jump to navigation

Political Asylum August 31, 2009

Posted by Sanity in Politics, reform, wisdom.
Tags: , , , , ,

HELLO Hello hello ello lo o…

Well, I had an idea this morning and the realization that I haven’t blogged enough or posted on my own site in way too long.  Maybe I’m here by myself.  Sanity is in low supply nowadays and there are not as many brains in government either.

Well, I plan on changing a few things.  Too many remnants of insecurity when I was initially defining my site, but I’ll probably procrastinate again.

No, the subject of today’s post pertains to sad state of politics in this country.  The Democrats are not actually any more productive than a year ago when their approval rating was lower than Bush’s. They appear to be more productive because they spend money really fast, but they can’t really improve things overnight like all the campaign rhetoric would have had you believe.  I measure productivity in the ‘effect’ not the number of bills written and passed.  They can completely ignore the Republicans and the Republicans are only busy posturing and attacking and scrambling for scraps of influence.

It doesn’t really matter though because it is no longer about what either party accomplishes.  This country (including the Party’s, the media, the talking heads, and citizens… and non-citizens) are completely focused on bad mouthing the other side.  Liberals vs. Conservatives.  Far-left loons vs. Right-wing extremists.  Neo-this, neo-that. Blame Bush, Blame Clinton.  If the “Left” proposed the idea/solution, then the “Right” must oppose it, vice versa, etc, etc.

I am tired of it.  I’m not the only one, but I’m going to re-introduce the concept of a new direction, and to continue the working analogy of direction, I declare myself to be an Upist.  Everyone talks about progress, moving forward, hope and change.  That’s why I chose “Up”.  I want to raise the expectation of government to work for EVERYONE, not just be an avenue for abuse, corruption and finding someone else to blame, punish or pay for things.

The mascot for this new Party/direction is the Eagle (or maybe the Falcon – someone who understands and agrees with my point and is more of an expect on birds can refine which features/characteristics fit better).

Now since there are always two sides and I don’t mean to be UP-ity, the “Down-ers” can still be a positive part of the solution and be “Down to Earth” or whatever completes the picture.  No single outlook will fit every facet of society nor make everyone happy.  It is about working together.  It is about growing and working together.  Different methods work and different concerns exist at different levels of society.  There has to be communication in BOTH directions (Up and Down) of the levels of society.  The safest example I can give without starting a political fight, hopefully, would be in agriculture.  Individual farmers need to know what crops are in demand but need to have a way to balance profit so everyone doesn’t plant one crop and prevent anyone from profitting.

One of the things I wish to communicate over time is specific examples of how we argue about things that “miss the mark”.  There are problems and there are causes of those problems and then there are problems with the same way we try to solve all problems.  If I have time, national healthcare is a great example since it provides so many problems with it.  Hopefully I will start that thread soon.

Comment, argue, compliment, ramble.  Just help me get the idea going that we don’t have to keep being led by the broken two-party system.

Color Blind, Hearing Empowered March 25, 2009

Posted by Sanity in Politics, Religion, wisdom.
add a comment

I have to admit a lack of optimism since the election. Not long before the primaries of 2008 started, I started blogging for the first time.  Hey, I had moved all my music from cassette tapes to an MP3 player, so I finally started exploring the social aspects of the Internet.  The new forum (new to me) allowed me to grow in way an introvert would never grow via live debates.  Of the many areas my curiosity grew wild was to finally try to understand politics.  At most I had ever cared about voting for the President once the choices had been narrowed down.  One dilemma arose: the more I learned, the more there was to learn, more people to track, and more half-truths to filter.  Both sides, in theory, had positions that I could agree with.  Both sides shared an aptitude for broken promises, deceit, not admitted mistakes, childish games, etc.  And the level of scrutiny, also riddled with half-truths, deceit, etc., was raised to a level that not one historic ‘leader’ would measure up.

Among the things that blogging showed me, most people are guilty of being too forgiving of “their side”, overly critical of the “other side”, and the art of constructive criticism is in very short supply.  Being aware of these inconvenient truths, I try even harder to remain open-minded without being easily swayed from my foundation.  The only time I may be wrong on my website is when someone does not challenge my perspective.  I may have been wrong, but if a healthy argument has happened, my position can be changed, but henceforth, I am again right.  Lately, healthy arguments have been less frequent.  Automatic defenses of the current party in power illicit responses such as “so-and-so did that too”, “that can’t be true”, “he has only been in office…”, and my least favorite “You only feel that way because you don’t like the guy.”  None of these tactics has convinced me to reverse my position.  One does not ‘win’ an argument, by excluding opinions purely due to not being aligned with the same political party.  Some of the more energetic exchanges tend to label people as racist for daring to question our new leader.  Regardless of family lineage, I equate certain derogatory racial terms with attitude, not skin color, so, my prejudices have no conventional tie with racial history.

So, with my effort and interest, I thought I would experience joy of “having an effect” and how “everyone’s vote counts”, but the Democrats have control of the White House, and both sides of Congress, and I have had no effect on interacting with third parties.  Where does that leave those that disagree with the paths they choose? Note: The stated question includes Independents, Libertarians and other third parties, AND Democrats who are not acting like kids in an unsupervised candy store.

Luke 16:10 “Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much…”

The Republicans had power and lost it. Everything has cycles, so it isn’t as if Democrats would never have majority again, but obviously ‘the People’ lost confidence in the RNC.  From my perspective, there are signs that those in power are ignoring Republicans, excluding them, and may be gloating about it.  Should the Republicans admit defeat and be content with commentary and criticism from the back seat? I say no.

George W. Bush suffered a huge volume of destructive criticism during his presidency.  Attempting to be “slow to speak, quick to listen”, I always asked the following: Why was a certain action bad?  How do you measure/monitor the effect of a decision? What should have been done instead with the knowledge at the time of the decision? What should be done from the current circumstances? (Rarely, if ever, do I get those answers)

Given the diminished position of power, where do we go?

  1. Servant leadership – Establish who knows ‘what’ to do, by seeing them doing it themselves.
  2. Reasonable accountability – No one is righteous. Know what to forgive and what to ignore.  A “plank in the eye” is usually warped and blocks ones hearing.  An opponent may criticize our leaders, but their leaders are usually guilty of the same criticism, so listen, set the bar higher and show progress by acknowledging and learning from mistakes.
  3. Micro-manage – National fixes rarely find their targets without a lot of waste.  Help the macro-changes find the little guys/gals that need the help.  If money is falling from the sky, the 10th floor exec has a better chance of benefiting than the single story mom-and-pop shop.
  4. Minimize the damage – We may not agree with the plan but we use it to our advantage by minimizing the waste and demonstrating who is actually fixing things with the piles of money.
  5. Regain trust – Things do need to change. Politics is riddle with stereotypes, a majority of which are not flattering.  Sing about accomplishments, share what works with other communities, and give people more of a choice than the “lesser of two evils”.
  6. Compromise on policy, not principle – There can be many ways to accomplish the same goal, as long as the goal is consistent. Don’t move the target to appease the last complaint received.

Republican Weight Loss Program March 4, 2009

Posted by Sanity in Humor, Politics, wisdom.
Tags: , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Are you tired of that bloated legislative feeling? Feeling over taxed?
Worried about that growing waste line? Uncontrollable spending urges?

Then try my new 42-step program: San-eat-y.  Guaranteed to add juicy vote-ables to your diet for a leaner party platform to stand on.  No point system to compromise on.  Just a good foundation of principles you can be proud of.  And each meal is PORK free!

Sound too good to be true.  It might take 2 years to see results? Or 4? But let’s not take 8 years to solve this problem.

Over time I will lay out a plan of sites and material to guide us all, from beginner to experienced, to become more aware of what needs fixin’, how to do it, who to support, and where, why and what ever other questions need to be included.  I’ll share discoveries of efforts that encourage me when the political forecast is scary, and I invite others to help create a guide to prepare for future elections.  Please don’t just drop names and sites and leave it at that.  Or point to a politician’s own website (but do include it with supportive material).  We need to focus on what works and why, and what doesn’t work.  We need more than the maintenance programs that government current supplies (using the same “patch it and ignore it” solutions expecting different results).