my weblog

Sunday, October 26, 2008

For President...

The long-awaited and highly-sought (yeah, right!) Kellie endorsement...

None Of The Above.

Actually I will be casting a ballot, for someone. At this late date I truly have not decided for whom. I have considerable respect for John McCain the man. But his candidacy has been lackluster and under-whelming; there is little compelling reason to vote for him. And his party- especially in Washington- is firmly in need of rebuke. Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr is a possibility; I have considerable affinity for many small "l" libertarian ideas, he is arguably the most mainstream candidate the LP has ever nominated, and it would serve- albeit small- notice that there are voters for whom the principles of limited government still resonate. Being from Massachusetts, my vote will not matter, as Barack Obama will easily carry my state and it's 12 Electoral College votes. And barring anything unforeseen at this late juncture, it appears he will win the election and become our next President. Obviously I will wish him, and our nation, the best. I will not be voting for him.

As I mentioned in a prior posting, unlike some I'm not especially concerned about the prospects an Obama Administration will have for the US in terms of foreign policy, the battle against terrorism, national security, and the like. I don't believe he has any interest in leaving our nation open to attack, nor surrendering our national sovereignty, allowing Belgium to dictate our military policies, etc... I am very concerned about what an Obama Administration, coupled with liberal Democratic Congressional leadership, might seek to do domestically. Make no mistake- despite his moderate-sounding rhetoric and mild manner, Senator Obama's record is that of a far Left Democrat; in his- brief- Senate tenure his voting record has been adjudged within the ten most left wing, in '07 the most left. This is no moderate, centrist Democrat. And, due to seniority, many of the Democratic Congressional leadership are old guard liberals, the somewhat more moderate Dems elected this decade lacking in seniority to assume many positions of leadership, committee chairs, etc... The agenda will be set by the left wing of the Democratic Party in Washington, set by people beholden to and in tune with that segment of the electorate. It has the potential to radically alter the manner in which our country has been governed for close to 30 years. There are some who, due to disenchantment with the excesses and the inconsistencies and, at times, the incompetence, of this decade's GOP Congresses and Bush Administration, believe that the governing philosophy of the last 30 or so years, a less-heavy handed, less-regulated, less government-intensive philosophy, has been repudiated and deserves to be replaced. They forget that we have seen tremendous, tremendous economic growth, growth with historically shorter and less-intense recessionary periods, low-inflation, low interest-rates, a nimble, innovative, technologically-advanced, less-protectionist/freer trade economy. Tax rates- on everyone- are far lower. We no longer face an existential threat in the former Soviet Union, or from any nation. Traditional "have-nots" face far less odds today- consider that a black American named Barack Hussein Obama is the nominee of a major party (and likely next President.) Consider that a woman was the runner-up for one party's nomination, and a Vice Presidential nominee of another's. Consider that an ostensibly conservative Supreme Court ruled a Texas anti-sodomy statute as unconstitutional, that many gay Americans have marriage rights, civil-union rights, and increased protections under law. All of these, and many, many more, accomplished during the allegedly reactionary Age of Reagan of the last 30 years. Is there any reasonable person who would prefer the society of the mid-to-late 70's to that of today? While an Obama Administration and a liberal Democratic Congress may do more to further expand individual liberties, rights (and hopefully responsibilities- liberals sometimes tend to forget the responsibilities part, instead leaving those to government, not individuals) and I will support them if/when they do, one hopes that they will not come at the expense of reigning in the liberties and rights (those include economic ones BTW, keeping the fruits of one's labors, as well as more traditional cultural expressions and values) of others; one hopes that they will not throw out the baby with the bathwater, that their change will not simply be change for change's sake.

One last thought. I cannot ever recall an election when so much of the establishment media was so firmly in the tank of one candidate as they have been this time out for Obama. This piece states it clearly. The water they have carried for this guy, going back to the Democratic primaries, the lack of any objective coverage, any interest in any item that might reflect negatively upon The One, has been outrageous. At least in '92 they reported, however reluctantly, on the Bill Clinton/Gennifer Flowers story. Not this time; instead they even went to the length of investigating and reporting on the background of a private citizen (erstwhile "Joe the Plumber") who had the audacity to question The One when The One approached him, on his property, to solicit his vote. Disgraceful. Seldom will be heard (or even tolerated) any dissenting word when it comes to Obama. And I can't fault Obama for it- no candidate is going to turn down good press. But the utter lack of any objectivity, any balance, from so much of the lamestream media has been disgraceful.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Politics, activists, and the T "community"...

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."- Lord Acton.

First, this will not be a blog on the upcoming Presidential election (I'll probably make on last blogging specifically on that and then- mercifully!- be done with it.) Rather, it will more broadly cover thoughts, views, and impressions of the politics and advocating of- too- many w/in the T "community" (many of the same thoughts could apply to the LGB- or is it GLB?- community. I can never keep the initials straight! All I know is that the T always comes last. Think about that.) Those self-anointed, self-appointed "leaders" who seek to speak for "the community." (I don't recall receiving my ballot to elect them- maybe ACORN stole it!) A few caveats- while my politics do lean Right, I have no problems with individuals who, on thoughtful consideration of issues and on how various proposals, policies, etc... on the broad range of issues would be best for them and for our nation, they weigh all of that and may favor the Left, I can respect that. I may not agree, but I can respect it. That certainly goes for T individuals as well. I have less respect for those who engage in group-think, stereotyping, and one-dimensional (or one-issue) thought processes. Over the past few years I've read many blogs, many articles, many items, I've seen and heard much rhetoric from T (and LGB) folks who purport to speak for us. (I refrain from naming them for a few reasons; I don't wish to publicize their partisan views, I'm not interested in denigrating any individuals, and many of them do good work beyond their partisan politics.) While I respect and, at times, applaud their courage in being activists on T (and LGB) issues, invariably they veer off and attempt to advance, under the guise of the LGBT "community", a host of political views and positions which have nothing to do with one's gender (or sexual) orientation. And worse, many engage in the same level of disrespect, of enmity, of intolerance, of groundless personal attacks and distortions, of hate, toward those who hold differing views that they often accuse the Right of doing; well-spoken, educated people, those who would be the first to bleat of their commitment to diversity, their inclusiveness, their tolerance, engaging in the most ugly of tactics.

Concerning T (and yes, LGB) folks and partisan politics- the Democratic Party often offers far more tolerant rhetoric toward us. No question. Their record of results is significantly less impressive. But for the sake of argument let's assume for a moment that the Democrats actually followed through with results to bolster their LGBT-friendly rhetoric- should that one issue be enough to sway every LGBT voter to pull that Dem lever, support the Dem candidate, every time? Is every LGBT individual better served by the so-called "progressive" agenda that is often represented and advanced by liberal Democrats? On taxes? Gun control? Opposition to school vouchers? Nationalized health care? Kowtowing to Big Labor? Speech codes? "Hate" crimes legislation? Hiring mandates on private employers? Affirmative action? Eminent domain abuses? Abortion? Illegal immigration? Environmental extremism? An activist judiciary? And many, many more? How are any/all of these LGBT-specific issues, issues on which the LGBT "community" (or more accurately, as presented by those who purport to speak for it) stands as one? Isn't it possible that there are LGBT individuals who might prefer, perhaps even be better served by: keeping more of what they earn? Less-stringent gun ownership laws? Greater means to afford their children the education they deem best, not what government dictates? Right-to-work vs. compulsory labor membership? Opposition to criminalizing thought, even repugnant thought, treating some crimes as greater than others due to the victims' status or the perps' bad thoughts? A Constitution that means what it says, not what some judge would like it to say today, another might like it to say tomorrow? Ensuring that those who enter our country do so legally? Increased domestic energy exploration and production? Might some folks prefer plastic, not have government dictate that they (or their customers) are allowed only paper?! Hopefully you get the idea...

Again, the problem isn't with LGBT individuals who believe that the so-called "progressive" agenda is good, nor am I intending to sway others to a more individual-focused, libertarian-leaning POV (tho' that is a very intelligent view to hold! ;) The frustration is with those LGBT mouthpieces who would seek to present their partisan views as speaking for the whole (and who brook no discussion, let alone dissent, from those who might differ) those who presume to present their personal politics and views as representing any beyond themselves, those who seek to arrogate unwarranted power and influence unto themselves.

Friday, October 17, 2008

Out of sheer boredom...

A list- in somewhat alphabetical order!- of some of my favorite discs by various artists, and my fav track from that disc. I haven't included greatest hits compilations, live discs, or stuff from long before I started listening... tell me where you agree and/or disagree, and send me some of yours!

AC/DC- Back In Black; You Shook Me All Night Long
Aerosmith- Toys In The Attic; You See Me Crying
The Bangles- Different Light; If She Knew What She Wants
Pat Benatar- Crimes Of Passion; Hit Me With Your Best Shot
Blondie- Parallel Lines; One Way Or Another
Garth Brooks- No Fences; Friends In Low Places
The Cars- The Cars; All Mixed Up
Neko Case- Fox Confessor Brings The Flood; Hold On, Hold On
Kasey Chambers- Barricades & Brickwalls; Barricades & Brickwalls
Shawn Colvin- A Few Small Repairs; Sunny Came Home
Sheryl Crow- Tuesday Night Music Club; Strong Enough
Dire Straits- Dire Straits; Sultans Of Swing
The Eagles- The Long Run; I Can't Tell You Why
Fleetwood Mac- Tusk; Sara
John Fogerty- Centerfield; Rock and Roll Girls
J. Geils Band- Freeze Frame; Centerfold
The Go-Go's- Beauty and the Beat; We've Got The Beat
Journey- Escape; Don't Stop Believin'
Huey Lewis & the News- Sports; I Want A New Drug
John Mellencamp- Scarecrow; Smalltown
Steve Miller Band- Book Of Dreams; Winter Time
No Doubt- Tragic Kingdom; Just A Girl
The Pretenders- The Pretenders; Mystery Achievement
Queen- The Game: Another One Bites The Dust
Lou Reed- New York; Dirty Boulevard
Rolling Stones (tie)-Some Girls; Faraway Eyes/Tattoo You; Waiting On A Friend
Rush- Moving Pictures; Limelight
Bob Seger- Night Moves; Night Moves
Bruce Springsteen- Born In The USA; Dancing In The Dark
Rod Stewart- Foot Loose and Fancy Free; I Was Only Joking
Styx- The Grand Illusion; The Grand Illusion
Shania Twain- The Woman in Me; No One Needs To Know
U2- Achtung Baby; One
Van Halen- Van Halen; Ain't Talkin Bout Love
Stevie Ray Vaughn- Couldn't Stand The Weather; Cold Shot
ZZ Top- Eliminator; Legs

"It's only rock & roll/but I like it..."

Thursday, October 09, 2008


Can this election season get over soon enough? This is easily- easily- the worst choice I can recall. Some choices- not. The Obama-Biden ticket is the most Far Left major-party ticket quite possibly ever, certainly since 1972. These are not moderate, centrist Democrats, certainly as far as their Senate voting records are concerned. And while there's been lofty rhetoric and pretty speechifying, I'm sorry, but I don't buy the hype- Change We Can Believe In? He's just another pol; no worse, no better. Had the Dems put forth a moderate, centrist ticket, I would have considered them this time out. Unlike some, I'm not especially troubled by the prospects of an Obama Administration in terms of foreign policy, of leaving our nation open to terrorism, etc... I am very concerned about where an Obama Administration would lead us domestically, on so many levels- taxes, activist judicial appointees, further expansion of the welfare state, excessive economic regulation (yes, even despite current straits- the current problems largely being not the fault of government but of incompetent decision making by many in finance; should government attempt to regulate stupidity? Heaven help us...) and many more.

McCain? This is not the John McCain of 2000. If all he has left is trying to tar Obama with his past associations with Billy Ayers and the like, McCain doesn't deserve my vote, much less to win. So many important issues facing our nation, and his campaign is wasting time and breath trying to slime Obama on this? And the Republican Party has lost it's way. Where once- not all that long ago either- they talked the talk and even walked the walk when it came to things such as belief in the market, in limited- and limiting- government, of expanding individual rights and personal responsibilities, a strong but restrained military posture, their policies these past 7+ years have been a repudiation of virtually all of those ideals. They've become nothing more than a conservative version of the Democratic Party, addicted to power and to wielding as much control over citizens as they can get away with, kowtowing to their perceived "base" (specifically social conservatives) and engaging in identity politics just as the Dems do with/toward theirs (Big Labor, blacks, gays, et al.) I've voted Republican because I'm a fiscal conservative, a social libertarian, I support a strong military, and above all I believe in smaller, more limited government, especially federal government, and in my voting life the GOP has been the closer of the two major parties to my views. They no longer are. And John McCain has done little to convince me that he is serious about attempting to return his party to these ideals.

But I may be wrong. Perhaps an Obama Administration- should it come to pass- and a Democratic Congress will surprise me and will be paragons of restraint. After all, we elected a "conservative" Republican President and "conservative" Republican Congresses this decade and saw the largest expansion of government since LBJ's Great Society years.

"Clowns to the left of me/Jokers to the right/Here I am, stuck in the middle with you..."