Politicizing the Census

The Democrats are on the war path this morning. The census is being discussed and a question came in about the wisdom of giving out this information to the government. The discussion then turned into an opportunity for politics. The Republicans were demonized by saying that the Republicans had politicized the census by sending out questionaires for fund-raising, insinuating that Republicans were being deceptive. These were not the overt words of the discussion, but it was the insinuation. Were the Democratically leaning panel not politicizing the discussion?

The census is done because the Founders believed that it would be the best way for the publics' interest to be represented, as it determines where the boundaries are that will determine a certain district.

Giving the Republicans the benefit of the doubt, could the Republcans be sincerely interested in what the American people want? After being "dismissed" and not being allowed to be players in the major decisions facing our nation, could they have learned that it is important that we all have a voice? Certainly, the tea parties and the town hall meetings over the summer gave these politicians a clear picture of how the American people feel about being left out of the political process by the dismissal of their voice!

I find that today so much is politicized that the American people cannot discern what or whom to believe. Has this always been so, and I am only waking up to the real world of politics? Perhaps so, but this morning's presentation by the Democrats made me more aware of how a "fact" can be interpreted.

Our Reality to Come...in the Political Realm

I read where the Republican strategy is to counter the liberal and ultra-conservative, by gaining back a Congressional majority by "centering" themselves. I hope this strategy works.

The strategy is to be to analyze the vacancies and determine whether the State can vote in a Republican or "loose" by voting in a conservative Democrat! This would bring Congress into center, where consensus can be built and legislation can be made concerning issues about our government. A centered Congress may not be ideologically driven along certain conservative or liberal social issues, but could gain much for fiscal and foreign policy. These are the issues that concern America today.

It is speculated that Newt Gingrich will run for the nomination. I hope so, as I have always been impressed with him. He has built consensus, has taught history and understands the political machine enough to know how to lead.

American Values Re-Defined

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are the "ideals" of our Founding Fathers. While these are still the values of the American people, what do they really mean?

Life is about survival. All humans need to survive and the basis of our life is to "compete" for survival. This is what our capitalistic system is based upon, "survival of the fittest". We have grown and enlarged our economy, but have limited others their "right to life", because they were "not fit". What is to be the solution?

Liberty is about opportunity. Opportunity to grow, become and choose. Liberty is not the life of all, when economic disadvantages limit choices and hinder opportunities to belong. What is the solution?

The "Pursuit of Happiness" only belongs to those who have the liberty of life. Many do not have these advantages because of personal limitations, or domination. The individual must have these opportunities, but how?

The Democrats have suggested that government is the answer to all social problems. But, dependence on government does nothing to help other "become fit". How does government help without encouraging dependence?

Republicans have affirmed personal responsibility, which has helped the individual to "become" and take their own responsibility without blaming others.

While the Republicans affirm the values of personal accountability, the Democrats affirm social responsibility. Which is of importance? Both.

Because both affirm certain values that are important for society to flourish, why have there been no more choice in our political parties? It seems that in Europe there are more distinctives, and perhaps, this would be a way to help the public to become more engaged in politics, if there were more nuances in different political parties. Instead, we see "black and white", with no shades of gray. Shades of gray are important to develop a more discriminating political view and help further the political debate, which, I think, would help our country as a whole.

The Consent of the Governed and Religious Freedom

Politics is the domain where we work, play, worship, and live our lives. The political realm is the network of our communities, colleagues, and other social connections. What our political policy and understanding of government that runs the policy is an important one, as it affects all of life.

We are no longer ruled by "the divine right of kings". This is the prinicple of our revolution of England's king to reign over us. Taxation without representation was an important "pivot point" because those who led the revolution felt that all people were created equal under law. That we were not to be a colony, but an independent government. This had/has major implications in understanding faith.

Many fled to America for religious freedom, but finding a place to worship as one saw fit, did not alleviate the need to form a "government'. Church government became a point of contention and led to many dissentions and splits. Some sects thought that the "heretical" should suffer persecution, or worse, death. Those who held such views had not given up on the "divine right of God" and how they understood man's duty toward the "transcendental realm". These believed in a personal God. Believers were not the only ones that made American history, but it was a value that is upheld in our Constitution and the separation of Church and State.

Everyone has an understanding or an "ideal" of what government should "look like" and this is the realm of political discourse. It is the realm of what "should be" and "how it should be accomplished". For the most part, Republicans and Democrats have a different view about what that should look like. Although the political parties have political platforms that formally describe their positions, these positions differ in particular individuals within these parties. Some have even attempted to form a Third Party, but not with much sucess.

Republicans believe in "free market economics" and family values, limited government, etc., while the Democrats believe in social concern in government programs, enlarging government and limiting the free market.

I find that our freedoms politically are the most important value to uphold, as without freedom there is little room for development of individual values, commitments, beliefs, lifestyle, etc. Political freedom is valued by all humans.

The consent of the governed is based on social contract, ethics, human rights, and political freedom. We cannot have morality, or ethical choice apart from political freedom. This very freedom was what some came to our shores to find. Today, Americans have liberty because of the commitment of men and women who were willing to lay their lives down for it. We should do no less!

Concern for America Continued

Last night I turned on Charlie Rose too late I'm afraid to catch the name of the CEO of AEI (I think that is the company). This company is struggling to keep afloat because of a lack of liquid assests...

This CEO (I didn't catch his name), was saying that the federal government is trying to bail the company out, by lending the monies needed. BUT, he was unable to sit in on the discussions. Why is he not allowed to sit in on this discussion? He had built this company up for the past 40 or so years...Is Nationalism at the door in America's future? Are we headed for nationalized companies like we see in communist countries? I hope not.

Even though we have chased the Almighty dollar, our nation's free markets have been the "success stories" of the American people. What is one to do, when there may be powers that be that would like to limit our free market, because of "a higher good"? What "higher good"? Individuals in our country have been innovators, discoverers, and business entrepreneurs. Now, we see that the government has underwritten our mortgage companie and is bailing out Fannie Mae and Fannie Mac...and this is afffecting the market..

What are we to think? I agree that we have sold our country's future in depending on "slave trade" and seeking to build our own personal economic interests on the backs of others, but, how can we continue to allow the freedom to pursue our "dreams" without socializing our futures.? Is universal health care the answer to the uninsured? Is the nationalization of our country's individual rights the answer to our future?"The Common Good" is the call of Obama, and the Democrats, I'm afraid. But, have the business interests become too powerful in the Republican party for the individual's voice to be heard?Is the individual able to do anything to change the country around? Or have we become too selfish to change?

Someone called in on a radio program yesterday and said that the "crows have come home to roost" because of Clinton's mortgaging our national debt. The interest has come due now in a Republican administration, so that the Democrats can position themsleves as the ":saviors" of our economic futures...What are we to think, when things go on in places of power that we have no access to and know nothing about? And while these things have been going on, America sleeps, the world watches and the leaders continue to be corrupted.

The Republican National Convention

I was proud of Fred Thompson's speech, but most proud of Joe Libermann's. He was the 2000 Democratic VP nominee and has become an Independent. He called for American unity and for his past political affiliates to band together to elect someone with proven character in Washington politics. He identified this person as McCain.

A lot of the RNC was about the military. Many Christians believe that the military cannot be identified with Christian faith, because of a conflict of interest. I do not believe that this is so, because, Christians all believe in human rights as a fundamental right. That fundamental right cannot be protected unless it is protected by advancing the cause of freedom from a tyrannical government. Good government is protected by the principle of the balance of power and the police force. The balance of power in our branches of government and the police force protect our country from within, while the military protects from without. Surely, we would not do away with the police force....

America has also stood for the individual's freedom to choose the way he practices his faith. Faith and how that plays out in one's convictions in life is what our government protects. Although Obama promises "justice" , and many believe this is the government's "duty", what then is the Church's duty, since governmental "justice" will be limiting the freedom in which Christian "justice" can be defined and expressed....