LC’s Commentary

Listen To The Voice of Reason

Enough already!

Enough already!

In his book titled The Age of Jackson, Arthur Schlesinger, JR. wrote about how American history has been marked by recurrent swings between conservatism and liberalism. Without a doubt, the period between the years 2000 and 2008 heavily favored those of the conservative persuasion. And, true to history, many social issues that needed to be addressed were ignored. Two long-lingering wars, a deep recession, high unemployment, uninsured Americans, a banking system in disarray, and a whole host of other issues that needed to be addressed were given little genuine attention

Although as history shows, the pendulum has always swung between conservatism and liberalism, the last swing to conservatism was something to behold.  The little people were all but forgotten-forgotten when it came to reaping some of the fruits of their labor. Conservative politicians and talking heads convinced many of their followers that this thing called trickle-down economics, fashioned and put into play by the Regan Administration was still applicable and adhering to this philosophy continued to be in their best interest. In its simplest definition, it says, let those at the top get most of the wealth of this nation and they will let it trickle down to the masses. Some are wondering when will the trickle-down phenomenon begin.

In 2008 Obama, a true liberal, was elected President of these United States. And, as has history clearly shows, he entered into office with the grim and unenviable task of solving the above mentioned problems as well as several new problems that surfaced on his watch. If history repeats itself, at some point, the public will feel the nation has swung too far to the left and once again, conservatism will again rule the day.

In their efforts to right the course of the ship, will the Obama Administration overcorrect and swing too far to the left?  Is America ready to be taken where the Obama Administration is trying to take it? Will his health plan crumble under its own weight? These and other lingering questions will be answered between 2013 and 2016.

The current budget impasse is a classic example of politicians letting things pile up. Some people think those in Washington charged with solving our budgetary problems are incapable of doing so. Others feel they may be capable, but are not willing to put aside their biases long enough to get anything done. Isn’t it amazing how easy it was for them to set aside their differences and put into place the mechanism to go to two wars, but will not use the same logic to craft a budget both sides can agree on?

Many of the issues the Obama Administration is dealing with have to do with the wealth of this nation. Although cloaked in something else, if one takes the time to remove the outer-garment, they will find the almighty dollar is driving the debate. A politician from Caroline had it right when he wrote the following way back in the 1800s. “Wealth, like suffrage, must be considerably distributed, to sustain a democratic republic; and hence, whatever draws a considerable proportion of either into a few hands, will destroy it. As power follows wealth, the majority must have wealth or lose power.”

Taylor saw two threats to the natural economic order. He states the following” there are two modes of invading private property; the first by which the poor plunder the rich….sudden and violent; the second, by which the rich plunder the poor, slow and legal.” He felt the poor could not become dangerous until the concentration of wealth greatly increased their number. The real peril he believed lay in the second mode; plunder from above; orderly and legalized. The secession of privileged orders through history-the priesthood, the nobility, now the banking system showed how every age has shown its own form of institutionalized robbery by a minority operating through the state.

Will the US Government ever be strong enough to wrest the power from those who have the real power in this nation. After-all, wealth equals power, and power equals control.  Have the majority  been conditioned to accept the fact that a few people with vast amounts of wealth control this nation and feel there is little that can be done to alter the situation? How does a Nation break up the mass concentration of wealth without wealth redistribution accusations obscuring and shrouding the issue?  How does one convince those controlling and owing most of the wealth of America that this situation could and probably will, eventually lead to the destruction of this thing called capitalism? This nation will eventually self-destruct if drastic action isn’t taken to insure more people share in its wealth. It is easy to see how the American way of life is being torn apart by companies and individuals seeking profit and wealth.  One of the simplest ways to get more wealth into the hands of the masses is to simply pay them a little more. After all, one can argue that without them, who would produce the wealth of this nation?

Something must change. There will be change. Will it be controlled change, or will it be forced uncontrolled change? Those elected to guide this nation must put aside their differences and make decisions based on the will of the people and/or for the good of America.

12/28/2012

December 29, 2012 Posted by | Economic Empowerment, Failed economic poicy, Greed, Soup kitchens, Trickle up economics, Uncategorized, wealth redistribution | Leave a comment

Guns and the Second Amendment to the US Constitution

The current debate over gun control has evoked all kinds of stupid responses. Of course, those on the Right quickly say the Second Amendment to the Constitution meaning is very clear when it comes to gun ownership. I have read this amendment several times and it is not set in concrete as they suggest. The 2nd Amendment talks about a well-regulated militia. This suggests something on the order of the National Guard. Back when this document was drawn up, those called to muster brought their own guns. There were few if any armories. Therefore, people were expected to have their own gun with no restrictions from the government. I repeat-no restrictions from the government.

Here is where the 2nd Amendment clashes with those who suggest it gives all Americans unfettered access to guns. If it indeed does this, how can those on the Right propose denying some people the right to own a gun? They say insane people should not have the right to own guns, and should not have 2nd Amendment protection.  The Right says criminals (felons) should not own guns. They say people of a certain age group (children) should not own guns. According to most people on the Right, the above-mentioned segment of society rights under the 2nd Amendment should be voided. Pray tell me, where in the 2nd amendment does it deny gun ownership to the above mentioned people?

When asked why they feel gun ownership is so important, those on the Right have one standard answer. They need the guns to protect their homes, families and self- but mostly for home protection. In its simplest term, they feel threatened. Let us use their logic. Is it possible for an insane person to feel threatened? The same applies to felons. They certainly can feel threatened. Gang members probably feel more threatened than most people. Should they be denied the right to have a gun for self-protection? Those little Angels, recently killed in Connecticut were certainly threatened. Since they were threatened, should they have had the right to own, possess and carry guns?

This nation is governed under rules of law. Many laws (restrictions) were put in place for the good of society. Certainly some people may feel some laws impose unnecessary restrictions on their personal behavior/actions. However, people are expected to give up a certain amount of individuality when they become part of the social order.

Those on the Right should stop hiding behind the 2nd Amendment to the US constitution. There is only so much room behind it. Do not allow this amendment to get in the way of common sense. Would your thinking be different if your child was one of the 20 recently buried children in Connecticut? Really think about it.

December 29, 2012 Posted by | Politics | 3 Comments