Left And Right Politics

…plus the cream in the center.

Libertarian-ism Is

Posted by Joanne On September - 16 - 2011

US Citizens, Libertarianism is, in essence, personal freedom and minimization of the state. Many would say that Obama‘s current administration conflicts with this view. The idea is that the state is a burden to the economy – a source of bureaucracy. Obama’s administration seems to contradict these views. One big example of this, certainly, is his health care reform plan. But many questions remain: is “reducing” the state simply abolishing it? Should the state be a thin layer, or completely eliminated? A state without any intervention is no state. So why not, instead of destroying the state completely, let it administrate the basics?

A state shouldn’t care only about its economy. The first thing a “true”, “free” state should think of is, certainly, its citizens. Some people would cry foul here: “why should we be burdened by people that don’t want to work? Let them pay their own bills!” But this is not what libertarianism is about. True libertarianism, and therefore freedom, is not violating the US constitution and invading people’s privacies needlessly. It’s about not enslaving other countries, and spending useless amounts of money with an imaginary war. So, if the state isn’t bad, is it good in every way? Should we let it take care of our lives?


Our State is made by US, Citizens. Obama’s government is certainly not perfect. One example is his making of bold claims. He said he would end the war, for example. He didn’t. He said he would cut the government’s wasteful spending. Did he? Politicians have too many ties, and they should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is a chance that Obama’s government will turn tyrannical. If that happens, it is up to us to claim back our freedom. So, as a consequence, I do not think Obama’s government is evil. It is here to bring many taboos to the spotlight. As we discussed, health is one of them, but economic and education inequality are also taboos in the American society. My point of view about all this? I believe freedom is knowing you can count on your State, and that it actually supports you into times of trouble – not some sort of façade that hides a political agenda made to benefit only a rich minority. I expect our politicians to spend our resources wisely, and I truly think the US hasn’t been doing this for a long time – it’s just that we’re only starting to see this now.

Drug Testing Welfare Recipients

Posted by Billy On September - 7 - 2011

For some time now, the idea of having welfare recipients drug tested for them to receive benefits has been appealing to many, but for those on the left as well as those who are on welfare, it’s a different story. No matter which side of the issue you are on, this topic brings a lot of discussion and emotion to the conversation.

The state of Florida has recently passed a law that states that any new welfare claim that is submitted, the person must have a drug test done before receiving any benefits. the claimant is responsible for paying for the test, but if the test is negative, the person will be reimbursed for the cost of the test. If they fail, they will not be paid back for the test as well as they will not be eligible for welfare for one year. This issue has become an ever growing concern for people on both sides of it.

The left (Democrats) feel that it’s an unconstitutional decision to invade someone’s privacy. They use the 4th Amendment as they reason to not allowing these test to be legal. The right (Republicans) think that if you’re going to get assistance from the government, you should be expected to abide by the same standards as those who have to take a test to get a job. They say that since employees who work to pay taxes to help fund entitlement program have to take the same test to work, the people on welfare should do the same. The reason behind their thinking is that there is so much corruption within the welfare system (along with multi-generation families) that this is one way to weed out the wrong-doers.

Those people who say that the drug testing is wrong is because if infringes on their Constitutional right as laid out in the 4th amendment The fourth amendment protects the American citizen from unwarranted and illegal search and seizures. In 2003, the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Michigan’s drug testing of welfare applicants as a Fourth Amendment violation.
As for the other side of the issue, the 4th amendment pertains to privacy and they feel that if these people are looking for public assistance, then the issue of privacy doesn’t play a role in the debate.

While I agree to the drug testing, some say that I’m wrong. All I can say to that is that I must trust the judicial system to make the right decision on the matter. Unfortunately I don’t trust those who are serving on the circuit courts as well as the Supreme Court. Again this issue is for each state to make their own decisions as to if they want to legalize medical marijuana.

The 14th Amendment

Posted by Billy On July - 29 - 2011

As the debt ceiling talks continue to deteriorate into nothing more than school yard standoff, Many democrats are pushing for President Obama to bypass Congress and cite a small provision in the 14th Amendment. The section the Democrats are referring is in Section 4.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Of course they only recite the first sentence of the section. As the text is written, yes, the United States does have an obligation to pay all debts. As any responsible adult should, so should the country/government . The problem I have with the Democrats and the Obama Administration is that they easily omit the most important part of the 14 amendment (in my opinion), Section 5 which reads…

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I can see why the president and the Democrats in Congress would want to ignore (or fail to mention) section 5. Because as it reads, the legislation branch holds the power of the 14th amendment, which is Congress, not the president. If Obama does overstep his boundaries of the executive branch of the federal government to raise the debt ceiling without the appropriate bil from Congress, it will be an impeachable political move. Obama has said (as well as the media), that he is a Constitutional scholar and understands the Constitution better than anyone. If that’s the case then he also knows the truth about this section and will not enact it. Obama and his aides know that he lacks the Constitutional power to do so, but that doesn’t mean the the Democrats and others alike aren’t pushing for him to change his mind.

So since we’re looking at the 14th Amendment, let’s look at Section 3 for just a moment…

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

As the text reads, neither the president, vice-president or any member of Congress shall engage in insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution or given aide or comfort to an enemy of the document. So I guess our executive and most of the legislative are already in violation of this amendment. The Health Care bill, Cap and Trade are just two of the most recent violations against the Constitution, I won’t even try to go back as far as 30 years where there were so many other violations we can consider.

Replying To Partisan Insults

Posted by Billy On July - 14 - 2011

Recently, I received a comment from one our many readers and wanted to address a few of this person’s points. The reader Eric, had some choice words after we posted a link to vote in a political poll. The poll was from 2009, but it seems it took Eric a little longer to find it. He commented on June 29, 2011.

Eric’s first sentence in the comment went like this,

All you people do is whine and throw around unguided, random superstitions and wrong information.

All you people??? Eric, we are all Americans and people who make comments like “all you people” want to keep everyone separated. That kind of thinking has been going on too long and it needs stop so we can move forward in this county. And if you really thought all we did was whine and give wrong information you wouldn’t feel so threatened by us. You would have just blown us off as just another misguided political site.

I’d like to hear you guys provide some ideas on the economy, or maybe the least you could is provide a legitimate point.

I’m not quite sure what Eric was talking about because he posted on a poll that is not even open anymore. If “you guys” was directed at Libertarians, then Ron Paul and Alexander Snitker, among other Libertarian minded candidates, had some great ideas, but it fell on deaf ears because these men (especially Mr. Snitker) weren’t taken seriously and given a fair shake in debates. If “you guys” was directed at this site, then your comment proved that you were only here to throw around a few insults because if you would have taken time to actually read some of the posts here, I have provided my ideas and very legitimate points.

You people are delusional. Maybe you’d be happier with Bush who started two wars (that still need to be paid for, under Obama) and turned a budget surplus into a 9 trillion dollar deficit and passed no considerable legislation that did anything besides allowing the Fed. to tap your phone line and check your emails ( oh yeah and he tortured a lot of people). Ya, he’s a good guy, let’s get someone like him.

Partisan and insulting in the same first sentence. I’m not sure if you took the time to notice Eric, but we’re Libertarians. That means we think the Democrats and the Republicans screwed us. Maybe if you read through the site before commenting, you wouldn’t have come across as so misinformed. Eric had a lot to say in these few sentences, so I will address each one separately.

As for being happier having Bush as president. What are my choices? If it’s a toss up between him and Obama, Yes I would want Bush as president. Let’s be for real though, Bush also didn’t do what he needed to when it came to war. Nearly ten years later and I’m still not sure if he had a right to be in Iraq. As for Afghanistan, we should have never been in there. While we’re on the subject, at least Bush did get Congressional approval before entering into these countries. We are now in Libya thanks to Obama decision after listening to the United Nation and NATO. It’s been over 90 days and there is still no justifiable reason from Obama to be there. How come you didn’t mention that Eric?
Lets talk about Eric’s comment about the $9 trillion surplus. There has not been a surplus in the federal government since at least 1969 when the federal government has spent more each year than it had collected in taxes. The so-called surplus was a numbers game for the Democrats. It was a “projected” surplus if Congress and the next President didn’t change a thing. And we all know the neither of them know how to do that.

As for the Patriot Act (if that’s what Eric was referring to since he didn’t mention it by name), The Patriot Act is totally against the Constitution that it should have never been enacted, never mind being renewed by President Obama in 2011(again Eric fail to mention).

So for Eric’s comment of “Ya, he’s a good guy, let’s get someone like him.” NO, let’s not. This country has been taken so far of course from it’s original intent of being a republic, governed by a set of laws, it’s not funny. We need someone who isn’t entrenched in Washington and the good ‘ol boy way of doing business in the Beltway.

One thing we don’t allow here on LeftAndRightPolitics is insults and attacks towards other readers. We want to promote open conversation and dialogue between readers and our authors, but it must be done with respect and not insulting. If you read the comments in the original post, you will notice another reader mentioned using name calling. The comment with the name calling was removed and I apologize for it getting through in the first place.

In response to one of our readers –

You seriously need to CHECK YOUR FACTS. Im pretty sure it was the democrats who passed the CRA. And the Republican Party of Lincoln is not the same Republican party of today. The South was primarily democratic until Civil Rights. You guys sound poor and uneducated, maybe you should consider supporting democrats who are for making progress and taking care of people who aren’t the top 5%, as opposed to the republicans (apart from Ron Paul) who are for “less-government” (who have not allowed Obama a political inch with anything unless it’s banning abortion) and taking care of their rich friends. The president can’t just wave a wand and make all of your lives perfect. This you’d know if you actually used your brain.

Anyone who says “CHECK YOUR FACTS”, without backing up their own just wants to throw out catch phrases. Here is where I laugh at the two major political parties. Neither one of them are for the American people. The Republicans and the Democrats are in it for themselves and their contributors. That is why we need term limits for all political position. If not this will never change.