Left And Right Politics

…plus the cream in the center.

Communism In American Government

Posted by Billy On July - 17 - 2011

When I was growing up in New York City in the 70’s and 80’s, I would hear on the news and in school about how Communism was a form of government that restricted individuality, free speech, personal freedom and the held most of their people in poverty, except for the rulers of those countries. The people of Russia and other Communist countries during that period were running out of their countries and made their way to America. During the 1980’s, Russia’s regime had fallen thanks to the work of Ronald Reagan. The evildoers were no longer able to take care of themselves and their economy collapsed as well.

Now it seems that our own President has decided to go down the path of socialism, fascism and or Communism. The people he’s surrounding himself with is a clear indication of that. In the past, we’ve seen the truth come out on Van Jones, the man that Obama hand picked himself to be the Green Job Czar (do you notice that they’re using communist noble titles for these positions). It was learned that Mr. Jones is a communist supporter as well as (what appears to me) a racist. Even though the main stream media stayed away from the stories that were coming out on the internet and reported on FOX, Van Jones resigned after all the controversy was released. My question is, who is Obama going to throw into the position next?

How many more of these unelected, non-approved people in our Republic government feel the same as Van Jones? There are over fourty czars in the current Administration and its not over yet. Most of these positions (if not all), have responsibilities that someone within the government was already accountable for. So why did President Obama need to create these positions? Maybe these were just a few of the 2.5 million jobs he was going to generate. Of course none of these jobs create a product or a service that wasn’t already being done by someone else.

We need to be aware that if we don’t watch what the government is doing, we won’t have the freedom to ever watch them again. The government has always grown in size and hasn’t reduced it’s size since the Reagan Administration.

Governor Jerry Brown Takes Away Parent’s Control

Posted by Billy On July - 15 - 2011

Since the the inception of the Board of Education in 1980, the school system has taken more control of what our children learn without any regard to the parents. The whole concept of the Board of Education is to increase the federal government involvement and control of the people.

On Wednesday July 12, 2011, Governor Jerry brown of California has increase the powers of the Board of Education in his state by signing a bill, (SB48) making California the first state in the nation to add lessons about gays and lesbians to social studies classes in public schools. The bill requires public schools to add to their social studies curriculum, contributions of people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. A curriculum which will be adopted for the 2013-2014 school year. Brown signed the bill passed last week by the Democratic-majority Legislature. The bill basically passed on a party-line vote.

“History should be honest,” the governor said. “This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books.”
How is it that you would need to revise existing laws that already cover the original intent? While I believe in personal freedom and tolerance towards all people. this quote speaks to me as saying that a person’s sexual preference is now a factor. No matter who the person is, black, white, Jewish, Muslim, gay or straight, if they contributed to history, they should be acknowledged.

The Board of Education has been increasing it’s control over what our children learn and by what standard they will be held to. From President Carter creating the Department to George W. Bush signing the “No Child Left Behind Act”, it’s all been about control and spending more money in a program that hasn’t improve the quality of education in this county.

State Senator Mark Leno, a San Fransisco Democrat who is also the author of the bill, praises the signing of this bill as a step towards teaching tolerance. Supporters feel that this bill will teach students to be more accepting of lesbians and gays since there has been so much bullying towards homosexuals. Leno is quoted saying, “Today we are making history in California by ensuring that our textbooks and instructional materials no longer exclude the contributions of LGBT Americans”.

Since when have homosexuals been excluded? Is Leno saying that the LGBT community was being excluded from history? Again, if a person contributed to history, they should not be excluded whatsoever. And if homosexuals were being excluded, by whom were they excluded by?

Our school system has no Constitutional right in the first place to be controlled by the federal government, even if the Democrats feel it falls under the commerce clause. Since the creation of this department, Conservatives have been trying to abolish it. As a Libertarian, I feel it’s an invasion of our personal freedoms since it gives the federal government too much power.

The Department’s mission is: to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
The only thing the department has accomplished is ensuring equal access since even illegal immigrants are entitled to a good education. But that’s a whole other post.

Washington DC Needs Diapers

Posted by Billy On July - 15 - 2011

debt talks
AP Photo- Charles Dharapak

With all the talk about the debt ceiling and the politics being played out, I think it’s time to ship diapers to Washington DC. Obama, along with congress have been trying to come to an agreement on raising the debt ceiling or not. Obama want to raise it $2.4 trillion, Congress wants to keep it down to about $1.4 trillion. Eric Cantor, House Majority Leader and seven other Congressional leaders met yesterday to work out what can be done to accomplish this task.

Of course, in true form of politicians, nothing was done except Obama and Cantor had their feelings hurt and walked out of the meeting. Depending on who you talk to, you will get different comments as to what happened behind closed doors. Either way you look at it, our political leaders are more concerned about their chances in next year’s election instead of what’s right for the country. Obama (like the kid in the playground with his marbles) is threatening to veto any bill that is put before him if he doesn’t get his way. The president said that he’s concerned for the American people. So if he is, why isn’t he eliminating programs that are draining the system?

The big problem that politicians are faced with, is if they have to close portions of the government for any length of time, the American people may realize that these programs weren’t needed in the first place and there won’t be a need to be reinstated once the crisis is over. Obama has used scare tactics this week by saying he can’t guarantee that the social security checks will go out in August. He knows that will not be the case and saying it just shows you how he’s willing to play ball.

Every time the threat of the country (or State) having to shut down part of the government, politicians will always use the tactic of claiming that the police, firefighters and medicare will be the programs that will be affected. This isn’t the case since there are so many other ones (parks, museums and rest areas) that can be cut for the time being (if not permanent).

So in the meantime, politicians will sit there and use spin tactics to scare the people and in turn whine and complain about the way things are getting done. If you think about it, the government is working exactly the way our politicians have set it up to work…poorly.

The Right To Carry

Posted by Billy On June - 29 - 2011

A well regulated militia,being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
II Amendment

Our founding fathers put this in the original amendments of the Constitution for a reason. They knew for a new country to protect themselves from enemies domestic and foreign, the citizens needed to be able to defend themselves.

In the last few years there has been an ever growing desire for the American people to apply for a Concealed Carry Permit (CCP) or Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP). The reasons vary from person to person. Whatever the reason, as American citizens we have the right to be allowed to do so if we want. There are many that feel firearms promote criminal activities, but that is their opinion and they have the right to voice it. That doesn’t give them the right to tell others what they should be allowed to do. My overall Libertarian view to everything is…”Do what you want as long as it causes no harm to anyone or anything”. That also includes telling people how to live their lives.

The concept behind having the right to carry a firearm is for self-defense, to protect one self from any serious harm to come to them or their family. Over the last few years there have been more people getting their CCP/CWP and during those years there has not been an increase in criminal activities in those areas. Why is that? Because criminals don’t defend, they attack innocent people who won’t be able to defend themselves against criminals.

Of course the media and the government will have you believe otherwise. In Chicago, a city where owning a firearm, being a pistol or rifle, is illegal. If that’s the case then why is it that the crime rate hasn’t dropped one percentage point since the law’s inception? Because if you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns. Yes I know it’s an old cliche, but it’s dead-on right. Take a good look at the cities that have firearm bans and you will see that they are also the areas with the highest crime rate. Criminals will increase their activities if they know that the people can’t defend themselves. In Kennesaw Georgia, a law was passed in 1982 that required home owners to own at least one firearm with ammunition for home protection. Many thought it was going to become the wild west, but on the contrary the crime rate went down by 89% and has stayed at that level for years after and to this day.

We have the right to protect our self from becoming a victim. Firearms are bought for protection and security, just like we do with car insurance, owning a fire extinguisher, wearing our seat belts and using a helmet when riding a motorcycle.