partisan split came from the French Revolution with Conservatives supporting the ancient regime and the Liberals supporting mass insanity.
Every experience I have had with conservatives is that conservatives shove everyone else aside with the claims that they (AND ONLY THEY) are the defenders of freedom. The second a Conservative gets power, the Conservative continues to shove people aside to grub at wealth and power.
Please, step back a second and look at your precious little term. If the common definition that everyone except you holds is true. If "conservative" means that a politician who uses free market rhetoric to grub power; then all the wonderful conservatives that I love in the Tea Party are systematically being reduced to stooges ... just like the foul smelly dupes in OWS.
It is entirely possible that the Tea Party undermined itself by trying to identify its message with a word that is corrupt and paradoxical.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Is the Tea Party Dead?
I decided to take another stab at holding a "Health Freedom Conference." A health freedom conference would get people together to discuss the concept of health freedom. My price for organizing such an event would be that I get to hold a little workshop on the Medical Savings and Loan.
As I only have enough room on the credit care to drive a few hundred miles, I decided to email all the tea party groups I could find in the Mountain West.
To my sorrow. Most of the tea party web sites I knew about have gone blank. Others have not been updated for a year or so, and none of them appeared to be making any progress.
This apparent death of the Tea Party made me sad. But it was predictable. The Tea Party has one fundamental flaw. It was a political movement for less politics. (A movement for less government is a movement for less politics).
The movement was populated by people, like me, who simply do not see a political solution to the problems of the day. The Republican Party was at Tea Party events recruiting people to beome political activists, but being an activist for less political action is a self-negating thing.
A health freedom conference might help revive the spirit of the tea party.
A health freedom conference isn't calling for political action. It is calling for business action. Following is my chain of reasoning:
Health care is about the face to face care of individual people. It is not a political problem; so there is not a political solutions. Political solutions actually have a tendency to create more problems. For example, employer based insurance was a political solution. Employer based health care leaves large numbers of people cut out of the system.
There needs to be some political action to preserve health freedom. A health freedom conference would call for a multifront battle with both political and business action. People, like me, who have no interest in politics could work on the business action part of the equation.
Anyway, I am back to spamming Tea Party and Campaign for Liberty type groups to see if there is any interest in hosting a Health Freedom Conference. Anyone interested in the concept can contact me.
As I only have enough room on the credit care to drive a few hundred miles, I decided to email all the tea party groups I could find in the Mountain West.
To my sorrow. Most of the tea party web sites I knew about have gone blank. Others have not been updated for a year or so, and none of them appeared to be making any progress.
This apparent death of the Tea Party made me sad. But it was predictable. The Tea Party has one fundamental flaw. It was a political movement for less politics. (A movement for less government is a movement for less politics).
The movement was populated by people, like me, who simply do not see a political solution to the problems of the day. The Republican Party was at Tea Party events recruiting people to beome political activists, but being an activist for less political action is a self-negating thing.
A health freedom conference might help revive the spirit of the tea party.
A health freedom conference isn't calling for political action. It is calling for business action. Following is my chain of reasoning:
Health care is about the face to face care of individual people. It is not a political problem; so there is not a political solutions. Political solutions actually have a tendency to create more problems. For example, employer based insurance was a political solution. Employer based health care leaves large numbers of people cut out of the system.
There needs to be some political action to preserve health freedom. A health freedom conference would call for a multifront battle with both political and business action. People, like me, who have no interest in politics could work on the business action part of the equation.
Anyway, I am back to spamming Tea Party and Campaign for Liberty type groups to see if there is any interest in hosting a Health Freedom Conference. Anyone interested in the concept can contact me.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
President Pick 2/14/2012
I was just asked the question from JaneMiami
I do not believe the restoration of America will come from the president. The answers to our problems must come from the people. So, what I care about most is which president will create an intellectual climate in which we can talk about the fundamental problems of the day.
The establishment candidate is likely to lead to a poisonous climate with both the left and right silencing the voice of freedom.
I agree with Ron Paul on most issues, but realize that if was president there would be such a shrill reaction that his important message would be lost.
So, the candidate that I think would lead to the best intellectual climate is Newt Gingrich. Although he is somewhat of a technocrat, he is a historian and philsopher who loves to discuss ideas ... Newt Gingrich.
I would support any candidate except the establishment candidate. If the establishment candidate won, I'd be voting third party.
This said, my really big concern is figuring out how to get Americans to talk about health freedom. I am trying my hardest to get people to talk about self-funded health care with a program called The Medical Savings and Loan.
"@yintercept Thns for follow. Who do you like for President in 2012, if you don't mind my asking. :)"
I do not believe the restoration of America will come from the president. The answers to our problems must come from the people. So, what I care about most is which president will create an intellectual climate in which we can talk about the fundamental problems of the day.
The establishment candidate is likely to lead to a poisonous climate with both the left and right silencing the voice of freedom.
I agree with Ron Paul on most issues, but realize that if was president there would be such a shrill reaction that his important message would be lost.
So, the candidate that I think would lead to the best intellectual climate is Newt Gingrich. Although he is somewhat of a technocrat, he is a historian and philsopher who loves to discuss ideas ... Newt Gingrich.
I would support any candidate except the establishment candidate. If the establishment candidate won, I'd be voting third party.
This said, my really big concern is figuring out how to get Americans to talk about health freedom. I am trying my hardest to get people to talk about self-funded health care with a program called The Medical Savings and Loan.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Ready to Hit the Road
I was watching CPAC and thinking about how much I would love to join in on the conversation on restoring liberty.
Partisan conservatives claim to be the sole defenders of freedom. When they get power, they lock people out. I developed this idea of the Medical Savings and Loan thirty years ago, and in all that time I have not been able to get a single Utah Republican to talk about the concept.
The Founding Fathers were not conservatives. I call them classical liberals. They applied classical logic to the question of liberty.
Partisan conservatives came later. The left/right split came from the French Revolution. The dialectics at the foundation of conservatism came from Hegel (1770-1831).
Watching CPAC makes me want to join in the campaign for liberty. Oddly, to do so, I have to leave the most conservative state.
I see that Arizona is the next stop in the Republican Primary.
If anyone wants to host an event on health freedom in conjunction with the primary. I would be happy to drive down to Arizona to attend. Please contact me. I have a really super fun fundraiser to go along with the presentation. If I found a group of people eager to discuss freedom, I could use the fundraiser to pay for the event.
I bought the domain Arizona Color (dot) US. It is a links directory and calendar. I will give free links to anybody who is interested in discussing freedom.
My message is not favorable to Mitt Romney but is favorable to candidates who are actually looking to restoring health freedom.
The Medical Savings and Loan is a really strong message in favor of health freedom.
To recap: I have an extremely intriguing presentation related to health freedom. The program includes a fundraising program and I will actively work to promote any group that invites me to give the presentation. You can give me a phone number on the contact form, and I will give you a call to arrange a presentation.
Partisan conservatives claim to be the sole defenders of freedom. When they get power, they lock people out. I developed this idea of the Medical Savings and Loan thirty years ago, and in all that time I have not been able to get a single Utah Republican to talk about the concept.
The Founding Fathers were not conservatives. I call them classical liberals. They applied classical logic to the question of liberty.
Partisan conservatives came later. The left/right split came from the French Revolution. The dialectics at the foundation of conservatism came from Hegel (1770-1831).
Watching CPAC makes me want to join in the campaign for liberty. Oddly, to do so, I have to leave the most conservative state.
I see that Arizona is the next stop in the Republican Primary.
If anyone wants to host an event on health freedom in conjunction with the primary. I would be happy to drive down to Arizona to attend. Please contact me. I have a really super fun fundraiser to go along with the presentation. If I found a group of people eager to discuss freedom, I could use the fundraiser to pay for the event.
I bought the domain Arizona Color (dot) US. It is a links directory and calendar. I will give free links to anybody who is interested in discussing freedom.
My message is not favorable to Mitt Romney but is favorable to candidates who are actually looking to restoring health freedom.
The Medical Savings and Loan is a really strong message in favor of health freedom.
To recap: I have an extremely intriguing presentation related to health freedom. The program includes a fundraising program and I will actively work to promote any group that invites me to give the presentation. You can give me a phone number on the contact form, and I will give you a call to arrange a presentation.
Partisan conservatives are not champions of freedom
I was watching videos from CPAC. It would be so wonderful to actually sit down and talk to people about restoring freedom. Sadly, I live in an intellectual wilderness called Utah.
Living in a state where state where conservatives rule with an iron fist, I see all of the faults of the conservative movement.
American Conservatism is decidedly incomplete and partisan vision of the American experience.
The great left/right was a product of the French Revolution, not the American Revolution. The dialectical reasoning underlying modern Conservatism came from Hegel (1770-1831), not from the US Founders. The US Founders were students of classical logic, not modern dialectics.
Because of its partisan and dialectical roots, the Conservative movement is one in which people use freedom rhetoric and become oppressive in their actions.
Conservatives will use freedom rhetoric to gain power. As partisans, they then lock out people who are not part of their group.
People who gain power then lock other people out are not liberators. They are oppressors.
Leftwing progressives, the other side of modern partisan dialectics, play on the hypocrisy of modern conservatives in their own shameful grub for power. The paradox of the left is that the partisans clamoring against oppression become even worse oppressors as they seek to impose social justice on their partisan foes. Locking people out is passive oppression. The left engages in active oppression.
Conservatives and Progressions are the two wings of a partisan dialectic system that is choking off the freedom envisioned by the US Founders.
For a vision of freedom to work, that vision must actually be inclusive.
I love watching videos from CPAC … where conservatives vie to see who is best at delivering freedom rhetoric.
Living in the most conservative state of the nation, Utah, I am forced to live under the yoke of oppressive conservative partisanship.
My circumstances are actually quite interesting. I want to discuss a concept that I've branded "The Medical Savings and Loan." The program argues that the problem in health care is group funding of individual consumption and that the best path to repealing ObamaCare would be to promote self funded health care.
If executed correctly, the project can generate reams of compelling freedom rhetoric.
Since I am not part of the group (I am not LDS), Utah Republicans make a big show of locking me out.
I came up with the project 30 years ago and have spent tens of thousands of dollars and countless hours trying to present local conservatives a plan that would fit within their rhetoric.
The ugly partisanship and desire to control others that dominates the conservative mindset leads this group to systematically lock out other people.
Modern conservatism is decidedly partisan and incomplete. It was a product of the dialectical thinking of the French Revolution and modern philosophy. (Hegel, etc.).
The US Founders learned classical logic. They realized that the challenge to creating a free society was to avoid the reflexive paradox. A free society cannot survive if it gives any group the freedom to deny freedom to others.
I like to call the Founding Fathers classical liberals. They studied classical logic and applied classical analytical reasoning to the questions of liberty and came up with a relatively free society.
Conservatives and Progressives (the left right split) came from the French Revolution. Its members cling to Hegelian dialectics and partisan conflict in their never ending grub for power.
Despite all of the inspiring freedom rhetoric from CPAC, we live in a world where conservatives and progressives are part of the same dance that systemically destroys the American experiment in self government.
For the last thirty years, I've tried to engage conservative Utahans in a discussion about self funded health care. Utah conservatives claim to favor self-reliance. Utah has many companies that sell preparedness products. But since I am not part of the group that seeks domination, I am simply locked out.
As I watch CPAC, I long to partake in the conversation about freedom. Each time I hear a speaker position partisan conservatism as the soul defender of freedom I want to yell through the screen that partisan conservatives are not the defenders of freedom. These partisan conservatives at CPAC are as much a part of the problem as the partisan progressives in Occupy Wall Street.
Living in a state where state where conservatives rule with an iron fist, I see all of the faults of the conservative movement.
American Conservatism is decidedly incomplete and partisan vision of the American experience.
The great left/right was a product of the French Revolution, not the American Revolution. The dialectical reasoning underlying modern Conservatism came from Hegel (1770-1831), not from the US Founders. The US Founders were students of classical logic, not modern dialectics.
Because of its partisan and dialectical roots, the Conservative movement is one in which people use freedom rhetoric and become oppressive in their actions.
Conservatives will use freedom rhetoric to gain power. As partisans, they then lock out people who are not part of their group.
People who gain power then lock other people out are not liberators. They are oppressors.
Leftwing progressives, the other side of modern partisan dialectics, play on the hypocrisy of modern conservatives in their own shameful grub for power. The paradox of the left is that the partisans clamoring against oppression become even worse oppressors as they seek to impose social justice on their partisan foes. Locking people out is passive oppression. The left engages in active oppression.
Conservatives and Progressions are the two wings of a partisan dialectic system that is choking off the freedom envisioned by the US Founders.
For a vision of freedom to work, that vision must actually be inclusive.
I love watching videos from CPAC … where conservatives vie to see who is best at delivering freedom rhetoric.
Living in the most conservative state of the nation, Utah, I am forced to live under the yoke of oppressive conservative partisanship.
My circumstances are actually quite interesting. I want to discuss a concept that I've branded "The Medical Savings and Loan." The program argues that the problem in health care is group funding of individual consumption and that the best path to repealing ObamaCare would be to promote self funded health care.
If executed correctly, the project can generate reams of compelling freedom rhetoric.
Since I am not part of the group (I am not LDS), Utah Republicans make a big show of locking me out.
I came up with the project 30 years ago and have spent tens of thousands of dollars and countless hours trying to present local conservatives a plan that would fit within their rhetoric.
The ugly partisanship and desire to control others that dominates the conservative mindset leads this group to systematically lock out other people.
Modern conservatism is decidedly partisan and incomplete. It was a product of the dialectical thinking of the French Revolution and modern philosophy. (Hegel, etc.).
The US Founders learned classical logic. They realized that the challenge to creating a free society was to avoid the reflexive paradox. A free society cannot survive if it gives any group the freedom to deny freedom to others.
I like to call the Founding Fathers classical liberals. They studied classical logic and applied classical analytical reasoning to the questions of liberty and came up with a relatively free society.
Conservatives and Progressives (the left right split) came from the French Revolution. Its members cling to Hegelian dialectics and partisan conflict in their never ending grub for power.
Despite all of the inspiring freedom rhetoric from CPAC, we live in a world where conservatives and progressives are part of the same dance that systemically destroys the American experiment in self government.
For the last thirty years, I've tried to engage conservative Utahans in a discussion about self funded health care. Utah conservatives claim to favor self-reliance. Utah has many companies that sell preparedness products. But since I am not part of the group that seeks domination, I am simply locked out.
As I watch CPAC, I long to partake in the conversation about freedom. Each time I hear a speaker position partisan conservatism as the soul defender of freedom I want to yell through the screen that partisan conservatives are not the defenders of freedom. These partisan conservatives at CPAC are as much a part of the problem as the partisan progressives in Occupy Wall Street.
Friday, February 10, 2012
A Peculiar Medical Condition
I have a peculiar medical condition that requires that I sacrifice a cat during the first full moon after the solstice.
I believe that members of PETA should be forced to pay for the cat.
I believe that members of PETA should be forced to pay for the cat.
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Bush Derangement Syndrome
Do you remember the irrational hatred people had of Bush in his lame duck years?
When Obama was elected, I swore that I would never hate him. Life is too short for hatred.
The only president that I ever actually hated was a gentleman named "Ronald Reagan."
I was in school at the time. I hated Reagan because my teachers pulled a trick in which they framed every action of the president with nefarious motives.
It wasn't until several years after Reagan's presidency that I confronted the deep irrational hatred I had for Reagan. It is funny. I hated Reagan because I saw him as a person who was expanding government, when he was probably trying to slow the rate of government increase.
I am proud that I have never felt hatred toward the president.
I do find it amusing that Obama has been guilty of almost every transgression that the victims of the Bush Derangement Syndrome cited for their hatred. The Obama's presidency has been as much an imperial presidency as Bush. We are still entangled in wars. Government is still overbearing and oppressive.
The state of discourse in this nation is even worse now than in the Bush years. The partisanship in Congress is at a fever pitch with even fewer bipartisan efforts to solve problems.
I am extremely angry with policies ... notably PPACA, and will work my fingers to the bones in an effort to repeal it. I dislike PPACA not because of its association with Obama, but because I am certain that there is a better way. (Medical Savings and Loan)
Sadly, I worry that many patriots may have caught a case of Obama Derangement Syndrome. This is a syndrome in which a person hates a policy because of its association with Obama and not because the policy itself is backwards.
I admonish patriots about the Obama-Derangement-Syndrome because the syndrome has people making decisions based on associations and not on the merit of the policy.
Many people hate ObamaCare, but do know what is in ObamaCare. The primary feature of ObamaCare is the Health Exchange administered at the state level.
Here is "ultra-conservative" Utah, the legislature passed Health Exchanges. Simply by removing the negative association, they passed ObamaCare without debate.
Avoiding hatred is not only good for the soul. Avoiding hatred keeps one from making bad mistakes justified by hatred.
When Obama was elected, I swore that I would never hate him. Life is too short for hatred.
The only president that I ever actually hated was a gentleman named "Ronald Reagan."
I was in school at the time. I hated Reagan because my teachers pulled a trick in which they framed every action of the president with nefarious motives.
It wasn't until several years after Reagan's presidency that I confronted the deep irrational hatred I had for Reagan. It is funny. I hated Reagan because I saw him as a person who was expanding government, when he was probably trying to slow the rate of government increase.
I am proud that I have never felt hatred toward the president.
I do find it amusing that Obama has been guilty of almost every transgression that the victims of the Bush Derangement Syndrome cited for their hatred. The Obama's presidency has been as much an imperial presidency as Bush. We are still entangled in wars. Government is still overbearing and oppressive.
The state of discourse in this nation is even worse now than in the Bush years. The partisanship in Congress is at a fever pitch with even fewer bipartisan efforts to solve problems.
I am extremely angry with policies ... notably PPACA, and will work my fingers to the bones in an effort to repeal it. I dislike PPACA not because of its association with Obama, but because I am certain that there is a better way. (Medical Savings and Loan)
Sadly, I worry that many patriots may have caught a case of Obama Derangement Syndrome. This is a syndrome in which a person hates a policy because of its association with Obama and not because the policy itself is backwards.
I admonish patriots about the Obama-Derangement-Syndrome because the syndrome has people making decisions based on associations and not on the merit of the policy.
Many people hate ObamaCare, but do know what is in ObamaCare. The primary feature of ObamaCare is the Health Exchange administered at the state level.
Here is "ultra-conservative" Utah, the legislature passed Health Exchanges. Simply by removing the negative association, they passed ObamaCare without debate.
Avoiding hatred is not only good for the soul. Avoiding hatred keeps one from making bad mistakes justified by hatred.
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Spartan Race
People are hungry for opportunities to participate.
Spartan Race is a great example of a traveling participatory sport. This group goes from state to state organizing races. They are currently in Arizona.
Spartan Race is an endurance race that includes mud and obstacles. This race is designed to see if people are Spartan tough. This race would appeal to some. Not to others.
Me? I am more of a Athenian philosopher than a Spartan warrior.
There are numerous urban challenges, relay races and incredibly boring just run while your mind is empty races.
Decades ago, I created a really fun social networking sport called Juggleball. The game involves relays from base to base in which players exchange balls. Whoever is best at working with others wins.
The game involves social networking and fitness. It can be configured for people of different activity levels.
The program has a fundraising component and can be used as either a fundraiser for a charity or as a for profit business. I like for profit businesses because they provide people with jobs and money.
I am wanting to use the program as a fundraiser for a project called The Medical Savings and Loan. I would love to hear from anyone who wants to participate. Participating in life is more interesting that just hanging on the sidelines spectating.
If anyone wants to participate in the creation of a new social networking sport, please Contact Me.
Spartan Race is a great example of a traveling participatory sport. This group goes from state to state organizing races. They are currently in Arizona.
Spartan Race is an endurance race that includes mud and obstacles. This race is designed to see if people are Spartan tough. This race would appeal to some. Not to others.
Me? I am more of a Athenian philosopher than a Spartan warrior.
There are numerous urban challenges, relay races and incredibly boring just run while your mind is empty races.
Decades ago, I created a really fun social networking sport called Juggleball. The game involves relays from base to base in which players exchange balls. Whoever is best at working with others wins.
The game involves social networking and fitness. It can be configured for people of different activity levels.
The program has a fundraising component and can be used as either a fundraiser for a charity or as a for profit business. I like for profit businesses because they provide people with jobs and money.
I am wanting to use the program as a fundraiser for a project called The Medical Savings and Loan. I would love to hear from anyone who wants to participate. Participating in life is more interesting that just hanging on the sidelines spectating.
If anyone wants to participate in the creation of a new social networking sport, please Contact Me.
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Participation is the Requirement
Wow, those people at the Superbowl sure are having fun.
Wouldn't it be fun to own a professional sports franchise?
I would rather participate than spectate.
Unfortunately, the franchises for football are taken and they cost a lot. I wonder how much other sports franchises cost?
I put up a call for people to start a social networking sport called Juggleball.
It is a sport that combines social networking (eg. Twitter) and physical activity.
What is the cost for starting a Juggleball franchise?
At this moment, the cost for starting a franchise is participation.
The ideal franchisee is a small business owner, a nonprofit, a business coach, a church or anyone who is skilled at motivating people.
(I mentioned Churches and nonprofits because juggleball is ideally suited for fundraisers. For that matter, my goal is to use juggleball to raise funds for an effort called The Medical Savings and Loan.)
What will be demanded of you is that you make an effort. That you participate.
To start a franchise, you need to be able to get twelve people (preferably over 18) together at a place of your chosing. The place could be a local park, some sort of sports court, an empty parking lot, a school playing field, a reception center or meeting space where a dozen people can legally meet and run around.
(It is a sport, there is activity involved. Physically disabled people can play this game).
It is a coed sport. Both men and women can play. For that matter the more mixed up the better.
You, the franchisee, will be responsible for all costs related to the location including liability costs. (NOTE, there is an income opportunity associated with the game). The franchisee will be responsible for taxes on funds collected during the game.
If you believe you have the skills to get twelve people to show up at a location of your chosing; then contact me. You will need to give me an email address, a phone number and tell me the locations you can play.
I am hoping to travel from Salt Lake City through Arizona to San Diego at the end of February. I also hope to travel to Colorado and Wyoming in the summer. People on this itinerary will get preference. But I will include people from anywhere.
If there was a great deal of interest in some distantant land, I would find a way to get to the interested group.
I will make a big list of all the people who contact me. I will look at a map and plot a course from Salt Lake to San Diego and back. I will then sketch out an itinerary and contact people with a date range when I can get through town. I will contact you and we will schedule a game.
During the game, I will make a pitch selling a token called JuggleArt .. which I will sell for $20 a pop ... we will get into all that after you contact me. Buying the juggleart is not required to play the game.
If we schedule a game and I show up to find fewer than 6 people were there, I will charge you a $100 you-just-wasted-my-day fee ... unless of course, they buy six of silly JuggleArt products.
Anyway, juggleball is a participatory social networking sport. The cost of starting a franchise is your willingness to participate. Your scheduling a game and getting a dozen adults to show up will prove to me your willingness to participate. If you think you can do that, then contact me.
Wouldn't it be fun to own a professional sports franchise?
I would rather participate than spectate.
Unfortunately, the franchises for football are taken and they cost a lot. I wonder how much other sports franchises cost?
I put up a call for people to start a social networking sport called Juggleball.
It is a sport that combines social networking (eg. Twitter) and physical activity.
What is the cost for starting a Juggleball franchise?
At this moment, the cost for starting a franchise is participation.
The ideal franchisee is a small business owner, a nonprofit, a business coach, a church or anyone who is skilled at motivating people.
(I mentioned Churches and nonprofits because juggleball is ideally suited for fundraisers. For that matter, my goal is to use juggleball to raise funds for an effort called The Medical Savings and Loan.)
What will be demanded of you is that you make an effort. That you participate.
To start a franchise, you need to be able to get twelve people (preferably over 18) together at a place of your chosing. The place could be a local park, some sort of sports court, an empty parking lot, a school playing field, a reception center or meeting space where a dozen people can legally meet and run around.
(It is a sport, there is activity involved. Physically disabled people can play this game).
It is a coed sport. Both men and women can play. For that matter the more mixed up the better.
You, the franchisee, will be responsible for all costs related to the location including liability costs. (NOTE, there is an income opportunity associated with the game). The franchisee will be responsible for taxes on funds collected during the game.
If you believe you have the skills to get twelve people to show up at a location of your chosing; then contact me. You will need to give me an email address, a phone number and tell me the locations you can play.
I am hoping to travel from Salt Lake City through Arizona to San Diego at the end of February. I also hope to travel to Colorado and Wyoming in the summer. People on this itinerary will get preference. But I will include people from anywhere.
If there was a great deal of interest in some distantant land, I would find a way to get to the interested group.
I will make a big list of all the people who contact me. I will look at a map and plot a course from Salt Lake to San Diego and back. I will then sketch out an itinerary and contact people with a date range when I can get through town. I will contact you and we will schedule a game.
During the game, I will make a pitch selling a token called JuggleArt .. which I will sell for $20 a pop ... we will get into all that after you contact me. Buying the juggleart is not required to play the game.
If we schedule a game and I show up to find fewer than 6 people were there, I will charge you a $100 you-just-wasted-my-day fee ... unless of course, they buy six of silly JuggleArt products.
Anyway, juggleball is a participatory social networking sport. The cost of starting a franchise is your willingness to participate. Your scheduling a game and getting a dozen adults to show up will prove to me your willingness to participate. If you think you can do that, then contact me.
The Role of Government in Business
Americans and pundits keep saying that they want a president who puts business first.
This is exactly the wrong answer!
The president is not the source of wealth in the nation. The people are the source of wealth.
This ongoing demand for the president and congress to do something about the economy is the source of our economic mess.
Barack Obama put the economy first. The first thing he did was pass the stimulous. Congress passed a big bill messing with healthcare. They passed all sorts of financial regulations that they believed would improve things. They socialized college loans. They bought GM. They bailed out banks, they did this, that and the next thing in business.
This stupid notion that wealth flows from the king is a kick back to feudalism. It is pig-headed and backwards.
The US Founders realized that the wealth flows from the people. For the most part, government gets in the way.
This idea that we need a president with a big business background and backed by friends in big finance is completely wrong.
If you see someone repeating the talking point that we need a president with big business connections to get big business back on track; could you please grab the person by the elbows, shake violently, slap him really hard and yell: "What are you thinking!?"
Fulfilling the duties enumerated in the Constitution is enough for any man. We don't need a president to design school curriculum (ie No Child Left Behind). We don't need a president to provide healthcare (PPACA). We don't need a president to give us low cost drugs.
We do not need a political leader to run our nation's businesses!!!!!!!!
Every time we demand that the president divert from the duties enumerated in the Constitution, our nation diminishes.
Please, i beg you. Stop demanding that the president become a god!
It is the pundits who keep demanding that our government expand that are putting the shackles on our nation's children.
This is exactly the wrong answer!
The president is not the source of wealth in the nation. The people are the source of wealth.
This ongoing demand for the president and congress to do something about the economy is the source of our economic mess.
Barack Obama put the economy first. The first thing he did was pass the stimulous. Congress passed a big bill messing with healthcare. They passed all sorts of financial regulations that they believed would improve things. They socialized college loans. They bought GM. They bailed out banks, they did this, that and the next thing in business.
This stupid notion that wealth flows from the king is a kick back to feudalism. It is pig-headed and backwards.
The US Founders realized that the wealth flows from the people. For the most part, government gets in the way.
This idea that we need a president with a big business background and backed by friends in big finance is completely wrong.
If you see someone repeating the talking point that we need a president with big business connections to get big business back on track; could you please grab the person by the elbows, shake violently, slap him really hard and yell: "What are you thinking!?"
Fulfilling the duties enumerated in the Constitution is enough for any man. We don't need a president to design school curriculum (ie No Child Left Behind). We don't need a president to provide healthcare (PPACA). We don't need a president to give us low cost drugs.
We do not need a political leader to run our nation's businesses!!!!!!!!
Every time we demand that the president divert from the duties enumerated in the Constitution, our nation diminishes.
Please, i beg you. Stop demanding that the president become a god!
It is the pundits who keep demanding that our government expand that are putting the shackles on our nation's children.
Professional Sports Franchises Up for Grabs
It's Superbowl time and the air is full of talk of sports.
I was just reading an article about the orgins of football and the first players who were largely driven by the love of the game (and the love of life).
Those first pioneers who developed football and baseball were great.
They really went out on a limb to pursue an activity that they loved. They are worthy of admiration.
Speaking of the Superbowl ... Have you ever wanted to own your own professional sports franchise?
Do you think it would be fun to participate in a weekend activity where you will burn some calaries while getting a bunch of inbound links to your web site or blog?
Are you in Utah, Colorado, Arizona (or perhaps San Diego)?
I am working on a new social networking sport called Juggleball.com.
Yes, it is a sport that involves social networking and physical activity! It is a participatory sport. In football, only a few people play. Most sit idly and watch. In juggleball, everybody who wants to play gets to play.
The game works as follows: When you join the game, you get numbered balls. You engage in a number of juggle relays. This involves running with the balls between bases (such as in a baseball diamond).
If you are unable to run, you can just stay at a base.
The winner of each game is the person who is best at completing the relays.
In most sports, the goal is to vanquish an enemy. In Juggleball, you compete in your ability to cooperate with others.
At the end of the game you will have a different set of balls than you started with. The scorekeeper will record the number of the balls and enter this information on juggleball.com. The balls bouncing around from player to play will form an interesting social network.
The first people who play the game will get the lowest numbered balls. The first scorekeepers will be lauded as the pioneers of the sport. They will get thousands of inbound links and there will be songs, sonets and museums praising their forthrightness and fortitude for centuries to come.
To get the ball rolling. I need brave souls to step up as scorekeepers ... the scorekeepers work for a franchise.
To own a juggleball franchise you will need access to a computer, the ability to secure a playing field and to get a dozen or so people to show up at a field for a game.
The franchise can be part of another business. For example, if you own a business or store; you can add the franchise as part of your existing lines of business.
A franchise is likely to be selling things, and might need a sales tax id.
I will reserve the first 1234 numbers for people who contact me and show interest in owning a franchise and becoming scorekeepers.
At this moment, I am especially interested in contacting people from places I can easily travel to. I live in Salt Lake City. I hope to be traveling to Arizona at the end of the month and possibly to San Diego.
I am especially interested in people who live in or can travel to Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada (Las Vegas), Utah, Wyoming or possibly San Diego. Small towns are as good as big ones in my book.
Of course, you can contact me from anywhere (including outside the US). I will put you on a mailing list.
As you watch the Superbowl, think about how fun it would be to own your own professional sports franchise. The cost to join is minimal, the limited opportunity to get in for free will pass you by if you fail to contact me.
The best way to contact me is to register for a free Community Color you can do this securely on irivers.com/register.html then use the secure contact form https://irivers.com/contact.html?to=kevind .
I was just reading an article about the orgins of football and the first players who were largely driven by the love of the game (and the love of life).
Those first pioneers who developed football and baseball were great.
They really went out on a limb to pursue an activity that they loved. They are worthy of admiration.
Speaking of the Superbowl ... Have you ever wanted to own your own professional sports franchise?
Do you think it would be fun to participate in a weekend activity where you will burn some calaries while getting a bunch of inbound links to your web site or blog?
Are you in Utah, Colorado, Arizona (or perhaps San Diego)?
I am working on a new social networking sport called Juggleball.com.
Yes, it is a sport that involves social networking and physical activity! It is a participatory sport. In football, only a few people play. Most sit idly and watch. In juggleball, everybody who wants to play gets to play.
The game works as follows: When you join the game, you get numbered balls. You engage in a number of juggle relays. This involves running with the balls between bases (such as in a baseball diamond).
If you are unable to run, you can just stay at a base.
The winner of each game is the person who is best at completing the relays.
In most sports, the goal is to vanquish an enemy. In Juggleball, you compete in your ability to cooperate with others.
At the end of the game you will have a different set of balls than you started with. The scorekeeper will record the number of the balls and enter this information on juggleball.com. The balls bouncing around from player to play will form an interesting social network.
The first people who play the game will get the lowest numbered balls. The first scorekeepers will be lauded as the pioneers of the sport. They will get thousands of inbound links and there will be songs, sonets and museums praising their forthrightness and fortitude for centuries to come.
To get the ball rolling. I need brave souls to step up as scorekeepers ... the scorekeepers work for a franchise.
To own a juggleball franchise you will need access to a computer, the ability to secure a playing field and to get a dozen or so people to show up at a field for a game.
The franchise can be part of another business. For example, if you own a business or store; you can add the franchise as part of your existing lines of business.
A franchise is likely to be selling things, and might need a sales tax id.
I will reserve the first 1234 numbers for people who contact me and show interest in owning a franchise and becoming scorekeepers.
At this moment, I am especially interested in contacting people from places I can easily travel to. I live in Salt Lake City. I hope to be traveling to Arizona at the end of the month and possibly to San Diego.
I am especially interested in people who live in or can travel to Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada (Las Vegas), Utah, Wyoming or possibly San Diego. Small towns are as good as big ones in my book.
Of course, you can contact me from anywhere (including outside the US). I will put you on a mailing list.
As you watch the Superbowl, think about how fun it would be to own your own professional sports franchise. The cost to join is minimal, the limited opportunity to get in for free will pass you by if you fail to contact me.
The best way to contact me is to register for a free Community Color you can do this securely on irivers.com/register.html then use the secure contact form https://irivers.com/contact.html?to=kevind .
Friday, February 03, 2012
Please Don't Kill the Freedom Movement
In the 1990s, I truly felt that the liberty movement was making inroads.
During the Clinton Administration, we had seen successful welfare reform, some deregulation and a decrease in deficit spending.
Personally, I think the famous "balanced budget" was more of lucky combination of circumstance than political skill. At the height of the dotcom boom, the economy grew faster than the CBO had predicted. Balancing a budget during an economic boom is not a monumental challenge.
If you had an expected ten percent bonus from work, would your budget be balanced for the month?
I had felt confident that the freedom movement had made its point and I was happy to see the Republicans take full control of the House, Senate and Presidency in 2000.
The suddenly the Republican establishment turned on the freedom movement and silenced it. Bush dramatically increased healthcare spending. He started no-child left behind, and issued a tax cut without corresponding spending cuts.
It was sheer insanity.
The president is the head of the party. During Bush's rule, he put a kibosh on the free marketeers, and the freedom movement lost all of the momentum of the 1990s.
In the 2012 election, we are being told by the Republican establishment that we must vote in a progressive candidate to have a chance to beat Obama.
As I look back on 2000, I realize that the momentum of the Tea Party will be lost if Republicans fall for that line again and vote in a progressive.
Wake up America!
Do you even remember the Tea Party of 2010?
Don't you see how it has all but disappeared in one short year?
Just as the freedom movement was pushed underground under Bush, the Republican establishment will stifle it under Romney.
PS: I actually care more about the people than I do about the candidate. My primary concern in the election is the effect candidates will have on the public debate.
I actually like Bush as a person. I like Obama as a person and Romney as a person.
Anyway, before voting in the primary, I ask that people put the candidate's personality aside for a moment as ask what effect the candidacy will have on the people.
I love the Tea Party, the Campaign for Liberty and Health Freedom movement. These are the things I care about.
The president's organization will control the party for the next eight years. I see this organization putting the iron boot down on all the parts of the freedom movement that I cherish if we make the mistake of putting a progressive Republican in power.
During the Clinton Administration, we had seen successful welfare reform, some deregulation and a decrease in deficit spending.
Personally, I think the famous "balanced budget" was more of lucky combination of circumstance than political skill. At the height of the dotcom boom, the economy grew faster than the CBO had predicted. Balancing a budget during an economic boom is not a monumental challenge.
If you had an expected ten percent bonus from work, would your budget be balanced for the month?
I had felt confident that the freedom movement had made its point and I was happy to see the Republicans take full control of the House, Senate and Presidency in 2000.
The suddenly the Republican establishment turned on the freedom movement and silenced it. Bush dramatically increased healthcare spending. He started no-child left behind, and issued a tax cut without corresponding spending cuts.
It was sheer insanity.
The president is the head of the party. During Bush's rule, he put a kibosh on the free marketeers, and the freedom movement lost all of the momentum of the 1990s.
In the 2012 election, we are being told by the Republican establishment that we must vote in a progressive candidate to have a chance to beat Obama.
As I look back on 2000, I realize that the momentum of the Tea Party will be lost if Republicans fall for that line again and vote in a progressive.
Wake up America!
Do you even remember the Tea Party of 2010?
Don't you see how it has all but disappeared in one short year?
Just as the freedom movement was pushed underground under Bush, the Republican establishment will stifle it under Romney.
PS: I actually care more about the people than I do about the candidate. My primary concern in the election is the effect candidates will have on the public debate.
I actually like Bush as a person. I like Obama as a person and Romney as a person.
Anyway, before voting in the primary, I ask that people put the candidate's personality aside for a moment as ask what effect the candidacy will have on the people.
I love the Tea Party, the Campaign for Liberty and Health Freedom movement. These are the things I care about.
The president's organization will control the party for the next eight years. I see this organization putting the iron boot down on all the parts of the freedom movement that I cherish if we make the mistake of putting a progressive Republican in power.
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Corrupt Generations
Tom Brokaw called the generation that grew up in hardships of the Depression to win a war against Nazi Germany "The Generation."
They were followed by a corrupt generation that create the current economic and social mess.
I contend that the same pattern happened at the birth of our nation.
The Founders were part of a great generation that rose against a corrupt monarchy and established a Constitutional Union.
The US founders were not able to resolve the problem of slavery, and hoped their children would.
The generations that followed the founders was an intellectually corrupt group that brought more harm into the world than good.
The intellectuals of the Founders generation were typified by Adam Smith, who showed that a free society will out produce an enslaved one, and Benjamin Franklin who advanced multiple disciplines.
The generation that followed was typified by Hegel who brought forth an ugly new dialectics based on paradox and conflict.
The generation that followed the Founders brought us the partisan divide that continues to dominate politics.
The corrupt intellectuals of the day not only failed to address slavery. They came up with lame ideologies to justify slavery.
The thinking of this corrupt generation is typified by the German philosopher Hegel (1770-1831), who created a new dialectics that used the reflexive paradox to claim freedom was slavery and slavery freedom.
Hegelian dialectics used a device called historicism in which a pseudo intellectual presents a fantastical view of history driven by thesis anti-thesis conflicts. The intellectual then claims to be able to deduce the future from the conflicts.
The papers of the 1820s were filled with fantastical histories and pseudo science to justify the prejudices and partisanship of the day.
So, while the work of the Founders laid the foundation for a free market and constitutional republic; the generations that followed spewed forth with corrupt ideologies and fantastical histories that spun historical events in really ugly ways.
This model of a great generation followed by a corrupt one is important to remember because our current understanding of the Founders is very much influenced by the spinning and the filters of the generations that followed.
The early 1800s were an intellectually corrupt time rife with partisanship that culimated in the Civil War and laid the intellectual foundation for the totalitarian regimes that caused so much destruction in the following century.
This intellectually corrupt and partisan generation that followed the founders is the group that wrote the history of the Founders. They are the ones that laid the foundation for all of the messes that we are in today.
Everything we see in the world is filtered. So, in our pursuit of truth, we must understand that indiviual views of history are always adversely affected by these filters.
They were followed by a corrupt generation that create the current economic and social mess.
I contend that the same pattern happened at the birth of our nation.
The Founders were part of a great generation that rose against a corrupt monarchy and established a Constitutional Union.
The US founders were not able to resolve the problem of slavery, and hoped their children would.
The generations that followed the founders was an intellectually corrupt group that brought more harm into the world than good.
The intellectuals of the Founders generation were typified by Adam Smith, who showed that a free society will out produce an enslaved one, and Benjamin Franklin who advanced multiple disciplines.
The generation that followed was typified by Hegel who brought forth an ugly new dialectics based on paradox and conflict.
The generation that followed the Founders brought us the partisan divide that continues to dominate politics.
The corrupt intellectuals of the day not only failed to address slavery. They came up with lame ideologies to justify slavery.
The thinking of this corrupt generation is typified by the German philosopher Hegel (1770-1831), who created a new dialectics that used the reflexive paradox to claim freedom was slavery and slavery freedom.
Hegelian dialectics used a device called historicism in which a pseudo intellectual presents a fantastical view of history driven by thesis anti-thesis conflicts. The intellectual then claims to be able to deduce the future from the conflicts.
The papers of the 1820s were filled with fantastical histories and pseudo science to justify the prejudices and partisanship of the day.
So, while the work of the Founders laid the foundation for a free market and constitutional republic; the generations that followed spewed forth with corrupt ideologies and fantastical histories that spun historical events in really ugly ways.
This model of a great generation followed by a corrupt one is important to remember because our current understanding of the Founders is very much influenced by the spinning and the filters of the generations that followed.
The early 1800s were an intellectually corrupt time rife with partisanship that culimated in the Civil War and laid the intellectual foundation for the totalitarian regimes that caused so much destruction in the following century.
This intellectually corrupt and partisan generation that followed the founders is the group that wrote the history of the Founders. They are the ones that laid the foundation for all of the messes that we are in today.
Everything we see in the world is filtered. So, in our pursuit of truth, we must understand that indiviual views of history are always adversely affected by these filters.