New Year's ResolutionI’m adopting a new strategy in my campaign to voice an alternative view within the Republican Party. I’ll be giving more time to my family, so what I say regarding politics will be to the point and I won’t spend too much time trying to smooth the rough edges. I’ve caught myself over the past few months trying to be “careful” about what I express, concerned that I might lose a vote or two – that’s exactly the logic that ruins much of what our professional politicians say. Conservatism should be about a restrained application of governmental power, not about conservative social values intrusively imposed by those in power. Traditional conservatism should shun the culture wars and look to expand freedoms, not limit them. Our $9 trillion national debt amounts to $30,000 for each American. The wealthy that hold this debt, many of them foreign investors, are getting roughly 5% or $1500 annual return. That $1500 could buy a good bit of health insurance, college tuition, or housing for many Americans. Rather than government providing these items for Americans, government should work to eliminate the debt and put that money back into the economy. Under the Constitution and the 10th amendment, the powers of the federal government should be dramatically reduced and functions shifted to the states. (A state can’t indefinitely spend beyond its means.) A dramatic reduction of the federal government would include elimination of functions not mandated by the Constitution such as: the Department of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Amtrak funding, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the hundreds of “earmark” projects that clog the budget. Many of these are worthy endeavors, but a nation in debt can’t keep throwing around government funds it doesn’t have. Likewise, our military adventures on foreign soil should be dramatically cut. Our efforts in Iraq are accomplishing neither security nor defense. The military-industrial complex should not drive the definition of American interests. The threshold for putting our troops in harm’s way should be much higher than recent justifications and driven by overwhelming consensus. The US flag does not need to be protected against expressions of “incendiary” political ideas any more than the institution of marriage needs to be protected against reasonable legal rights of homosexual partnership. Gays should also be allowed to openly serve in the military if they choose. The freedoms embodied in the Bill of Rights should be extended generously and “liberally,” rather than excluding them from acts or groups we deem offensive. Morality does not flow exclusively from “the Creator,” and those who don’t believe in God are entitled to every protection afforded those who do. An American theocracy is just as offensive as an Islamic one. Claims of moral righteousness are frequently only a justification to oppress those who are seen as ungodly, immoral, or simply different. Is that what Jesus meant by “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?” Many religious values are admirable and noble, but dogma has no place in government policy. These views will turn some voters firmly against my campaign. Fine, I didn’t start this campaign to voice their view. There are plenty of candidates who will gladly pander to these voters. I intend to voice a view that is indifferent to religion, race, and class. In that indifference there is ample opportunity for Americans to find success based on merit and achievement rather than government preference or political connections. I do value the ability of government to provide the collective resources that individuals sometimes lack; I just insist that we constitutionally provide these resources at the state and local level where they can be effectively and accountably managed. As I shift more energy toward my family and recent new job responsibilities, I may not post as frequently as I did this past year. I’ll try to post something at least once weekly. Thanks, Michael Previous: Former GOP Rep goes Libertarian -- Next: The Immediacy of Snail Mail Comment from Ken Larson: There are good points in your article. I would like to supplement them with some information: I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak. If you are interested in a view of the inside of the Pentagon procurement process from Vietnam to Iraq please check the posting at my blog entitled, “Odyssey of Armaments” http://rosecoveredglasses.blogspot.com/2006/11/odyssey-of-armaments.html The Pentagon is a giant, incredibly complex establishment, budgeted in excess of $500B per year. The Rumsfelds, the Administrations and the Congressmen come and go but the real machinery of policy and procurement keeps grinding away, presenting the politicos who arrive with detail and alternatives slanted to perpetuate itself. How can any newcomer, be he a President, a Congressman or even the new Sec. Def.Mr. Gates, understand such complexity, particularly if heretofore he has not had the clearance to get the full details? Answer- he can’t. Therefore he accepts the alternatives provided by the career establishment that never goes away and he hopes he makes the right choices. Or he is influenced by a lobbyist or two representing companies in his district or special interest groups. From a practical standpoint, policy and war decisions are made far below the levels of the talking heads who take the heat or the credit for the results. This situation is unfortunate but it is absolute fact. Take it from one who has been to war and worked in the establishment. This giant policy making and war machine will eventually come apart and have to be put back together to operate smaller, leaner and on less fuel. But that won’t happen until it hits a brick wall at high speed. We will then have to run a Volkswagen instead of a Caddy and get along somehow. We better start practicing now and get off our high horse. Our golden aura in the world is beginning to dull from arrogance. Posted by Ken Larson Jan 4, 04:36 PM # Comment from nicrivera: Mr. Smith, It’s good to see that the libertarian wing of the Republican party hasn’t completely conceded the party over to the neoconservatives and social conservatives. As a political independent, I look forward to hearing more about your candidacy. During the next 22 months, I will devote a substantial portion of posts at The Coming Realignment and The Moderate Voice to showcasing the candidacies and views of third party candidates as well as libertarian-leaning Democratic and Republican candidates who are brave enough to stand up against their respective parties. Sincerely, Posted by nicrivera Jan 7, 11:34 AM # Comment from BoggyWoggy: One dream I have, especially being that it is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, is for folks to be willing to take a slight step back, gather up some good oxygen, and think about whom they each admire most and make an attempt to emulate that person’s goals or visions. For example, if the religious right, God-fearing folks would stop and really think about Jesus’ views, love and caring would be the focus, not restriction or limitations…let alone “rules.” If Muslims stepped back and really attempted to follow the teachings of the Koran, love and caring would be the focus. If extremist Environmentalists took a deep breath and thought about the words of Ayn Rand, love and caring would be the focus. I know, I know…sounds childish and naive, but what better time to dream, right? As a public educator, I try to breathe this thinking into my students everyday. Most live in poverty and have never really experienced the positive feelings of knowing that others have expectations of them and that their daily actions and statements really do alter our community, be it classroom, neighborhood, or country. To teach them about Karma (one kid asked, “Who’s she?”) and the Golden Rule, rather than instilling guilt and meaningless propoganda, will hopefully bring these youngsters into the realm of reality. They just may begin to be the first to turn the tides of hate and uniformity. They may be the first to really read and understand the writings of our Country’s Founding Fathers and see that “appreciation” was (and is) the focus, as well as love and caring. Can others even begin to imagine how these attributes may be our only hope? With you working toward the office of President, I think we stand a chance. I really like what you have to say… Posted by BoggyWoggy Jan 15, 11:16 AM # |
Favorite Posts:
Other Blogs:Links:
Feeds - SFP updates for your homepage:Previous Posts: |
