Is it time for a national primary day? The general election is always held the first Tuesday in November for all states, but in the primaries the states are free to choose their own date for the primary. New Hampshire's Constitution states that theirs will be the first in the nation, and they will move the date to make that happen. The question is why should New Hampshire be the first, or Iowa or South Carolina for that matter?
If your state is not one of the first 3 or 4 states to hold a primary, then the outcome of the presidential primaries are pretty much decided by the time the rest get to it. I do not believe it does justice to the rest of the country allowing a few states to determine the candidate for the national election. Using a few states as a pre-filter for the rest does not serve the interest of the nation.
Let's look at a national primary day. The first Tuesday in May would be a good choice, as it is 6 months from the General Election. All states on one day, so that all may have a say in who moves onto the General Election.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Thursday, June 21, 2007
The Spirit of Man and How to Destroy It
When the liberal left wants to condemn the Iraq theatre of the War on Terror, often they say "We have no business telling other countries what to do" or "Things were much better when Saddam was in charge." Then the leftists turn around here and push for heavy taxation to make smoking less convenient or ordinances that will remove old cars from people's property.
It seems contradictory, this idea of where they stand on "telling people what to do." They do not mind Iraq's former government running amuck. When an individual longs for the simple joy of a cigarrette, or wants to tinker on an old car for ten years as a hobby, they scream "There oughtta be a law!"
Look closer and you see the connection in the idea of collectivism. Collectivism is the principle of order at any price. The price often asked is individuality paid towards the bill titled "Collective Societal Good." Leftists do not mind the idea of a Saddam Hussein run government because it maintained a collective that promised order to the vast majority of the people. Never mind those paltry few that suffered horrifically. They like it so much they want to impose collectivism on those of us in the United States.
Collectivism comes not at the barrel of a gun, but as on little kitten paws. It oozes into our societal thinking here and there. Collectivism does not overawe us with power at the beginning, but begs for our sacrifice and calls us greedy should we decide we want to keep what we earned. Collectivism asks us why we cannot sacrifice some of our freedom if it results in a common good defined by some authority. The Declaration of Independence articulates that the pursuit of happiness is one of our most sacred individual natural rights. It means we seek our own happiness through living our life in a state of liberty. Collectivists gain power by convincing us that happiness is a sin and that the accomplishments we worked so hard to attain were at someone else's expense even though all acted according to their own free will (an idea which collectivists try to undermine.) Mediocrity becomes a virtue and achievement something to ridicule and destroy if possible.
It is no accident that the liberal left supports ideas such as the Mineral County Courthouse being rid of junk food altogether rather than simply offering more healthy choices. When we cede the right to even determine what should be put into our digestion when and how often, what right do we have to speak freely or select our government?
It seems contradictory, this idea of where they stand on "telling people what to do." They do not mind Iraq's former government running amuck. When an individual longs for the simple joy of a cigarrette, or wants to tinker on an old car for ten years as a hobby, they scream "There oughtta be a law!"
Look closer and you see the connection in the idea of collectivism. Collectivism is the principle of order at any price. The price often asked is individuality paid towards the bill titled "Collective Societal Good." Leftists do not mind the idea of a Saddam Hussein run government because it maintained a collective that promised order to the vast majority of the people. Never mind those paltry few that suffered horrifically. They like it so much they want to impose collectivism on those of us in the United States.
Collectivism comes not at the barrel of a gun, but as on little kitten paws. It oozes into our societal thinking here and there. Collectivism does not overawe us with power at the beginning, but begs for our sacrifice and calls us greedy should we decide we want to keep what we earned. Collectivism asks us why we cannot sacrifice some of our freedom if it results in a common good defined by some authority. The Declaration of Independence articulates that the pursuit of happiness is one of our most sacred individual natural rights. It means we seek our own happiness through living our life in a state of liberty. Collectivists gain power by convincing us that happiness is a sin and that the accomplishments we worked so hard to attain were at someone else's expense even though all acted according to their own free will (an idea which collectivists try to undermine.) Mediocrity becomes a virtue and achievement something to ridicule and destroy if possible.
It is no accident that the liberal left supports ideas such as the Mineral County Courthouse being rid of junk food altogether rather than simply offering more healthy choices. When we cede the right to even determine what should be put into our digestion when and how often, what right do we have to speak freely or select our government?
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Darfur, Civil Rights, and the Atlanta Braves
Recently Jesse Jackson harassed yet another mark, the Atlanta Braves. Apparently the baseball franchise happened to field a team with no blacks on it. Confronted with this horror, Jackson hauled out the old tired racial rhetoric.
Few really pay attention to Jackson anymore. Black sportscasters on ESPN slammed Jackson's position as ludicrous, asking the logical question of why the Braves would not seek to put the most competitive team possible on the field. On Pardon the Interruption, the point was raised that black children's interest in baseball has waned considerably over the years. Historically black colleges cannot even fill their rosters with black players. Jackson understands attention more than logic.
The civil rights movement for blacks has entered an era where it has nearly grown obsolete. The generation now exiting high school and entering college is less racially conscious than any in our history. Generally speaking they simply ignore color, meaning that the dream once articulated by Martin Luther King Jr. has nearly come into being.
Success means peril for any influential person of any race that gained influence by using racism and it has produced some ugly developments. Bill Cosby gets blasted for suggesting that young people get an education that can lead them into productive ways of living. Condoleeza Rice and Michael Steele have suffered from racial attacks and stereotypes launched from people in the NAACP among others because they dare to support President Bush and the Republican Party. Some Baltimoreans actually threw Oreo cookies at Steele, yet condemned Trent Lott for a kind word about Strom Thurmond. I wonder what they would think of Frederick Douglas's statement that "The Republican Party is the ship. All else is the sea."
The way for groups such as the NAACP to remain relevant is to first follow Bill Cosby's ideas. Encourage education, especially in the inner city. Hold up people like Rice as models instead of demons. Rice grew up in Alabama in the 50s and 60s and that speaks for itself. Second, the NAACP and others ought to pressure Congress and others to address slavery where it exists now, not where it has not existed for over a century and a half. Black Christians continue to suffer in places like Darfur. The Moslems controlling the north of the country of Sudan enslave and massacre them routinely and America has not involved itself directly. Black leaders in America can work with President Bush to find a way for our nation to help.
That is how the NAACP, a movement with a storied and successful tradition, can stay relevant in an increasingly color blind America. Confederate flags and the Atlanta Braves are picayune compared to the potential that can be tapped through encouragement of education. They are also very minor relative to real suffering and terror experienced in Darfur and elsewhere.
Few really pay attention to Jackson anymore. Black sportscasters on ESPN slammed Jackson's position as ludicrous, asking the logical question of why the Braves would not seek to put the most competitive team possible on the field. On Pardon the Interruption, the point was raised that black children's interest in baseball has waned considerably over the years. Historically black colleges cannot even fill their rosters with black players. Jackson understands attention more than logic.
The civil rights movement for blacks has entered an era where it has nearly grown obsolete. The generation now exiting high school and entering college is less racially conscious than any in our history. Generally speaking they simply ignore color, meaning that the dream once articulated by Martin Luther King Jr. has nearly come into being.
Success means peril for any influential person of any race that gained influence by using racism and it has produced some ugly developments. Bill Cosby gets blasted for suggesting that young people get an education that can lead them into productive ways of living. Condoleeza Rice and Michael Steele have suffered from racial attacks and stereotypes launched from people in the NAACP among others because they dare to support President Bush and the Republican Party. Some Baltimoreans actually threw Oreo cookies at Steele, yet condemned Trent Lott for a kind word about Strom Thurmond. I wonder what they would think of Frederick Douglas's statement that "The Republican Party is the ship. All else is the sea."
The way for groups such as the NAACP to remain relevant is to first follow Bill Cosby's ideas. Encourage education, especially in the inner city. Hold up people like Rice as models instead of demons. Rice grew up in Alabama in the 50s and 60s and that speaks for itself. Second, the NAACP and others ought to pressure Congress and others to address slavery where it exists now, not where it has not existed for over a century and a half. Black Christians continue to suffer in places like Darfur. The Moslems controlling the north of the country of Sudan enslave and massacre them routinely and America has not involved itself directly. Black leaders in America can work with President Bush to find a way for our nation to help.
That is how the NAACP, a movement with a storied and successful tradition, can stay relevant in an increasingly color blind America. Confederate flags and the Atlanta Braves are picayune compared to the potential that can be tapped through encouragement of education. They are also very minor relative to real suffering and terror experienced in Darfur and elsewhere.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
A Tale of Two Hampshires
When I glanced at the Hampshire Review today, two stories stood out. The first story alerted the region that yet another politician had violated public trust. The sum of $100,000 evaporated from county coffers. Funny business with public funds is nothing new unfortunately.
Next came the story covering Hampshire High School's graduation. It accompanied a photo of 2007 graduates just as they reached up to move their tassels, symbolically marking their ascension to the next level in their lives, whatever that may be.
These young men and women represent a large part of their county's future, but how much has the past affected them? Has the county educational system's corrupt misdeeds and outrages that colored their school years angered the graduates? Or did they learn that corruption is the way it has always been done and that no one can change it? Will they make their lives in the county? Will they give up on it and hope that another place has government for the people, not for dishonest politicians and paid for by the people?
Certainly Hampshire County has people and politicians that are mad as hell and do not want to take it anymore. They thirst for clean government and honest development. Are there enough of these good, honest people to overcome the corrupt and apathetic segments? These new graduates could make the difference one way or the other.
Will enough of them have the faith in themselves and their community to stand up and demand better from all of their government officials? If they do, a prosperous future for that community is certain.
Next came the story covering Hampshire High School's graduation. It accompanied a photo of 2007 graduates just as they reached up to move their tassels, symbolically marking their ascension to the next level in their lives, whatever that may be.
These young men and women represent a large part of their county's future, but how much has the past affected them? Has the county educational system's corrupt misdeeds and outrages that colored their school years angered the graduates? Or did they learn that corruption is the way it has always been done and that no one can change it? Will they make their lives in the county? Will they give up on it and hope that another place has government for the people, not for dishonest politicians and paid for by the people?
Certainly Hampshire County has people and politicians that are mad as hell and do not want to take it anymore. They thirst for clean government and honest development. Are there enough of these good, honest people to overcome the corrupt and apathetic segments? These new graduates could make the difference one way or the other.
Will enough of them have the faith in themselves and their community to stand up and demand better from all of their government officials? If they do, a prosperous future for that community is certain.
Monday, June 18, 2007
The Liberal Media Strikes (or at Least Tried to Strike) Again
For over a century the Charleston Gazette has stood at the fringes of respectable politics. This paper generally represents a left wing position somewhere to the wrong side of Vladimir Lenin and rarely sees a Republican it likes. Not for nothing did Governor Moore call it "The Morning Sick Call."
If the charges levied against it by the Department of Justice are correct, then this venerable bastion of loony lefties has found new lows. On May 7th, 2004 the Gazette purchased Charleston's afternoon Republican newspaper the Daily Mail. This in itself was not unique as morning papers had taken over afternoon publications around the country to help keep them afloat.
The Department of Justice, unfortunately for the Gazette, does not consider halting solicitations for new Daily Mail subscribers, allowing half of the reporters and staff to leave without replacing them, stopping all promotions and discounts, and cutting the newsroom budget to be helping the afternoon paper. A nineteen page report alleges that the Gazette tried to strangle the Daily Mail right out of existence. It only ceased these policies when the Justice Department launched its investigation.
Either the Charleston Gazette tried to suffocate one of the last printed conservative voices in West Virginia, or it sought to create a monopolistic stranglehold over the metropolitan region around Charleston. The second possibility must particularly delight the Gazette's enemies due to the enormous number of corporate greed sermons its editors launched over the years.
The internet means that even in the Potomac Highlands of West Virginia, we can read news about state government from those directly at the sources. When the Gazette choked off resources to the Daily Mail it reduced the conservative paper's ability to cover events. Those seeking daily news about state government had to turn to the paper with one of the most shrilly liberal biases in the nation. Already the 2004 purchase has been voided. Hopefully the courts will force the Gazette to pay damages to ensure a balance of coverage out of Charleston.
If the charges levied against it by the Department of Justice are correct, then this venerable bastion of loony lefties has found new lows. On May 7th, 2004 the Gazette purchased Charleston's afternoon Republican newspaper the Daily Mail. This in itself was not unique as morning papers had taken over afternoon publications around the country to help keep them afloat.
The Department of Justice, unfortunately for the Gazette, does not consider halting solicitations for new Daily Mail subscribers, allowing half of the reporters and staff to leave without replacing them, stopping all promotions and discounts, and cutting the newsroom budget to be helping the afternoon paper. A nineteen page report alleges that the Gazette tried to strangle the Daily Mail right out of existence. It only ceased these policies when the Justice Department launched its investigation.
Either the Charleston Gazette tried to suffocate one of the last printed conservative voices in West Virginia, or it sought to create a monopolistic stranglehold over the metropolitan region around Charleston. The second possibility must particularly delight the Gazette's enemies due to the enormous number of corporate greed sermons its editors launched over the years.
The internet means that even in the Potomac Highlands of West Virginia, we can read news about state government from those directly at the sources. When the Gazette choked off resources to the Daily Mail it reduced the conservative paper's ability to cover events. Those seeking daily news about state government had to turn to the paper with one of the most shrilly liberal biases in the nation. Already the 2004 purchase has been voided. Hopefully the courts will force the Gazette to pay damages to ensure a balance of coverage out of Charleston.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)