Opinion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQYENKT5El0 I've been getting paid for my opinion! You can too! Check this video out for some amazing opportunities to get paid for sharing your opinion! Follow my link to join Opinion Outpost: www.opinionoutpost.com/join/7889397

On the President as compromiser

I find it very curious that there is an argument in the world at large that at once says that the president is the only adult in the room because he compromised, but that he should have fought the good fight and not compromised as much. Somehow you get a better result by nobody wanting to actually govern. I rather like people who try to actually govern. Perhaps this is because I am not a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, or any other identified type.
I am an anarchist, though possibly not a very good one. I have never paid my dues. I have never attended a meeting. I have no bombs to throw (well, blog bombs notwithstanding). I am an anarchist because at the bottom of my heart, I do not believe in politics. It never works! I had a professor in college who said he had just the right amount of anarchy in his politics. I followed this idea for a while, then had to abandon it. Instead I went for total anarchism, with just the right amount of representative democracy. It is a relatively small amount. I vote, I don't expect a whole lot as a result. I believe in the people, well most of them, but not in the politics. More in the democracy that the representing.
I voted for the current President and never once thought he was anything other that what he is: a moderate Democrat. Everything he has done is what I expected. It is not what I would have done: but I didn't run for the job. I will vote for him again, because he will do what I expect him to do. Not what I want, what the country needs desperately to be done. Governing! Compromising! Getting on with the job of existing. He will also do a couple of things that I am interested in: nominate Supreme Court Justices, and extend justice to those who live without it (a list too long to enumerate). He won't nominate the Justices that I want, but he will nominate people who are much less insane than would his opponent. He will not necessarily move as quickly to extend justice, but will move much faster than the alternative. This small differences will result in very large differences over time. Now is not the time to mistake the small but vital interests at hand. Get off your high horses and lower your expectations.

The Party of Business

Of course it has long been said that the Republican Party has been the party of business. I just don't understand why people don't get that it is now the party of bad business. It is the party of the quick buck, profit at any price (paid by the taxpayers though either indirect or direct taxation). It is no longer the staid party of banking--there are no more staid banks. The new business of the Republican party is privately held prisons (meant literally and figuratively). These are horrible businesses that make no attempt to do anything but squeeze as much profit as possible from the taxpayers. In the old system companies bought other companies and squeezed them for money (so 80s), but now the company is formed to go bankrupt (morally and financially) at which point the government (which somehow they are against) will step in and make good the bills. That they don't actually keep the prisons functioning as prisons--lots of people escape--is just beside the point. Google for competing businesses says the newly insane ex-Governor of  Minnesota. Make everything private. Allow the market to set the rules of business. Sounds good, but businesses don't do this. They don't believe there is a single market, only economists and politicians believe this claptrap. It just makes me tired. I am not, nor have I ever been a Republican. I used to allow that they were at least human.

On the Constitution: Reading assignment

I highly recommend James MacGregor Burns' latest book: Packing the Court



It helps greatly to put much of the discussion of the constitution in proper context. Most important is his explanation of the "invention" of  ability of the Supreme Court to rule laws unconstitutional. Without this perspective much of the banter on the constitution is simply wrong. "Original intent" cannot make sense unless such claims address this question. If one claims to believe in original intent, one must not believe in the unconstitutionality of any law, a position that is held neither by these "constitutionalists" or their political opponents. Make no mistake: nobody currently believes in "original intent."

Second term remedies

There is a lot of hot air in this early political season, but it would be more productive to have a sense of history and reality. Presidents seldom accomplish much in their first terms--they want to be reelected. Strange. Sure, they may pick a few low hanging fruit to please their base, but seldom is there substance. Now as I remember the current president has gone somewhat beyond that level of timidity. Some think he has gone too far. Others demand he immediately agree with their position (always the only reasonable answer). But there is never a single answer. Sometimes there isn't even a path to any answer. "All he needs to do is lead!" you declare. Lead whom, where? Can we accomplish today what we have never done before? That is what is being asked. The audacity of hope is now taken to mean the audacity of the unlikely. Maybe we can. It make me tired. Work hard for the reelection of this president and you will be amazed at what can happen--if the congress is also changed. The unlikely can happen, but only in a second term and after a lot of work and effort.
By the way, if you fear that he will be a one term president:  you have already lost your cause.

The Direction is more important than the details

While it is indeed true that I would have like to have seen the President implement a more aggressive removal of troops from Afghanistan, in the end he is president and I am not.

I don't get to have a policy much less implement one, and as such my concern is more with the general direction of things than the specifics. To some this may seem strange and indeed weak, but I really think that is wrong. While willing to march (I have made numerous trips to my capital of Madison to make my views known to our soon to be former Governor), not every decision I disagree with needs to be protested. The need for protest was at the beginning, and it isn't really all that clear when that was. I think that an understanding of the history tells me that given the forces at hand the President is doing fine and doesn't really need my help. I think that he is in an excellent position to make a decision, and I am fine with that decision--agreeing or not.

This is not to say that I think his advisors are necessarily correct or even that the President understands the situation correctly--though I suspect he is doing fine. There is no answer; there are only a great many contradictory questions. It is a little late to be asking why we are there. The situation exists and its tentacles reach many places. Some say we need a new strategy! I say we have had quite enough of those, let’s try to actually leave. I don't care if the pace is too slow for some, or most. I only care that it has begun.

Truth

"Truths are the lies we agree to recite to each other." Nowhere is this more true than in politics. Ideology is nothing if not agreed upon lies. Everything is frame and spin. Nothing is true. Political reporting combines the lies of the press and the politicians. Of course sometimes one finds small bits that are worth agreement, worth reciting. But not much, and never forever.