It may strike some as strange to state a partial government shutdown is a good problem to have. Such a statement would take most aback, especially when today’s American society has been lulled in a stupor on focusing on the here and now. This stupor has led to complacency, apathy and a lost sense of history. It is only when looking at the shutdown from much larger and far broader historical perspective, that an unprejudiced and bipartisan clarity be attained. Today, the Obama Administration has singly drawn our attention to the “Republican shutdown.” Their strategy is that of the President’s; “blame the Right
” and the people, now lacking the ability to self assess and self educate, will blindly follow – and they have.
While watching the news covering the partial shutdown this weekend, things fell into perspective. Eric Cantor emerged from the chambers and in his opening sentence declared the Democrats were at fault. Shortly thereafter, Nancy Pelosi emerged and immediately blamed the Republicans. More of the same nonsense. It was not until President Obama spoke that truth rang with the aforementioned clarity. He stated that the government was in a shutdown because of the House Republicans’ stubbornness. In the same sentence and in the same breath, the President stated that he would not sit with Republicans and the shutdown would remain in effect until the Republicans gave him the exact budget that he wanted with no attached stipulations. He insisted that he would not settle for anything less than his specific demands and again blamed the Republicans for the shutdown. Here is where Americans miss, have never fully understood, or have forgotten the obvious; America is a Constitutional Republic and is thus specifically designed to prevent such lineal and direct acquiescence of imperial polity.
While the public may in fact blame Republicans for the shutdown
, they fail to understand that it is House of Representatives’ constitutional responsibility to assure the powers of government remain dispersed and are not solely and exclusively under the authority of any singular individual named as President of the United States. What President Obama wants is to increase the debt ceiling by 1 trillion dollars with no stipulations while the House wishes to apply stipulations to the debt ceiling increase. Because the House did not bow down to President Obama’s attempt at imperial polity and upheld the values that founded American political influences, we now have a shutdown. When reflecting back on the President’s words concerning the Republican’s role in the shutdown, it is the demand of the Obama Administration that the House acquiesces to both the legislative and fiscal intent of the President. Again, America was created as a Constitutional Republic to permanently escape such tyranny.
We must remember why the Mighty Pine Tree once adorned the revolutionary Don’t Tread on Me flag. The British government enacted regulation stipulating no citizen could cut down tall and straight trees, even if the tree were on their private property. The government then cut down the tallest and straightest of trees for their naval fleet whether the tree was located on privately held or public land. Being that people purchased property largely for the quality of trees contained within the land, revolution was enacted to dispel imperial polity and attain freedom from government overreach and excessive taxation. More recently, President Obama spoke to this during our Independence holiday. The President stated that he felt the Revolution of our forefathers was wrong and government should possess the ability to tax as it sees fit and not in accordance with constitutional authority or the people’s desires. The historical context of the government shutdown is equally compelling.
The people have been fed very simplistic and sophomoric excuses for the shutdown. Responsible are Republicans, right-wing extremists and even the racist intentions of not wanting the nation’s first Black President to have his way. These are offered forth to shift the focus away from the 40-year history of government shutdowns. There have been 17 shutdowns prior to the current, 15 of these shutdowns were at the hands of Democrats, not Republicans. In fact, George W. Bush is the only president to not have served as President during a shutdown with a divided congressional body in the last 40 years. On the short term, Americans only see the more recent absence of a shutdown. Now that one has occurred, it is easy to sway Americans with disillusioned understandings of government and history to blame on the Party upholding the intent of a Constitutional Republic in order to thwart the reemergence of the governmental tyranny that drove the creation of America. To give the President the budget he wants in the manner in which he wants it with no stipulations, solely because it is his demand, defies the role of the House of Representatives where budgetary assent is required and ultimate fiscal responsibility is bestowed
under “trias politica,” or separation of power. As much as President Obama admires Britain’s parliamentary power that prevents their upper chamber’s dissent from the ruling or winning party’s manifesto – we are not in Britain, and for good reason we have contrived a Constitutional Republic to ensure specific disseminations of power, which block such attempts at absolute rule. Moreover, President Obama has tried to demand the House relinquish its constitutionally ascribed authority directly to the Office of the President of the United States. The House, acting under the rule of law refused to relinquish this authority to the President. The public do not see these basic, underlying separations for their historical significance and how they our vital to America today.
So yes, the shutdown is a good problem to have in that it prevents absolute power. President Obama’s followers and supporters find fault only in who the President has directed them to find fault in. The blame is placed upon the shoulders of the Republicans. The Right, in their eyes, is therefore responsible for what has been closed due to the shutdown. The failing here is the overlooked fact is the shutdown is partial - not complete. This means the Obama Administration decides what remains open, what is closed, what is funded and what funding is stopped.
It was not the Republicans who decided death benefits would not be paid to the families of fallen military members serving abroad, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who decided to block people from stopping to view Mount Rushmore because “it is a National Monument and the government is closed” and therefore those driving by cannot pause to witness it, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who have forced people from their own homes because they live in a National Park, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who have blocked access to the Florida Bay
to prevent fishermen from accessing 1,100 square miles of open ocean due to the shutdown while maintaining staff to police the ban, again it was the Obama Administration. These choices are best described by a Biscayne Bay Park Service Ranger who stated, “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”
These actions are by selective choice, not by Republican force or any other entity besides that of the Obama Administration, which is largely “acting out” an Obama led temper tantrum at the people’s expense. The Left refuses to acknowledge their choices in what aspects of government have been shutdown, but are quick to blame the other while fully and willfully denying the Obama Administration’s motives against a Constitutional Republic as it demands ever increasing control and power over the nation in ways that are beyond the historic understanding of the average American.
Therefore, President Obama’s greatest power lies in the bias nature and intellectual weakness demonstrated by his support base. Today, they would support the House of Representatives losing its fiscal power so that he, as President can have unmitigated and unconstitutional fiscal control. However, should this exact control they want for Obama fall in the hands of Republicans – it is only then that they would see error in what is happening today and why separation of powers are important to the American way of life.
It is not that I am “anti-Right” or anything like that, though I have matured enough politically to see the gross republican failings. Hell, that would make me a Liberal… or even worse – an Independent! “A far Right Conservative,” a very good friend more recently called me. It was to say that I tend to be a bit unbending in my political perspectives; rigid and unforgiving – extreme even (which is what “far Right” means anymore). Consider it a “slight of compliment” that was both fitting and at times appropriate.
It was a comment that made me think
Place the emphasis of “far Right Conservative” on Conservative; i.e. not Republican is what was being stated. (I like the sound of that – “Not Republican!” It would make a good blog or website theme these days). I like Republicanism and the associated political ideologies, but before that, the political values of fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutional rights, personal accountability, personal responsibility and limited government must be upheld. Looking at my little checklist: Where do Republicans really fit in to my political value system? In my opinion, Republican officials represent these values in terms of rhetoric only, not in practice. They DO exist in Republican philosophy and mantra, but both current and more recent Republican leadership refuse to practice them. Moreover, I see the Party for how it practices the art of American politicking, not how they wish to be perceived as practicing them. And this is where I simply veer course from the “establishment Republican” – they either do not find such values as important as myself, or they simply refuse to see and accept the truth about what their Republican political leadership is actually doing. It is not that they are bad people; it is just that I see things differently and am accordingly not blinded by party affiliations over personal values and common sense. (Ahem, Not that all Republicans are).
I just don’t get it
Practically, everyone on the Right is fuming over Obama’s Executive Order essentially granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – and rightfully so. What I don’t get is why the actively elected Right has called upon an out of office, professional President wannabe (with no active political decision making authority what-so-ever) to take the lead on the immigration issue. Rather than effect active legislation, those HIRED TO SERVE IN OFFICE BY THE RIGHT have taken a roll of passivity while further relying on a moot political figure, solely because he is running for office. Simply put, Romney is not in a position to right the unilateral wrong committed by Obama, nor is Romney in a position to dictate immigration policy. Elected politicians, inept in their own individual political ability, have hid from the issue behind a Romney shield instead of taking action as they were hired by the people to do. Yet, no one really seems to notice.
For purposes of personal amusement, let’s take a quick glimpse on Romney and the Latino vote.
Romney’s presidential bid needs no less than 31% of the Latino vote AFTER Obama just rolled over, smiled and swallowed and secured the Latino vote in a monumental way. When pressed on whether he [Romney] would strike down the EO if elected President, he ducked, dodged and avoided answering. [Should probably insert a note here that Romney’s avoidance means he will do nothing if elected]. Romney however, is not dumb, but he may be making a very stupid move to resolve the “immigration” conundrum he faces.
More of the same old thing
Have you noticed how the media consistently covered how “Obama deported more illegal Mexicans than Bush;” all while AZ was attacked for enforcing the same standard Obama was being given credit for? Perhaps you may have noticed when Obama deportation numbers were being dropped in public view; ICE was granting amnesty. This Democrat hypocrisy exists because MOST DEMOCRATS SUPPORT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, NOT AMNESTY. Obama pandered to both sides of Liberal immigration temperament and then sealed the deal favoring the Latino vote over national sovereignty. Suckers.
Here’s another little immigration conflict for ya! Asians now stand to overtake Mexicans in immigration to the US. If they (both Republicans and Democrats) have sold national sovereignty for the Latino vote to this extent; can you possibly imagine what they will be willing to do for the Asian vote once politicians decide to make Asians the next American race issue? That is how they get the votes you know. They make it look like anyone not of a specified race is wrong and racist for not being of that race and then promise they will make things different and better. The whole time making it worse to have something to actually fix, then walking away - after the given ethic group has given them their blind loyalty that is. If you are Black like me, that should sound all too familiar. If you are Mexican, I hope you have been watching closely; you’re next.
Republican vetting against constitutionalism
Rubio is currently being vetted for the coveted VP slot. Not a bad choice in terms of political perspectives, but one cannot help but wonder if this is merely a “Hey! I like Latino’s too!” move to counter traditionally low Latino support for Republican politicians in a time where the Latino vote could well be the deciding factor in the 2012 Presidential race. Though obvious, this is not what makes it a potentially disastrous and stupid move.
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has something in common with the good old Prez. Rubio’s parents “held off” on become US citizens until such a time Marco had already earned dual citizenship. (In case you have not noticed, the commonality is not the Cuban parent part….) Please allow me to digress even further.
The Right hosed the “Birther” issue by attacking it the laziest way possible. Challenged was “where Obama was born” because the Right felt that if it proved Obama was born in Kenya, it would be an open and shut case; WRONG! They almost completely ignored the true issue in that Obama’s father gave him dual citizenship because he [Obama] was born of a father that claimed citizenship to a nation that extended its citizenship to those children of their citizens born abroad. You see, it never matter “where” Obama was born per se, because the dual citizenship is where the constitutional argument lies; an argument more difficult in constitutional terms than that of Obama being born in a foreign nation. Had Republicans taken the higher ground, the “birther” conspiracy would have held the merit it truly deserved. The average American of course, does not know this and the majority of those whom do possess the apathy of those worthy of following only. Be that as it may, constitutional eligibility has been brought back to the forefront by Republicans; incorrectly, but nonetheless by Republicans – and constitutionally minded Republicans at that.
So, that leaves me pondering why a Republican presidential wannabe would venture so recklessly in the deep and murky waters of constitutional eligibility – after making such a big deal about it and all.
What matters is winning the Latino vote, not the constitution. Sound familiar? The system was wrong for allowing Obama to be vetted and consequently seated in terms of constitutional eligibility. Now stay with me here. Yet, because American politicians have failed in the three years since Obama’s election to correct (or even attempted to correct) the failed system that allowed Obama to win the Presidential seat in the name of the Democrats – it is now only appropriate that the constitutional eligibility blind eye now be turned in REPUBLICAN favor. A little quid quo pro if you will. Since when was the constitution relevant anyway? When will we, as Americans, become smart enough to realize that Left versus Right yields no true winner when both are wrong?
When both are wrong; all lose
And that is the underlying theme of all of this anyway isn’t it? Both sides are wrong and they are wrong on all of the issues. When it comes to the political elite; they are of the same agenda, just with different means to their ends. Obamacare was so wrong, yet we nominate its architect for President? Never mind Nixonian Republicans and their attempt, ignore Clinton’s attempts and Gingrich who pushed it while Speaker of the House. Illegal immigration is wrong, but Reagan passed Amnesty; now Obama pens an EO for the exact same reasons Reagan pushed it through. I mean really, with such hypocrisy; who should take the establishment Republican or modern Liberal seriously? When is the last time an administration, albeit Republican or Democrat, effectively reduced government, regulation and spending? Chirp, chirp. (Hint: WWII for those not taking the question with its posed rhetorical intent. BTW, it was the sharpest recession recovery in US economic history – yet today both Republicans and Democrats see it only fit to increase spending in order to provide entitlements in barter for votes). The big difference is that Democrats have arguably done a better job of exposing Republican failures than Republicans have exposed the egregious failings of Democrats. What’s funny is that Americans are ever so bitterly divided – all while their given elected officials pursue a common agenda against the good and freedoms of the people. Well, that’s not really funny is it? Please interject sad, pathetic, pitiful or any other adjective you deem most appropriate lieu of funny.
The problem is that, to an establishment Republican, I maintain an “extremely conservative” political perspective. (The word they are looking for is DIVIANT, not so much extreme – while fully admitting extreme can fit in several places). ;)
It is this deviance that separates Conservatives from establishment Republicans. It is almost as if establishment Republicans have not yet awakened to the fact their political elite do not share their agendas, or at least I hope they don’t (given all the unconstitutional laws passed and what not).
It goes to reason why so many people refuse to follow politics. It is truly a culture of deceit, corruption, hypocrisy and destruction. In not following, you are spared the frustration and don’t have to look like a hypocrite for supporting one side over the other; you win by not playing. What’s better than that?
I hope at this point you realize our problem is not so much what the Left is doing versus what the Right is doing. They are doing the same things and we only find political wrongs “un-American” and unconstitutional when it is the other side penning the legislation. It is as shameful as it is true. Perhaps what is most shameful is supporting this Two Party system solely designed for internal destruction and expecting someone to take you seriously.
Of course if I were Joe - non-self-educating, lemming-like, sheepish – Public, I too would have fallen for the rhetoric that most today seem to be falling for.
Things are indeed getting better, but only when you compare “bad” to “worst.”
The Obama Administration would like Americans to believe that “bad” is in fact “good” and “worst” is not of their making.
Be that as it may, both bad and better are subject assessments of condition as compared to a “normality” that is based upon a set of personal values.
The idea in this case is to lull the public into overlooking the larger and more important picture – Obama’s actual performance as POTUS.
Here is what the Obama Administration is selling as better:
- Americans in poverty increased 6.4 million from 39.8 million to 46.2 million
- Home values dropped from $193,000 to $172,600 – an 11% loss in value
- The U.S. has fallen from 1st to 5th in global competitiveness
- As a direct consequence of Health Care Reform, health insurance premiums increased some 23% skyrocketing from $3,354 to $4,129 annually
- Food stamp recipients jumped from 35 million to 45 million, an increase of 45%
- Federal debt increased from 10.5 trillion to more than 15 trillion with no supporting federal budget
- Gas prices jumped 85%
- 2 million more people found their way into unemployment despite POTUS boasts of an effective multi-billion dollar stimulus
- Unsurprisingly, the Misery Index increased 65% under the Obama regime
What’s worse; while the Obama administration has not passed a budget in well over 900 days, it uses this failure in rudimentary functionalism to rationalize the blaming of Bush, who passed a horrid budget that spanned into the Obama presidential tenure.
Had the Obama Administration passed a budget in the three years Obama has been in office, their culpability in continuing the economic fascism of the Bush Administration would be irrefutable to even the most biased Obama supporter.
Instead, they use their inability to pass a budget as an excuse to both blame Bush and continue Bush spending policies which could have all been mitigated by more current fiscal budgets and defunding practices.
Simply put, America’s economic outlook could be considerably different today if the Obama Administration had actually wished to improve America’s overall solvency.
Here is a way of looking at one aspect, perhaps the largest aspect, of the Obama Administration.
If your household is consumed by debt, you do not seek to correct the problem by assuming even more debt.
Yet, America is being told things are getting better in areas where it is completely impossible for them to improve given the Obama Administration’s refusal to assume a role of fiscal responsibility that would be of benefit to the people.
But when you look at it from the Progressive (anti) American position… I guess things are getting better.
America has fallen in almost all measurable areas making America more a global norm than an exception to a failing world.
This is after all, want progressives have wanted all along; a land of equal outcomes and denied opportunity to be more accepted by a lesser world.
And to think, I was told that things are getting better.