About Me

Name: Mantic
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Blog Roll

 

Thanksgiving and Social Slavery

Posted by Mantic on Thursday, November 23, 2006 11:53:54 AM
Today is Thanksgiving.  An article on RealClearPolitics' daily links by Allen Guelzo in the WSJ Opinion Journal is about the Gettysburg Address as an expression of where our American democracy was in 1863.

In 1863, the United States was the only significant democracy in the world. The French Revolution had drowned itself in blood; the democratic uprisings of the 1820s and 1840s had been easily and successfully repressed by kings and emperors; and everywhere, it was power and hierarchy rather than liberty and equality which seemed the best guarantee of peace and plenty. Americans remained the one people who defined themselves by a natural proposition, that all men are created equal, so that no one was born with a superior entitlement to command. But this republic of equal citizens had two basic weaknesses. The first was its tolerance of slavery, which drew the line of race across the line of equality. The second weakness was the question of authority in a democracy.

He further talks about the challenges of the populace accepting majority rule.  It is tough when one is in the minority.   As I reflected upon his words, I realized that there is, indeed, many mini-tyrannies and some not so mini in our country.   An example of this is that the minority GLBT strata of our society gets a great deal more than their fair share of attention.  When we hear the phrase all men are created equal, there are those who take that to mean the disadvantaged are more "equal" than others.

I look at the mini-tyrannies and the notions of slavery.  In the American society we have an interesting set-up.  The slave-owners are the politicians currently in power.  The slaves can be anyone they wish to impose their will upon.  When one reads the taxation spread in our country, where the bottom 50% of the population pays 3 (that's t-h-r-e-e) percent of the taxes one must wonder who is yoked with providing the ever-increasing goods and services to this, basically non-paying group of folks.  Well the top wage earners in the country do.  One half of the country is put to work paying for government services for the other half.  And that is wage earners, not the retirees and the children of our country.  The top 10% pay 36% of all taxes.  This is tyranny.  To an extent this is economic slavery.

What do the "slaveholders" get for enthralling the high wage earners of our country?  The votes of the bottom 50%.  In our country if you get 51%, you win.  Luckily, and one of the reasons our democracy has lasted so long, is that the 51% requirement isn't for one vote, one time, but many votes for many politicians many times.  The very dynamism of our election system provides for shifts in our governmental make-up.

However the relentless push against the 'rich' in our country is always supported by those who don't have, but driven by the Dem politicians.  There is a relentless push for increased bondage of our wealthier citizens despite recent rollbacks in death taxes, capital gains taxes and dvidends.  John Edwards talks about two Americas.  What he is really talking about is the 50% who take and the 50% who are forced by law to give.

Americans, being Americans are more than happy to help those less fortunate.  At this time of year, Thanksgiving and Christmas, the focus of millions of us turns more the to poor and disadvantaged of our country than at any other time.  This is laudable and unique in the world.  However the notion that the pockets of the wealthy 50% are the property of the politicans to give to the bottom 50% is disgraceful, disingenuous and, quite frankly, entirely un-American.  Shame on Edwards, shame on tax-restorer Rangel, shame on the Democrats and their Republican enablers.  There are better ways.  

On this Thanksgiveing Day, let us be thankful we live in a country that permits bounty and permits the freedoms we take for granted.  Let us also be thankful that we do have the power to change, to nudge, to modify our government to decrease the mini-tyrannies in our lives.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Iraq Deaths: Who's Responsible?

Posted by Mantic on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 11:43:07 PM
In today's Wall Street Journal, 101 violent deaths occurred in Iraq yesterday:

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- At least 101 Iraqis died in the country's unending sectarian slaughter Wednesday, and the U.N. reported that 3,709 Iraqi civilians were killed in October, the highest monthly toll of the war and one that is sure to be eclipsed when November's dead are counted.

Who is exactly responsible for these deaths?  Is it Saddam?  Is it the US?  Is it the feckless Iraqi government?  Is it the Sunnis?  Is it Al Qaeda?  Is it the Shiite militias? 

The answer is, of course, all of the above to one extent or another.  The primary inflicter of pain and suffering in Iraq is the "insurgency".  I define that as Sunni/Shiite/Al Qaeda insurgents.  In other words the "bad guys" with the guns, rockets and IEDs.  The U.S. is somewhat at fault for creating such a target rich environment for the insurgency.  The Iraqi government for failing to clamp down on the Shiite militias.

But when all is said and done, this is primarily Iraqi on Iraqi violence.  It is not the US military out there killing innocent Iraqis.   It is Iraqis killing Iraqis.  There is a clash of two cultures, a culture of life (most Iraqis) and a culture of death (a vicious, but very small minority).
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Dems Appoint Formerly Corrupt Officials

Posted by Mantic on Sunday, November 12, 2006 11:17:17 PM
First the buzz was soon-to-be Nancy Pelosi will jettison Jane Harman to chair the House Intelligence committee and put in Alcee Hastings.  Now in an article online at MSNBC, she is favoring putting John Murtha as the second-in-command in the House.

Let's quickly review the career of these two Dem paragons in the House.  Alcee Hastings was impeached for bribery and corruption while he served as a judge.  That's right, he was impeached and convicted for bribery.  He doesn't deserve to be in the House, much less be on the Intelligence Committee, where he has been serving already.

Abscam was a sting operation in the 80's.  It indicted a number of legislators in taking money from Arabs for political favors.  Murtha was only saved because the House ethics committee was controlled by Dems and basically gave Murtha a pass.  He was caught red-handed on FBI video tape...  That means he was guilty, but had enough political pull to keep from being prosecuted.

Both of these guys are formerly corrupt officials.  Now I will go along with "go and sin no more" in dealing with people.  But they should not go back to being legislators for our country.  Where is the outrage?  Where is the moral standing of the Dems where they support formerly corrupt officials. 

Washington is a very heady place.  There is power seeping out all over the place and we should not have formerly corrupt officials serving in positions of such high responsibility.

... and George Allen was disqualified by Virginia voters because he said the word "macaca"???????????
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bush Woes Have Just Begun

Posted by Mantic on Saturday, November 11, 2006 11:40:34 AM
After a few days of letting the dust settle on the 2006 elections, the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld and the appointment of Robert Gates, it is apparent that the White House is out to protect itself, GOP be damned.

Perhaps Bush 41 is running the show, or whoever ran the show for him is running the show.  The release of Rumsfeld after the election certainly cost some seats... and if it was done in August or September, might have had serious consequences as to who is running both houses of Congress.  If, indeed, lack of action on the war in Iraq was the key to the Dems winning, then Rumsfeld's earlier resignation would have led the country to realizing something was being done and a change might be in the offing.   But no.

Bush needed the deflection on the day after the election.  Instead of Thursday's papers going on and on about change of power in Congress, they had to cover the Rumsfeld resignation.  Bush put personal politics way, way ahead of national politics.

Who does he pick to replace Rumsfeld?  In a Harriett Meiers moment, he chose, yet again, an old crony.  Now, Robert Gates has a resume that supports his appointment, Meiers did not.  However, he was a member of Bush 41's team and even more important is part of the Scrowcroft-influenced realists.  These are they that stopped before they went to Bagdad in the first Gulf War, only to see hundreds of thousands of Shiites slaughtered by Saddam's intact armed forces.

Bush is now playing patty cake with the Democratic leadership.  They are smiling and making nice.  Our feckless president is happy with his ability to work with the new Dem leadership in a bipartisan way.  Are they?  Not for a moment.  For all of their words to his face, where are the apologies for the Bush hate speech each and every member of the Dem leadership invoked before and during the campaign?  They poise with political knives, much as Brutus and his fellow Senators did just before they assasinated Ceaser.

Bush's civility is destined to become tragedy as he bobs and weaves to deflect the wacko programs that will come across his desk.  He must remember that he still has veto power and neither chamber can muster votes to overcome a veto.  However, knowing Bush, he will sign many of these measures because it is the "civil" thing to do just as it was to never throw back a spending bill to the spendthrift Republican congress that was just thrown out on its ear.

Other than seeing through a tax reduction bill and hanging tough on the war on terror, Bush has been a terrible disappointment that will keep on disappointing for the next 15 months of his term.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

GOP: Losers?????

Posted by Mantic on Monday, November 06, 2006 4:13:24 PM
It's time for final comments on the 2006 elections held tomorrow.  That means the shelf life of this post will be a day and a half. 

Will the GOP lose?  I think the chances are really good that the Dems will take over the House.  I think it a little less likely that the Senate will fall into the enemy's hands.  By "enemy", I don't mean Dems, I mean the terrorists.  The Dem's platform for the war is capitulation, withdrawal, dialogue, concession, dialogue, concession, dialogue....  You get the picture.

Orson Scott Card, a science fiction writer, wrote a great article reprinted in RealClearPolitics originally printed in the Rhinoceros Times (Greensboro, NC).  He is Dem of the Lieberman mold.  Here is a quote of some significance from his piece:

If control of the House passes into Democratic hands, there are enough withdraw-on-a-timetable Democrats in positions of prominence that it will not only seem to be a victory for our enemies, it will be one.

Unfortunately, the opposite is not the case -- if the Republican Party remains in control of both houses of Congress there is no guarantee that the outcome of the present war will be favorable for us or anyone else.

But at least there will be a chance.

I say this as a Democrat, for whom the Republican domination of government threatens many values that I hold to be important to America's role as a light among nations.

But there are no values that matter to me that will not be gravely endangered if we lose this war. And since the Democratic Party seems hellbent on losing it -- and in the most damaging possible way -- I have no choice but to advocate that my party be kept from getting its hands on the reins of national power, until it proves itself once again to be capable of recognizing our core national interests instead of its own temporary partisan advantages.


You really should read the whole article.  It is a well-thought-out conscience piece.  The War on Terror is a reality that a lot of people relegate to the fictional world of TV.  Those who have served or know people who have served in Iraq know different.  Mr. Card does a marvelous job of pointing out the pitfalls in dealing with Islamofascism.

Our current war woes is only part of the reason NOT to vote Dem.  Conservative judges, extending the Bush Tax Cuts and immigration are another three important reasons.  However, why are the Republicans doing so poorly in these local elections?

One of my reasons is the fecklessness of Republican leadership in the House and Senate.  I suppose 12 years in power ruins the leadership... but did it have to?  Did Hastert have to defend earmarks?  Did Trent Lott, the former Senate Majority Leader, have to be show so blatantly his disregard for his fiduciary responsibility to the nation's taxpayers and his dogged determination to spend, spend, spend?

Where was the leadership and original thought in communicating to the American people how Congress can deal with the upcoming fiscal problems in the explosion of entitlement spending?  How difficult can it be to communicate to the nation the importance of the "Ownership Society" that Bush so casually jettisoned.  It was the most conservative of messages and was flushed down the agenda toilet because the Republican Congress as a whole wouldn't really support it.

All of this talk of Bush and his poll ratings where BOTH sides of the aisle in Congress consistently polled lower than our president.  Where does this lead?  It leads to a two-year period of legislative chaos.  Perhaps the presidential candidates can develop real strategies and committed platforms to give the nation's voters a real choice.  They sure can't rely on anything other than the war this time around.

It is my feeling that then nation's restiveness comes from their lack of confidence in Congress that is only reinforced by the war and not the other way around.  This has been the worst run election season since the incredibly inept Dole/Kemp campaign of ten years ago.  It matches the level of Congressional leadership we have had in that decade.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »