Left Right News - OpEd

Entitlement, Dependency, Control

2009-05-27T03:37:08Z

Responsibility isn’t something people are born with. It’s learned. It’s learned by prioritizing, making tradeoffs, weighing the benefits, costs, and risks of alternative course of action, and dealing with the consequences of one’s decisions.

When an overprotective parent spoils their child by shielding them from hard lessons, or gives the child whatever it wants so the child will love them more, they fail to instill in the child a sense of responsibility. Instead they encumber it a false sense of entitlement to whatever the child desires. Later, the child is faced with a rude awakening when thrust into a world where it has to compete with others who are accustomed to making hard choices and working for the things they desire.

Once a sense of entitlement is engrained in someone’s belief system, it’s difficult to overcome. Developing a sense of responsibility is counter to their conditioning, and they cannot easily grasp the notion that they are really not entitled to anything they haven’t earned. When something doesn’t come easily, instead of getting fired up with a sense of determination to work harder and make the necessary sacrifices to achieve their goal, they feel resentful that it isn’t provided for them. Whatever nominal effort they put into it seems like it ought to be enough. They feel a deep sense of personal injustice that they can’t have things that other people have, oblivious to the tradeoffs and sacrifices others have had to make to acquire those things.

In the real world, nobody is entitled to own a house. If you can’t afford a house, the responsible thing to do is to work and save and sacrifice until you can afford to buy one. By encouraging people to buy houses they really can’t afford, the government sets them up for failure later on when the house payments become a burden they cannot sustain. And when that time comes, the “homeowners” won’t consider that, until their mortgage is paid in full, the house isn’t actually theirs. Instead, they’ll feel entitled to the house in which they’re living, and deeply resentful of losing it.

A person who buys a house incurs a responsibility. If they’re shielded from the full impact of the responsibility they’re incurring, by making it easier than it would be (in a free market) for them to assume it, it gives them a false sense of security and makes the responsibility seem lighter than it is. That is not a wise thing to do. And the current economic crisis is a perfect illustration of that folly. Yet the government is going down the same path again, with the FHA taking on the role once played by AIG.

This is just one of many examples of the government fostering an entitlement mentality in its citizens. Perhaps, like the parent who spoils their child in an attempt to buy its love, politicians see this as a way to buy votes. But, like overprotective parents trying to make life easier for their precious dumplings, when government shields people from the onus of personal responsibility, it does not strengthen them; it weakens them. And it not only weakens the individual beneficiaries of the government’s largesse, it weakens the entire economy, and the underlying moral fiber of our nation.

For years, our government has been actively encouraging people to become less and less self-reliant. By the same token, it has been making us more and more dependent on government. The flip side of dependency is control. The more dependent one is on another, the more control the other has over them. Perhaps the underlying motivation is not so innocent as politicians trying to buy their constituents’ love. Perhaps it’s far more insidious.

The current crisis in our nation is not just an economic crisis. It has far broader implications. The only way out of this crisis is to bring about a fundamental change. -- Not the kind of change that accelerates the crisis, leading to ever more weakness, dependency, and state control, but a return to the once deeply-held values that made this country great: personal responsibility, individual sovereignty, and economic freedom.

THE CHENEY DOCTRINE

2009-05-21T20:07:37Z

I'm sick of torture. And the fact that we're one of the countries way up there on the J.D. Powers annual "torture reliability" list makes me unwell as well. As does talking AROUND torture. What this country needs is an up front national referendum on whether we should or shouldn't be torturing people. Oh wait. That's right, we did have one. Last November 4^th.

These aren't your normal ordinary everyday forms of torture we're talking about either: like 12th in line at a understaffed Starbucks or shuffling through life a Golden State Warriors fan or being forced to watch NBC's prime time lineup against your will, I'm referring to real, state sponsored, "talk or we do something crazy" Jack Bauer on steroids kind of stuff.

The big difference being, Keifer Sutherland's rascally television torturer gets most of his best results simply by raising his voice. "Are you going to talk?" "Never." Compelling him to move in real close and yell in the dastardly scoundrel's face: "ARE YOU GOING TO TALK NOW?" "Okay. Okay. I'll talk. Just lower your voice. The kids are trying to sleep."

Now we got Nancy Pelosi and the CIA exchanging torture lying charges. Don't you hate it when lovers' spats go public? The Republicans are gleefully sliding into the House Speaker cleats up because she has little of the President's Teflon coating. To many Americans she's that great aunt who smiles too much at Thanksgiving and always uses your full name when scolding you for poor quality table manners. "William, only cows chew with their mouths open."

Even Dick Cheney has gotten into the act with a recent talk show offensive defending his administration's torture policies. And as far as everybody in the nation who sees his face being mightily offended, he's been successful. This is not a partisan thing. A National Journal poll of Republican insiders shows 57% of them think he's hurting the party. So pretty much everybody agrees, Dick Cheney speaking on torture is redundant.

He called the enhanced interrogation techniques used at Gitmo regrettable but necessary. And you got to love that phrase: "enhanced interrogation techniques." Sounds like instructions on how to turn on the fluorescents at a job interview. He's not being tortured, he's being solicited to provide easy answers to exceptionally difficult questions. In bad lighting. And those car battery cables attached to his nipples are "nervous system awareness amplifiers."

What I don't get is how anybody can defend waterboarding a single prisoner 183 times. Operationally, wouldn't you think the effectiveness would start to wear off after about 60 or 70? What genius kept pushing, "I know we've gotten nothing the first couple hundred times here, but I got a hunch, this next time- we're gold." Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 183 times, shame on me. As my daddy always said: 183^rd time's the charm.

The best way Dick Cheney could help this country is to creep back to that undisclosed location of his, and maybe take Joe Biden with him. Still haven't figured out why Cheney is so obsessed with selling the positive merits of torture. Though there is that old axiom about one man's torture being another man's S&M turn- on, so maybe that explains more about the Cheney Doctrine than we really need to know. TMI. You want torture? Dick Cheney in fishnets. Try to pry that image out of your mind.

Congress’s Torture Bubble

2009-05-13T23:48:03Z

JUST four members of Congress were notified in 2002 when the Central Intelligence Agency's "enhanced interrogation techniques" program was first approved and carried out, according to documents released

DEMS' NEW 'CULTURE OF CORRUPTION'

2009-05-06T23:45:29Z

Democrats took back Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008 in no small part because of their ability to bang their spoons on their high chairs about what they called the Republican "culture of corruption.

Elizabeth Edwards: A Complicated Question

2009-05-06T23:38:35Z

Looking across the booth at her grinning, boyish husband, she told me that it was irritating to be married to someone so comely who looked so much younger.

Pelosi confronts justice

2009-05-04T23:05:39Z

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is working to buffer lawmakers from federal investigators. This is a bad idea. Special legal protections for politicians encourage unethical conduct.

Freedom is Not a Pendulum

2009-05-04T05:51:10Z

The periodic swings from one party to the other in control of our government often give rise to the analogy of a pendulum. A pendulum swings from one side to the other, always passing through the equilibrium position at its center. This flawed analogy leads to the illusion that our country’s political swings from left to right also pass through a stable center that is fixed and permanent.

History belies that illusion. Throughout the history of civilization, there has never been a government that did not eventually come to an end, either through defeat in war or corrosion from within. The Roman Republic lasted 500 years before it gave way to the Roman Empire, and that too collapsed after a few hundred more years. Ancient history? Yes, indeed. But the rate of social, political, industrial, technological, and cultural changes on the global scale have accelerated, not decelerated, from ancient to modern times. Change happens much more rapidly than it used to.

We think of our government, and our nation, as permanent and impervious to destruction from without or within. That is a comfortable, but naive and historically insupportable, perspective. This country has only existed for a couple of hundred years. It will not exist forever. It too, like all other governments and nations, will someday decline or be overthrown by an enemy. Most of us cannot conceive of the demise of our country and the way of life we’ve taken for granted from birth, so we don’t believe such a thing could happen, — at least not in our lifetimes. But nobody ever realizes they’re living in a historically significant period until it reaches the tipping point and cataclysmic change is suddenly thrust upon them.

In spite of the dire, and oft-repeated, warnings of our founding fathers, the size and scope of our government has continually increased from the founding of our nation until now. For the first hundred and fifty years, the expansion was slow and gradual, with each incremental transfer of power to centralized authority a result of prolonged deliberation and strenuous debate. In the last half century, government expansion has accelerated dramatically, and continues to accelerate at an unprecedented rate. The president and Congress now sign bills into law without even bothering to read them!

Along with the increasing momentum of government expansion, we’ve also seen a pronounced trend toward more and more socialist programs and policies. By that, I mean state control of production and distribution, and increasing regulation of industry and of individual rights. The “pendulum” may still swing to one side or the other, but the center point is moving, and it’s moving ever more rapidly. We are straying further and further from the principles on which our founding fathers established this nation. When government takes power away from the people to determine what’s in their best interests, that power does not swing back to the people, like a pendulum. The balance of power is permanently shifted from the people to the government, making it easier for government to usurp even more power in the future.

History informs us that the decline and fall of our nation will eventually come to pass. But history doesn’t tell us when or how. We are on a trajectory toward the termination of the greatest and most successful experiment in freedom the world has ever known. We could stand back and idly watch it slip away and, afterward, wonder where it went. Or we could wake up and start waking up our friends and neighbors, and impress upon them what is at stake.

In his farewell address on March 4, 1837, Andrew Jackson said:

But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing. It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government.

We, the people, may have it within our power to stave off the inevitable expiration of our nation by exchanging complacency for vigilance, and apathy for involvement. How long we can maintain it is unknown. But it rests with us to at least pass it on to the next generation. What happens after that is up to them.

I Hate Earth Day

2009-04-26T05:20:42Z

I hate Earth Day. I'm serious. It makes my head hurt. Pours buckets full of tiredness into my soul. 40 years of watching it slowly transform from a vibrant subversive movement to an ineffectual Hallmark holiday has sucked all the energy out of me. We're approaching President's Day here in terms of vapid commercialization. This little hippie girl got tarted up like a hooker on shore leave payday with parades and coupons and big box stores stocking aisles to bridge the holiday purchasing gap between yellow Marshmallow Peeps and red white and blue Sparklers. "Earth Day Candy. 100% Organic Sugar. It's green!"

I'm worn out by people so busy proving they're planet friendly, they end up spraining their own arms patting themselves on the backs for barely remembering to throw an empty beer bottle at a blue bin. And missing. For flaunting their extreme green commitment with a personalized embroidered hemp shopping bag swinging provocatively to the front door of the Park and Rob from the back hatch of an SUV.

I'm sick of the politicians. All of them. The supposedly sympathetic ones, staging their sanctimoniously phony photo- ops in front of CGI forest glens, while their staff is under strict orders to do everything in their power to stall environmental reform to the point of arguing about punctuation. And the unsympathetic ones simply wear me out, expressing their smirking faux concern over the larger problem of cow flatulence.

I'm way weary of the corporations weaseling their way into our wallets with nonsense as transparent as the curtains at Grey Gardens. "Earth Day, brought to you by Dow Chemical. Without whom this event would neither be possible, nor necessary. Co- sponsored by Mobil- Exxon, Spanning the globe to find new ways to teach fish to breathe oil."

And you know who just drains me? Those big hotels shoving their laminated cardboard placards into our faces from the top of the bathroom sink with the sole design of instilling guilt. "We here at Acme Rest want to see the burrowing barn owl smile. So don't make us wash your sheets. Oh sure, you can have new towels if you want. You'll kill Bambi's mom. Its up to you." Hey, I just want new towels from the previous guy. Is that going to be a problem?

The naysayers? These people are exhausting. You'd think that since Obama had rescued the fair damsel Science from 8 long years of Executive dungeon darkness, that people would at least say nice things about her hair. You'd be wrong. "We don't know what's causing the greenhouse effect. You're costing jobs." As opposed to costing lives. Then the idiots keep lighting matches to see how high the pool of gasoline has risen. Hey! Your shoes are wet. What else you need to know?

Al Gore puts me to sleep and Prius drivers make me want to plotz. Not the Prius. The drivers. The EPA? I get drowsy just thinking about them. With their impenetrable lack of bark and bite and teeth and the same goes for the media who can't even get worked up for one freaking day a year and yeah, that also means me. As I said, I hate Earth Day. But you know what? It sure as hell beats the alternative.

Those torture memos

2009-04-26T04:57:43Z

There is something precious and virginal about the torture debate in the United States. As if that nation never knew torture before the shock of 9/11, and had to play catch-up, stumbling understandably as united statesit felt its way.

Stem Cell Compromise

2009-04-23T19:49:09Z

The Obama administration took the easy political path on embryonic stem cells last week by proposing to pay for research only on stem cell lines created from surplus embryos at fertility clinics but not on lines created in the laboratory to study particular diseases.

Obama's Rippling Pecs

2009-04-23T19:47:01Z

Just as I didn't want to hear the explicit details about Bill Clinton's private parts when Juanita Broderick accused him of rape back in the 90's, neither do I want to see the current President of the United States featured on the front page of a magazine with his chest bared.

Color me a prude for caring more about the image of the United States than Obama's rippling pecs. Personally, I don't think they ripple that much but hey, the media says they do, so they must. Color me old fashioned for believing modesty is not an outdated virtue. And color me disgusted that the president of the greatest country on earth allows his half naked image to be displayed and included in the new culture of celebrity.

Yes, sales of the magazine will go through the roof. And yes, the younger set will consider Obama the essence of cool. And the feminists? They're having a collective orgasm as we speak.

To feminists, Obama is the quintessential metrosexual. For all you other prudes out there, a metrosexual is a feminist invention designed to redefine a 'real man'. Guys like John Wayne and Clint Eastwood are out - they exemplified the now outdated version of strong men who used brute force instead of relying on dialogue and charm.

The new revised version of manhood is more politically correct. Body hair is out and testosterone is best kept under wraps. Strong silent types are passe. The new male is sensitive and knows how to cry. The new male is more gentle, more feminized, less threatening, less male. More, well, Obama.

In the face of overwhelming acceptance of the new-improved 'man' I feel kinda silly. My idea of a real man is more along the lines of Clint Eastwood or Sean Connery. You know, the type of guy that wears the pants as opposed to the dude who uses hair spray and nail polish.

As I gaze on Obama's bare and rippling chest, I don't see a real man. I see the nerd that gets sand kicked on him by more powerful members of the species. I see a narcissist who values his exterior over his interior. But like I said, that's just me. And my kind of thinking is way out of tune these days.

As my feminist mother will tell you, my problem is I can't alter my basic nature in order to be in tune with the times. My nature insists there is a basic difference between men and women. Men are stronger. They are the protectors of women and children, whether or not those women and children think they need protecting. Women are the nurturers, taking care of their men and their children. You know, the role they've played since the dawn of man.

When I see Obama cavorting around in his swim suit, I don't feel, well, secure. I keep thinking of all those nasty terrorists that want to annihilate us. I know its silly, but I just can't envision Obama as a warrior, a protector, a 'real man'. I also can't keep from wondering why everyone sees him as handsome and sexy and virile. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Our president has been called the world's greatest celebrity. That may be true. My question is, what happens when the celebrity fades, as it always does. Who will be left to deal with the threats our country faces, both at home and abroad? If I had to bet my last dollar, (and its almost come to that) I'd bet on murdering jihadists over a cool guy with rippling pecs any day. But that's just me.

Obama's gun lies

2009-04-23T19:29:27Z

While on a visit to Mexico, the president continued his Blame America First tour. "This war is being waged with guns purchased not here but in the United States," he said, referring to the drug wars that are tearing apart our neighbor to the south

Blame America First

2009-04-20T19:27:47Z

President Obama traveled to Latin America last week and used his world stage, once again, to assure foreign leaders that America is but one culture among many and to apologize for America's greatness.

Expounding on his campaign promise to promote equality, Obama assured America's foes that the United States is no better than any third world country. "I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership," Obama said to Venezuela dictator Chavez. "There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations." He then proceeded to, once again, apologize for America's arrogance.

Obama's much vaunted tolerance was proudly on display as he politely endured a 50 minute anti-US diatribe from Nicaragua dictator Daniel Ortega. He then graciously, and publicly accepted a book from his new buddy, Venezuela dictator Chavez. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent, a virulently anti-American book, instantly skyrocketed to #6 on Amazon.

The left is rejoicing at the apparent instant friendship between President Obama and thug Chavez, celebrating the vindication of their long-held belief that dialogue is better than war and that apologizing for America is a cool way to win friends and influence people.

Mea culpa is now official U.S. policy. In Mexico earlier last week, Obama took the occasion to blame America for all the gun violence in Mexico. Despite the fact that the report he was echoing has been thoroughly discredited, Obama stoically echoed the 'fake but accurate', theme made popular by the likes of (discredited) Dan Rather, (discredited Nobel prize winning author) Rigoberta Menchu, (discredited sex researcher) Kinsey..., well, you get the idea.

President Obama promised he would reach out to the rest of the world. One of his main campaign pledges was a vow to make everyone like us. Never mind that that kind of thinking is usually seen only among school kids. Obama wants us to be popular. And now we are. Just as long as we're humble and continue kowtowing to despots.

The problem is, our new best friends are not very savory characters. From Castro to Kim Jong Il to Achmadenijad to Chavez, these guys are the school yard bullies. They routinely kill their own citizens, they impose law by fiat, they jail or kill any dissidents and generally impose their will on all citizens unfortunate enough to reside in their countries. But hey, it works for them.

Liberals, oops, progressives, hold the belief that dialogue, not guns, will cause third world dictators to realize and then remedy the error of their ways. Totally absent from their equation is any recognition of past history. Namely, the last 20 or so years that produced lots of words and dialogue yet spectacularly failed to influence or change any actions or policies.

Believing that his charm can trump reality, President Obama remains intent on changing the world. But first, America has to be brought down to size. We must acknowledge yet again the sins of our past and, like celebrities who hit bottom, apologize profusely and publicly and then enter rehab to assure the world we are, indeed, sorry.

Obama is a great communicator who convincingly tells the world what they've yearned to hear. Namely, that America is arrogant. And we're sorry. And by the way, our system of, gasp, capitalism, despite being the engine that has fed the world, is flawed. And we're sorry.

Our culture is responsible for all the world's ills, and we're sorry about that too. Mea culpa, mea culpa. On the bright side, now that the Obama administration has branded most conservatives as extremists and terrorists, maybe Obama will apologize to them too. Ya think?

America's new president is well suited to displaying America's humility. That's because he really believes what he is saying. One need only look at his 20 year attendance at a church that preached hatred of America. One need only look at his (now former) associates, domestic terrorists Bill Dorn and wife. One need only listen to Michelle Obama's own words on her 'pride' in America. One need only read Obama's own book. America is to blame for everything wrong in the world. Case closed. Let's move on. Oh, and we're sorry.

When I asked my beautiful and smart, yet decidedly liberal niece, Sarah, why she voted for Obama, she thought a moment and then said, "He believes in the same things I do." When asked to expound, she said, "Equality."

68 million Americans voted for Obama based on the same lofty ideal. Equality, inclusion, tolerance, multiculturalism and the 'fake but accurate' belief that America is a racist, arrogant and imperial nation that needs to atone to the world for its sin of freedom and greatness.

The left, as exemplified by Obama, firmly believe all of life is a zero-sum game i.e.: if someone is rich, its always at the expense of the poor. A person, business or country is only successful because they hijacked success from those less fortunate. They view America as a nation of victims, oppressed by those that have the audacity to become successful and/or rich (without government help).

The 62 million Americans who didn't vote for Obama think differently. They believe, based on history, that kowtowing to dictators is interpreted as a sign of weakness. They believe, based on reality, that all the carrots in the world will not change the minds of enemies dedicated to America's downfall. They know from experience that accepting or rewarding bad behavior only encourages more bad behavior. They know, and Reagan proved, that America's strength, real and perceived, is the single largest factor in avoiding war with recalcitrant dictators.

Equality is a wonderful concept. But, as Laurence Reed of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) says, "Citizens of free countries are not equal. And countries where citizens are equal, are not free." That is a reality that no amount of rhetoric or mea culpas can change. Sorry.

Arrgh Diplomacy

2009-04-20T14:33:57Z

It's bad enough Obama has to juggle two wars while scrubbing the floor of the White House trying to clean up the domestic mess left by the previous tenant, but as soon as he looks out the door, what does he see... pirates. That's right. Pirates. And no, I'm not talking left handed relievers from Pittsburgh or a limo full of Bernie Madoff wannabes or some Hong Kong cartel peddling bootleg copies of The Watchmen sequel. Actual bilge sucking pirates. With guns and boats and rum and Davy Jones's Locker and everything. Wouldn't be surprised to find out they're brandishing scabbards and cutlasses in possession of a motley selection of wooden prosthetics as well. Shiver me timbers.

You all know the story. A US ship, the Maersk Alabama, on its way from Djibouti to Mombassa, filled with relief supplies, is attacked by two boatloads of scallywags. That's right. These guys tried to hijack a boat full of relief supplies. They're not just pirates, they're BAD pirates. The US Navy surrounds them, and they try calling other pirates for help, but of course no one comes, because, me hearties, THEY'RE PIRATES. And then they got out- sea dogged by a group of landlubbing Navy Seals. And there was a happy ending. Especially for the rescued captain. Less so for the pirates. They were ship out of luck.

These sea bandits have terrorized the waters around the Horn of Africa since the beginning of Somalia's civil war back in the 90s, boarding ships and holding them for ransom. Last year, it is estimated they were able to leverage over 100 million dollars in ransom, which ain't bad booty. A lot of doubloons. Pieces of eight o'plenty. Abdullah Lami, a pirate currently holding a Greek ship hostage, vowed revenge. "We will retaliate for the killings of our men." Dude. Avast. You are a pirate. This is not new news. Retaliation is in ye job description. As is pillaging and keelhauling and walking the plank. Thems that dies is the lucky ones.

Hillary Clinton threatened to hang em all from the yardarm, but a pirate doesn't fear tough talk, only a bigger badder pirate. Now Obama may look good with his shirt off, the question is, how does he look in a ruffled shirt? And hoop earrings? I think he should stop shaving and convince his staff to refer to him as Blackbeard. Even if the whiskers come in gray, it still works on a couple of levels. Then we buy Secretary of State a bird to perch on her shoulder. And encourage Joe Biden to appear in public wearing an eye patch. That could even be the real reason behind this week's Executive Caribbean visit. We're going to Pirate School. "Buckle your swash in six easy lessons." Where are our buccaneers? Under our bucking hat.

This was the first time a president was forced to act against piracy on the high seas since Jefferson sent the Marines to the shores of Tripoli. Hence the song. The halls of Montezuma had something to do with tequila, I think.. Or an epidemic of bad burritos. 21st century pirates. What's next: scurvy? Who knew that piracy was a legitimate career track? Besides banking CEOs I mean. Can't wait for the Vikings and Visigoths to make a comeback. Oh that's right, they have, only now they call themselves Teabaggers. Talk about arrgh.

George McGovern urges pullout from Iraq this year

2009-04-20T13:41:26Z

The former U.S. senator admires Obama but is puzzled by his adoption of the Bush administration's policy of dragging out the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.