Sorta libertarian, sorta conservative, never poltically correct either way, dedicated to sarcasm and a refusal to grow up. That would be me.
![[Powered by Blogger]](http://buttons.blogger.com/bloggerbutton1.gif){kind=small}
Friday, January 23, 2004
Bush Isn't Perfect...but he's the only real option.
The “Patriot Act” needs to go away. As Grover Norquist once said, if it wasn’t a bad law no one would have felt the need to name it that.
The TSA’s version of airport security is expensive, ineffective, and nasty. It does nothing to enhance real security. What it does is allows fascist techniques to be tested on American citizens. This was inevitable when the first head of the organization was named. It wasn’t someone from the FBI, CIA, or Secret Service. It was John McGaw, the head of Clinton’s ATF. The boss of the most out of control agency during the most out of control administration of recent years.
American citizens and legal residents have a right to the full protection of the Bill of Rights while on American soil. Period. There is no wartime or “time of emergency” exemption in that document.
The Drug War needs to end. Drugs need to be gradually legalized, starting with marijuana. “Forfeiture” proceedings should not even begin until after conviction for a felony. If even then.
Even with all that, George W. Bush needs to be re-elected. There are two basic reasons.
First of all, he’s done more good than bad. This is especially true regarding his dealings with the world as a whole. He dealt with the Taliban when they sided with Osama bin Laden, making themselves accesories after the fact to mass murder. He refused to allow bin Laden to bait him into condemning the Saudis for the actions of some of their dissidents. He had the gumption to deal with Saddam Hussein when he refused to abide by the conditions of what amounted to his probation. He refuses to make America part of the “International Criminal Court”, which not only endangers American servicemen abroad but potentially infringes upon American sovereignty.
He’s shown resolve, and prudence as well. He’s taken great pains to make sure Iraq redevelops properly, even when the media depicts it as a quagmire. He’s recognized that moderate and even conservative Muslims can be our allies against the fundamentalists, as long as we don’t try to make it a religious war. He’s taken an even-handed approach to Israel, refusing to either compromise our commitment to the security of that nation or pander to its extremist expansionists. He’s taken a proactive approach to the world’s problems without compromising our perogatives to select who we help and how we help them.
At home, he’s done a good job. Not great, but good. He’s refused to let the government scapegoat Muslims in general for the current terrorist threat, as some demagogues would love to do. He’s refused to allow the government to “stimulate” the economy with anything but tax cuts. He’s opened the door to involving some of the most effective charities in our nation, those based on religion, in fixing our social problems. He’s done this without compromising on the separation of church and state, as tax money cannot be used to prosletyze and programs will be judged solely on impact. He’s provided solid leadership and appointed solid people to run his programs, without micromanaging.
The second and most telling reason is the nature of his opposition. The Libertarian Party will not be viable until it learns to take a gradualist approach at home and quits being isolationist abroad. That leaves solely the parties of the fringes, and of course the Democrats.
From an individualist standpoint, the GOP has its problems. Yet it remains redeemable. There’s still some basic respect for the economic and civil rights of the individual. That’s not the case with the Democratic Party. It no longer recognizes the concept of the individual. It has become a nationalized version of Tammany Hall or the Daley machine. It is all about enlisting groups of voters to support its cause, gaining power for itself and distributing unearned perks to the favored groups. In support of this agenda, it encourages collectivist thought and group-think, instead of individualism. It has no value whatsoever to someone who wants to be left alone by government.
As bad as the Democrats are, their current crop of Presidential candidates is worse. Indeed, any party in which Dennis Kucinich can maintain a primary campaign has gone over the deep end. Kucinich likely has the worst administrative record of any unindicted politician in America. The fact that he has not been laughed out of the campaign yet speaks volumes about the party.
There really aren’t any logical alternatives to President Bush in 2004.
The “Patriot Act” needs to go away. As Grover Norquist once said, if it wasn’t a bad law no one would have felt the need to name it that.
The TSA’s version of airport security is expensive, ineffective, and nasty. It does nothing to enhance real security. What it does is allows fascist techniques to be tested on American citizens. This was inevitable when the first head of the organization was named. It wasn’t someone from the FBI, CIA, or Secret Service. It was John McGaw, the head of Clinton’s ATF. The boss of the most out of control agency during the most out of control administration of recent years.
American citizens and legal residents have a right to the full protection of the Bill of Rights while on American soil. Period. There is no wartime or “time of emergency” exemption in that document.
The Drug War needs to end. Drugs need to be gradually legalized, starting with marijuana. “Forfeiture” proceedings should not even begin until after conviction for a felony. If even then.
Even with all that, George W. Bush needs to be re-elected. There are two basic reasons.
First of all, he’s done more good than bad. This is especially true regarding his dealings with the world as a whole. He dealt with the Taliban when they sided with Osama bin Laden, making themselves accesories after the fact to mass murder. He refused to allow bin Laden to bait him into condemning the Saudis for the actions of some of their dissidents. He had the gumption to deal with Saddam Hussein when he refused to abide by the conditions of what amounted to his probation. He refuses to make America part of the “International Criminal Court”, which not only endangers American servicemen abroad but potentially infringes upon American sovereignty.
He’s shown resolve, and prudence as well. He’s taken great pains to make sure Iraq redevelops properly, even when the media depicts it as a quagmire. He’s recognized that moderate and even conservative Muslims can be our allies against the fundamentalists, as long as we don’t try to make it a religious war. He’s taken an even-handed approach to Israel, refusing to either compromise our commitment to the security of that nation or pander to its extremist expansionists. He’s taken a proactive approach to the world’s problems without compromising our perogatives to select who we help and how we help them.
At home, he’s done a good job. Not great, but good. He’s refused to let the government scapegoat Muslims in general for the current terrorist threat, as some demagogues would love to do. He’s refused to allow the government to “stimulate” the economy with anything but tax cuts. He’s opened the door to involving some of the most effective charities in our nation, those based on religion, in fixing our social problems. He’s done this without compromising on the separation of church and state, as tax money cannot be used to prosletyze and programs will be judged solely on impact. He’s provided solid leadership and appointed solid people to run his programs, without micromanaging.
The second and most telling reason is the nature of his opposition. The Libertarian Party will not be viable until it learns to take a gradualist approach at home and quits being isolationist abroad. That leaves solely the parties of the fringes, and of course the Democrats.
From an individualist standpoint, the GOP has its problems. Yet it remains redeemable. There’s still some basic respect for the economic and civil rights of the individual. That’s not the case with the Democratic Party. It no longer recognizes the concept of the individual. It has become a nationalized version of Tammany Hall or the Daley machine. It is all about enlisting groups of voters to support its cause, gaining power for itself and distributing unearned perks to the favored groups. In support of this agenda, it encourages collectivist thought and group-think, instead of individualism. It has no value whatsoever to someone who wants to be left alone by government.
As bad as the Democrats are, their current crop of Presidential candidates is worse. Indeed, any party in which Dennis Kucinich can maintain a primary campaign has gone over the deep end. Kucinich likely has the worst administrative record of any unindicted politician in America. The fact that he has not been laughed out of the campaign yet speaks volumes about the party.
There really aren’t any logical alternatives to President Bush in 2004.