Get Off Our Ass

Okay boys and girls… today’s piece was inspired by an article in the Boston Globe (boston.com). The article How facts backfire: Researchers discover a surprising threat to democracy: our brains, was entertaining… in much the same way as certain French appetizers are entertaining. They’re not toxic so they’re not completely wrong, but no matter how you wrap it in elitist language and/or with a French accent… it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a slug with a shell and as such… should only be eaten if stranded in remote lands for extended periods of time with nothing else to eat. While the article leads with the conclusion that our brains are actually a threat to democracy… because facts don’t change people’s minds or opinions, it then follows with a string of sketchy so called facts to bolster its position.

The fact is that in a really distorted way, the article it correct that facts don’t generally change anyone’s mind, and then it exemplifies why facts don’t change anyone’s mind… by throwing out several non-facts and inferring in the end that normal people just can’t handle the responsibility of democracy… because of the non-facts that the author throws out as facts.

             So, I’ll start with the few ‘facts’ that this article throws out as facts that so called conservatives take issue with;

1. “In 2005, amid the strident calls for better media fact-checking in the wake of the Iraq war, Michigan’s Nyhan and a colleague devised an experiment in which participants were given mock news stories, each of which contained a provably false, though nonetheless widespread, claim made by a political figure: that there were WMDs found in Iraq (there weren’t), “
   1. Well… the (there weren’t), part isn’t exactly true. There were MWD’s found in Iraq, there were MWD manufacturing and research facilities found in Iraq, and there was evidence that large quantities of WMD’s were transported out of Iraq, however… there were NOT the large quantities of WMD’s found that the entire world’s intelligence agencies thought were there. But to say flatly that “there weren’t” any WMD’s in Iraq… is wrong.
2. “that the Bush tax cuts increased government revenues (revenues actually fell)”
   1. That statement is patently false… Government revenues did rise. President Bush took office in 2001, in a year in which government revenues were steeply falling.

Year     GDP-US          Total Revenue-fed       

1999    9353.5             1827.64           a

2000    9951.5             2025.46           a

2001    10286.2           1991.43           a

2002    10642.3           1853.40           a

2003    11142.1           1782.53           a

2004    11867.8           1880.28           a

2005    12638.4           2153.86           a

2006    13398.9           2407.25           a

2007    14077.6           2568.00           a

2008    14441.4           2524.00           a

2009    14258.2           2105.00           a

2010    14623.9           2165.12           b

Legend:

 a – actual reported

 b – budgeted estimate in US fy11 budget

Now, as the actual numbers show… revenues peaked in 2000, a year before Bush took office, then dropped precipitously until… by God… until 2004, the fiscal year following the full implementation of Bush’s tax cuts. (Please do not take this as a defense of Bush at all… because while his tax cuts did raise revenues… his spending outpaced his revenue increases dramatically)

            So, two ‘facts’… that according to this article claims that so called ‘conservatives’ were so defensive about… weren’t even facts at all, but misrepresentations of facts.

            Is it any wonder why so many people disbelieve these so called ‘facts’??

            Then the article continues with this, ‘It’s unclear what is driving the behavior — it could range from simple defensiveness, to people working harder to defend their initial beliefs — but as Nyhan dryly put it, “It’s hard to be optimistic about the effectiveness of fact-checking.”’

            Well, to the trained eye it is simple what the driving behavior is. I divide it up into two areas, agenda and simple values.

1. Agenda… people have agendas to push. Everyone has agendas to push… from Katie Couric interviewing Sarah Palin to Sean Hannity interviewing Sarah Palin. The media, whether it’s CNN, Fox News, MSNBC to your evening news… they all have an agenda.

I have an agenda… only I freely admit that I have an agenda, and I’ll state my agenda openly an honestly. That is one of the few things that I think sets me apart from many others…

… other people cloak their agendas in the language of intellectual elitism and behavioral studies, etc.

Politicians wrap their agendas in GAO studies, CBO projections, economist speak, and greater good… and need and… my personal favorite, it’s for the children…

And of course, these ‘Fact Checkers’… themselves have agenda’s. Factcheck.org, MediaMatters.org and even to a slight degree… snopes.com all have agendas. Though snopes.com seems to have the least political agenda, factcheck.or mediamatters.org both have a steep political tilt and thus… their facts are about as reliable as the ones in this article.

                     2. Values… simple values. I’ll tell you what I value. I value individual liberty, namely my individual liberty and that of my children. I value your individual liberty, but not necessarily as much as my own, meaning… I’m not willing to let you swing your fist into my face for the sake of your liberty. Nor would I expect you to be willing to let me swing my fist in your face… or would I expect to party all the time and expect for you to pay for my house, run my business into the ground and expect you to bail me out.

That is what I value. I won’t make any bones about it. I don’t value your health-care. I don’t value your house. I don’t value your job… at least not as much as I value our liberty.

So, when faced with what may very well be absolute facts (for the sake of argument)… like that a new sweeping health-care bill might lower overall health-care costs and it might provide for a new Utopian society… at the cost of letting some bureaucrat to decide what kind of health-care I have…

… I’m going to completely ignore and disregard it. I don’t care.

            It’s not some flaw in my brain. It’s not a threat to democracy… it’s a simply difference in VALUES.

            So, take into account a difference in values, with the FACT that I recognize that like opinions and… well opinions… everyone has agendas, it’s no wonder why so called facts don’t seem to change people’s minds.

            There has never been a pundit or politician yet that has let facts get in the way of their opinions… and it would seem that very few of these studies or articles let facts get in the way of their ‘facts’ or conclusions.

“I am Sovereign” is one of my favorite phrases, right up there with “Get Off Our Ass”. They go hand in hand, two ways of saying the same thing. Both phrases should be shouted from the rooftops of every free man and woman’s home, every free business man or woman’s business. We should teach our children that THEY are sovereign.

It is one of the core, fundamental American ideals. It is in part how we came up with the principle that “All Men are Created Equal”. As it stands today, as Orwell so quaintly stated, many people are just ‘more equal’ than others.

Today, we are not all created equal. It strikes me as funny that a bunch of millionaires can take as much money as they want (from us) and give it to other millionaires… to bankers and CEO’s and community organizers.

Now, I cannot walk into anyone’s home, take their money and give it to my friends, relatives and supporters. I would be arrested, put in jail and tried and probably convicted. But for some reason, “we the people” have gotten it into our heads that our elected leaders have the power to reach into our paychecks and take our money and give to their friends, relatives and supporters… and they just get reelected.

So, something is wrong here. Are we not ‘all created equal’? I guess not.

Well, the problem, as much as it’s the people who willingly take as much power (and money) from the people, lies mostly at the feet of the people who willingly abdicate their own authority. The problem is the people who fail to think and act like and believe that, “I am Sovereign.”

“I am Sovereign.” What the heck does that mean anyway? It means, in short, that I am my ruler. In this country, we do not elect our rulers, we elect our representatives. (See Democracy vs. Republic, & What Does it Mean to be Republican)

“I am Sovereign” means that that man or woman that I just sent to Washington DC (or OKC as it might be) does not have more power than me, but less. They are not my master, they are my servant. They do not rule over me… I rule over them.

And as I rule over them… because I am Sovereign… they cannot dictate what kind of light bulb I have in my own, they cannot dictate to me what kind of toilet I have in my home, and they cannot dictate to me what kind of healthcare I have for my family.

Now, there is a flip side to being a Sovereign individual. Being Sovereign means that with every right that you hold comes with it an equal measure of responsibility. It’s the responsibility part were most of the ‘people’ fall flat on their ass.

It’s hard for you to demand that our politicians get off our ass if YOU are not taking care of business like a Sovereign individual should be. The only reason why the politicians can keep a tight hold on Social Security is because there are so few people taking responsibility for their own ‘Social Security’. The only reason that there is a chance of them taking control of our healthcare is because there are so many people that are not being responsible individuals and taking care of their own health.

That is just another dividing line in this country. I know I lead my life like I was a Sovereign individual… meaning that if the mighty fedzilla were to fall, I would be okay. My family would be okay. It might be a challenge and it might be difficult without the federal bureaucracy to get in the way of actually LIVING like a Sovereign individual… but I think I’d get along.

How many other people could say that? Can YOU? If tomorrow morning you woke up and the government were the size that it was when it was founded, meaning no Social Security, no public schools, no FDA, no ATF, no FBI, no Medicare, Medicaid, no safety net, and no big brother to take care of you… how would you get along?

I challenge you to ask yourself that question. What would you do if that pet government program were gone? Ask your friends and your family that question.

If you can’t answer that question by saying that you would be fine without a government check or a government bailout or government protection… then you are NOT living up to standards that our founders envisioned for you. If you are dependant on politicians… then you are not free.

And if my welfare and the welfare of my family were laid into the hands of a bunch of lawyers and politicians, I would be terrified.

So my greatest desire is that you, and every American, stands up and yells “I am Sovereign”… and “Get Off Our Ass”… and then that you also take the responsibility for your own life back from the lawyers and politicians and finally… for once in the last 100 years… learn to live as free, responsible… Sovereign Americans.

(Now, I would like to add that I am a Christian and Jesus Christ is my Lord. When I say that I am Sovereign, I mean regarding any man or woman born [to a mother and father] on this Earth)

I was recently in a discussion with a friend, a man I served with in the Army, and a man that, though I disagree with, I respect if for no other reason than the fact that we wore the same uniform, the same patches on our shoulder and both of us raised our right hand and swore to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

Now, as said, I do disagree with this man, but in the course of our discussion, I did get a glimpse into the thought processes and perhaps the roots of their ‘issues’.(“Their being shall we say, the more liberal leaning individuals) What I mean is that so often we get caught up in arguing over the varied issues; healthcare, bailouts, social security, et cetera, that we fail to look at why two, very large, groups of very disparate people disagree on such a large array of issues… right down the line.

I’ve always been amazed that, no matter the issue, it seems like there is usually one line drawn and people naturally trend to one side of that line or the other, and that’s even before the politicians come in and stir the pot to really get people pissed off at one another. So, for the most part (there are always exceptions) the same people that are pro-gun control are pro-government run healthcare and are pro-abortion and pro-big government anything, pro-low flow toilets, pro-CFLs (the piece of crap light bulbs). Then on the other side you have; pro-Second Amendment, pro-individual run healthcare, pro-life, pro-small government anything, and pro-deciding for yourself what kind of toilets and light bulbs you have in your house.

Anyway, in our discussion my friend made a statement that really struck me, (I paraphrase) “a Democracy means that we have to accept the will of the majority, and we have to accept what they desire, and by proxy the elected officials that represent them.”

Now, that really did strike me. First of all, we’re not a democracy. As a matter of fact, if anyone took a little time and looked back towards our founding fathers; you’d find that at our nation’s founding, the term ‘democrat’ was almost a pejorative. You’d have to look back at the time frame and understand what was happening. Right after our Revolution, the French went through their revolution; with a much different result. It should be noted that one of the early divisions in this country was over the French Revolution. Thomas Jefferson was an early supporter of the French Revolution, but later changed his mind because of the bloody direction it took, while John Adams opposed getting involved with the French Revolution, even though the French had supported the United States.

Now, the difference? The United States was based on a republican form of government; while the French was pure democracy… mob rule. America wound up with a small representative government, where the government had a few defined responsibilities and the individuals had the rights, and responsibilities, for the rest. The French wound up with guillotines, blood in the streets, fear and eventually Napoleon Bonaparte.

THAT is the difference between a democracy and a republic.

Another difference between a democracy and a republic; you can do a lot more under a democracy than you can a republic. One of our founding principles, if anyone would go back and read our founders, and the genesis of the phrase, “All Men Are Created Equal”, is the idea that my elected officials have no more rights than I do as an individual. I elect neither my ruler nor my slave master. The people that I elect work for me.

That means that if I can’t walk into your house and force you to change your light bulbs, then neither can my elected officials. If I, as an individual, cannot come into your home and force you to either pay for someone else’s healthcare or take a healthcare system of my design; then my elected officials cannot do it, and it doesn’t matter how many of them band together into a majority.

But under a Democracy, there are no prohibitions on the power of the masses. As a matter of fact, it doesn’t even take a majority of the masses today; it only takes a majority of the elected officials. (So, to all of those people who don’t pay attention to politics and then bitch and complain that the government is taking away your rights… F’ You)

So, how have we managed to survive for over 200 years without a universal healthcare system? Because, our founding fundamental principles prohibited our government from imposing itself on its people. The government, in short, respected the people.

This, I believe, is where the battle line has been drawn; between a democracy and a republic. (Now, please don’t misunderstand my support for a republican government with any support for the piece of crap Republican Party we see today). On one side, you have people that see this nation as a democracy, as my friend does and the other as a republic. The democracy folks think that just because so many people want to do something, then it’s alright and the rest should just suck it up… and the rest of us basically want to be left alone (thus the genesis of GOOA).

Now, I do not hate my friend. I think he’s wrong. I do not think he understands what was meant when he stood, raised his right hand and swore to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. I do not think he understands the phrase, “All Men Are Created Equal”.

I will stand up, and until the day I die protect my friend’s right to be wrong. I will protect my friend’s right to live as he chooses, no matter how much I disagree with him. I will help him fight anyone who wants to impose their will on my friend, by the vote or by the gun…

… my only hope is that one day my friend will wake up and return the favor.

I suppose I should state what my beliefs are, before I question anyone else…

What does ‘Republican’ mean?

In my view, a republican refers to someone who adheres to our Constitution and the ideals that our Constitution is wrapped in and directly opposed to the democrat, who follows the ideal of mob rule.

In short, a Republican’s ruler is the Constitution. We don’t elect rulers… we elect representatives. I haven’t heard ‘Republican’ candidate refer to what the Constitution empowers them to do since Reagan. We elect a President, who’s only job is to Preside over the government… he’s not our ruler. He is a subject to the same laws as anyone else.

Now, indeed… today’s Republican party has completely divorced itself from anything resembling republican principles. It is, in fact just another democratic party. It plays to the whim of the masses just as much as much as the democrats do. It plays to the cult of personality, classes and victimhood, just as the democrats do…

… but just as has been said, they’ve just got different classes and victim groups.

They’re not rooted in principle, they’ve sold their soul to the masses… and I’ll fully admit that for a long time, I was a part of the mass.

I say that, because conservatism does not equal republicanism. Saying conservatism equals republicanism is like saying sugar equals tea. Yes, I love sweet southern iced tea, but not everyone likes sweet tea… and regardless of how well they go together… one does not equal the other.

One of the great things about our federal republic is that each state can run their state pretty much as they see fit. Now, that’s not to say the rest of us can’t bitch and complain about how the unions are ruining Michigan, or the Chicago mob bosses (read Blago/Obama/Rezko) are ruining Illinois… or illegal aliens are ruining California, but being a federal republic, republicans should at least support their right to f’ up their own states.

That’s what our founding fathers faced. For better or worse, they designed a system that, in the matters of domestic policy, particularly slavery… they were for the most part powerless. They didn’t see themselves as the know all, be all, end all of everything in the United States. They didn’t see themselves as rulers who knew better for us. So we wound up with northern industrial states, southern agrarian states… some slave states, some anti-slavery states…

Now, I’ve defined conservatism by what it is not. So what is it?? To me, at least, it’s the way I want my government to operate… literally. Read – in small amounts. I like a liberal amount of sugar in my tea… I like a conservative amount of salt and pepper in my food…

… I like a conservative amount of government in my life.

I don’t want to see a ‘free’, liberal government. I believe that the freedom of the state and the freedom of the people are inversely proportional. The freer the government, then the less free the people. Today, our federal government is free to write checks for whatever they want… and spend our children’s children money as THEY see fit.

I don’t want a government free enough to create a national health care system. I don’t want a government free enough to school lunch program. I don’t want a government free to manipulate the economy… or ‘save’ the economy. I do want an impotent government… as far as domestic affairs. As horrible as it might be, if a bunch of poor starving kids petitions the federal government for ‘help’… my hope would be that my politician would have the balls, and principles, to say, “As a congressman, there is nothing I can do, BUT… as a man… here’s what I can do.”

Leave the saving of poor, destitute children… and of AIG, and Chevy… to individuals.

I don’t want a government free enough to write one billion dollar check to Wall Street or a billion one dollar checks to welfare recipients. I don’t want a government free enough to spend my money on car companies, or my grandchildren’s money on me or anyone else’s “social security”.

Now, as I said, as a conservative, I want a small government, an impotent government… but as a republican, if Barack Obama came out tomorrow and said, “I’ll leave the rest of the country alone, I just want to turn Illinois into a communist haven.” I’d actually be willing to stand by his side and support him. With the emphasis on ‘leave the rest of the country alone’…

… and if his ideas and way of life is so great, then everyone in the country would flock to Illinois. If they’re wrong… they’ll run away.

I know, that’s not the way a liberal’s mind works… they want to impose their ideals on everyone else… to hell with what people want for themselves.

The problem is that for most so called ‘conservatives’ now days… that’s how their minds work as well. It’s not about the struggle between the rule of law and the power of the masses, it’s just about a bunch of people who want their side to win. It’s about people who that think their ideas as so much better… to hell with the rule of law… to hell with principle…

The dichotomy the ‘left’ and ‘right’, ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’, ‘Democrat’ and ‘Republican’… is fiction. Those ‘struggles’ are no more real than the ‘struggle’ between men and women, blacks and whites, gays and straights. It is all a bunch of BS. It’s all a game played to inspire fear and passion amongst the masses… doesn’t matter much at all which side of their fence you come down on.

Now, personally, I refuse to play their game. I know… it tends to piss people off who want to play their game. I don’t care. I don’t care if I hurt people’s feelings.

If you believe that the federal government should have the right to spend your grandchildren’s wealth before they have a chance to earn it… you’re neither a conservative nor republican. If you believe the government is free to choose which multi-trillion dollar companies win and which ones lose… you’re neither a conservative nor a republican. If you believe that all of those poor plebes out there in the country just don’t understand how much they need the federal government to save them… you’re neither a conservative nor a republican.

Now, that in and of itself isn’t necessarily a horrible thing… so long as your intellectually honest enough to admit that you’re a liberal (think that the government is free to do whatever they want) and a democrat (play to the masses instead of the rule of law).

Don’t feel bad about being what you are… that goes to people like John McCain, George Bush… I & II… Arlen Specter… and pretty much the entirety of both the Democrat and Republican parties.

Neither of the parties are ‘more republican’ than the other… neither are big government or small government… just different big government.