The Road Ahead

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed----."     Declaration of Independence


As a conservative who regards the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the bedrock of our individual freedoms and sovereignty, I am troubled by the path that we have been on and which we elected to stay on this past election.

We have discussed in past posts the country's problems:

     *A stalled economy.

     *Out of control public expenditures.

     *An unsustainable federal debt.

     *A political and cultural climate that fosters dependence and seeks security at the expense of liberty.

     *A federal government that is too big, intrusive and bureaucratic with no clear lines of responsibility.

     *The lack of political will and the courage to address and solve our problems.

     *Politicians who speak of high ideals and big things but act small.

     *The undue influence of lobbyists in the legislative and regulatory process and their corrupting influence on our election campaigns.

     *The lack of respect and tolerance for each other's opinions and insensitivity in our public discourse.

     *An emphasis on what is expedient, not what is morally right or in keeping with our nation's ideals and constitutional imperatives.


 I strongly believe that our country would have been better served had we been truer to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  In the main, those principles envision a federal government of enumerated and limited power granted to it by the sovereign will of the people--that such powers granted were to be divided and balanced among the three branches--and that powers not granted "are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (10th Amendment).

In the first ten amendments of the Constitution (the Bill of Rights), certain freedoms are specifically protected from federal jurisdiction and in subsequent amendments individual liberty and rights are guaranteed to all of the nation's citizens.

In its size and scope, the federal government as it now exists is far beyond its constitutional mandate of limited and specific powers. For example, the federal government currently regulates much of how we live our daily lives from the food we eat, to the education of our children, to the toys they play with, to the products we buy, to the health care we use and much more. In addition, the government has the power to access all manner of personal information through the tax system, the internet and its ability to intercept private communications.

One could argue that these government functions are required for our safety, for security purposes. But consider what we have lost: diminished personal freedom, individual sovereignty, responsibility and the incentives that spark individual initiative. With these values comes risks but if we are to be free, we should be willing to accept some uncertainty, some risks. If we do otherwise, we are denying those essential elements that made our country exceptional: "--that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It is true that our nation historically has faced and conquered numerous crises. I believe that we still can if we are resolute and true to our principles. But questions remain.

Will we follow the example of generations past who forthrightly faced their problems? Or are we to the point that we can not or will not? Are we capable of making the changes required to get our federal government under control? To restore to the States and to the people those powers that were meant to be retained by them? Only time will tell.

Another Look at the Election Results

What is it that divides us?

Much of the liberal/conservative split has as its origin the question of the size and scope of the welfare state. Conservatives are often portrayed as being hard-hearted, unsympathetic and uncharitable. We know that is not the case but it seems to stick because we oppose a welfare state that is clearly out of control.  Or is it because we oppose the misuse of funds in support of questionable goals? Or because we oppose spending that enables immoral behavior (remember Sandra Fluke)? Or that we are more rational, realistic (and less emotional) about these topics? Or that we stand on principle, not political pandering and opportunism? 

In a follow-up post on his blog (cited in my previous post) Rabbi Pruzansky points out that true charity is a voluntary act, not one to be forced by government. I would add to that idea that government should have no right to pass on our tax dollars to organizations that perform immoral acts (Planned Parenthood), distribute to organizations that don't need it (Big Bird), benefits political friends (Acorn etc.) or is just plain wasted (adding to an unsustainable debt).

Another critical issue that divides us is abortion. Conservatives who are pro-life believe that abortion is immoral, an intrinsic evil that should be opposed. Liberals as well as secularists say conservatives want to deny a woman's "right/freedom" to choose. The charge is perplexing. The very same liberals and secularists have little hesitation in supporting the imposition of health care mandates on religious institutions contrary to the Constitution's clear guarantees of religious freedom. 

It is generally agreed, at least among conservatives, that the country's divisions have a strong moral dimension and a constitutional one as well. We have discussed the constitutional issues in prior posts but to summarize I will only say that the federal   government, as it currently exists, is a danger to our fundamental freedoms. It is too big, too intrusive and unmanageable with no clear lines of responsibility. If we continue on this path, we not only will be less free, we will also be economically diminished and a second rate international  power.

Frankly, I thought that economic considerations coupled with the fact that it was the "right" thing to do would win the day for Romney. The fact that it didn't is partially explained by a bad economy and the existence of a bloated government which fosters a dependency on welfare (folks in fact do want "stuff" as Bill O'Reilly would say). Other factors include fear (Grandma over the cliff), demonizing Romney as a ruthless capitalist (with ties to those scoundrels on Wall St), the image of Republicans as being insensitive to the immigration problem (enforcing our borders and cries for no "amnesty") and the so called Republican "war on women". 

Both sides had less total votes than the 2008 election.  Romney didn't get as many Republican votes as McCain in 2008 (because he wasn't conservative enough?--talk of cutting off your nose to spite your face--ironic when you think about it). He also lost votes among Hispanics because of the strong Republican stance on border control. For many Hispanics that stance is directed at their family and friends. Once they heard it, they shut out anything else the Republicans/Romney had to say.

Obama' s decrease in total votes from 2008 can in large part be attributable to a decrease in the enthusiasm he previously generated. Whether it was due to the economy, or because Obama is now more familiar or just "buyers remorse" is an open question.  It is also apparent that these votes did not go to Romney. Was it because he was "too conservative? Again, another irony.  Or was it because he didn't "fire them up" even if we consider that this election had been described as crucial for the country's future? If this portion of the electorate thinks that there is a perfect candidate out there, they will continue to be disappointed.

My conclusion is that enough voters (and non-voters) were short-sighted and ill informed that the results favored Obama.  I don't know if "dumb" is the correct description (as Rabbi Pruzansky puts it) but whatever the malady, it exists in abundance on both sides of the aisle. 

Past, Present and Future

My initial reaction (see my last post) to the election results were anything but upbeat. In the past week, I haven't changed my mind.

In my posts on this blog, my standard for appraising any policy or proposal has been the Constitution.  In summary, I believe that the federal government in its current form has gone beyond its constitutional mandate. I further believe that this result will be to the ultimate detriment of all of us, rich and poor, of all ethnic heritages and no matter where we live.

This result did not suddenly happen over the last four years. We have been drifting toward it for some time.

One analysis is entitled "The Decline and Fall of the American Empire" and is found in the blog link cited below.  You can agree or disagree with it but don't ignore it. As usual, comments are welcome.

http://rabbipruzansky.com/

Post Election Blues

What can we say about the election results? Some random thoughts:

I have several emotions on this day after the election. I am disappointed, angry and sad for our country. It is a day of mourning.

This is not the country I know any longer.  This is not the country where a president could say: "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country". That call to service has  been turned on its head. We are now a "gimme" nation with Sandra Fluke as its emblem.

We have drifted to this conclusion for some time; it did not happen in one day. Who is to say when it started----when was the balance between sobriety and irresponsibility tipped? Who was there to warn of unsustainable expenditures---why did we allow them to be marginalized?

We face some very serious problems--you might even refer to them as existential. With Romney, I could see a way out; with Obama, the uncertainty continues. His campaign was one of acrimony--it will not be easily bridged. He is not prone to compromise, to reach across the aisle, to respect those in opposition.

The first crises facing us is the so called fiscal cliff. The President and Congress should address it now--there is no longer any excuse to kick the can down the road. The solution isn't in raising taxes for the rich--the problem is much larger. Spending has to be brought under control. Speaker Boehner now has the proverbial task of putting his finger in the dike.

What will be the impact on our role in the world? What is to become of the Middle East? Of Israel--our friend and ally? Will the world now be apportioned into spheres of influence--China, Russia and us?  We know that terrorists are not defeated despite Osama's demise--they will strike again but where and when? How will we respond? Only time will tell.

These are my random thoughts on the day after the election. What are yours?

A Summary of Where We Are on this Election Day

The choice in this election has both a philosophical and practical side.

The philosophical: Barack Obama reflects the view of his father.  That view is based on the premise that the Western powers subjugated other countries and populations primarily to exploit their resources. It is a view that is not only anti-colonial but anti-capitalists as well.

It is a view that puts America (with all its wealth) as the inheritor of that history. From that idea, proposals to "spread the wealth" and laws to control private industry/business are promulgated.  From that idea such sentiments such as "you didn't build that" and references to voting as "revenge" are based. And it explains, in my opinion, Obama's "apology tour" early in his presidency.

We should oppose these ideas on several levels. Briefly, they are:

1) America was never a major colonial power.

2) Our wealth was built on the basis of a free economic system. That system has led many to immigrate here and to prosper under their own initiative. They represent the vast majority of Americans today and are the bulwark of the middle class.

3) Policies emanating from anti-colonial, anti-capitalists views can only be self destructive and hurt people of all classes.

4) Such policies are in opposition to our Constitutional values and historic tradition.

The practical: We now see where Obama's policies have led us. The results are there for all to see. In the press, on the net, during the political campaigns and in past posts of this blog and comments received. They show an economy that is frozen in place, no better than it was four years ago, a country that is divided and fearful, a country under threat from emboldened foreign enemies and a country that sees its liberties diminished.

Many attribute these results to incompetence. That is only part of the story. Based on his background and ideas, Barack Obama seeks to fundamentally "transform" America. If you don't think so, read his books, see the movie "2016".

It is often said that this is a critical election. If Obama is reelected, there will be no turning back. That his policies will be too ingrained to reverse or change. Based on what we now know, the reelection of Barack Obama is a risk we should not take. It is a bridge too far.

Mitt Romney is the better alternative. He best represents our values, knows how our free enterprise system works, has held both private and government leadership posts and is committed to reverse the path we are on to a brighter, more optimistic future.

Barack--Your Man?

The President regards "them" with disdain, prefers not to deal with "them" or even to be in their presence. Harry Reid has said that there is to be no compromise with "them".  Key members of the Democratic Party advocate any all means to defeat "them".  "Liberals" demonstrate an illiberal intolerance toward every utterance by "them". The media ignores journalistic objectivity in their criticisms of "them".

"Them"? A foreign power that threatens us and our allies? Terrorists who attack and kill Americans at every opportunity? It is neither of these.

"Them" refers to conservative Republicans and everyone or anyone who dares oppose the Democrats' agenda. In their zeal, Obama adherents justify deceit, fear and division to promote their ideology. An ideology that opposes American values of limited government and individual freedom. An ideology that promotes big government and ultimate control.

Given this fundamental difference, it is no wonder that our government is deadlocked and ineffective.  That our problems have not been addressed, our economy essentially "on hold".

Want more of the same? Barack Obama is your man.

Want to break out of this mess? Vote for someone who knows how to govern and reach across the aisle: Mitt Romney.