Friday, September 14, 2007

My Latest Correspondence With A Liberal Friend

I have a bright and literate friend who is decidedly inclined toward liberal thinking, and even more disinclined to approving of Republicans. This is the large part of my response to his communication about Bush’s foreign policy fiasco in Iraq. What has always been remarkable to me is how someone so philosophically and practically ambiguous as George W. Bush is often portrayed as an expression of “the extreme radical right wing.” That kind of talk can leave one speechless.

Anyway, I’ve edited out the personal references and conversation, but left my personal reactions to today’s political situation and a very basic reason why I so strongly support Mike Huckabee:

I was going to write a response to some of these specifics with some questions. But, it would be better if we could talk over a drink and a piece of bread, where tone and motivation can be clearer.

It is beyond clear what you think and what it seems you will think, no matter what happens. Remember that as a Texas I never was a George W. Bush supporter, never voted for him for president, and still wouldn’t. But watching someone, especially someone so modestly armed to explain himself, so roundly and completely slandered as he has been, is sad and offends my moral sensibilities.

I have some questions, but it seems to me that there is an element for whom George W. Bush will be a dishonest, devious, and inhumane devil regardless of whether the facts play our far to the east or far to the west. As I have said, either in intellectual or leadership terms, I don’t count him as clear enough to be responsible for either. And, I don’t say that as an insult. I would say the same of all but a few of the presidents and candidates that we have seen in our lifetimes: Morally-driven people usually lead scout troops and intellectually lucid people usually write books for a living. Ordinarily, the job doesn’t demand extraordinary capacity in either of those respects. But, given the extraordinary disorientation of America, in both foreign policy and domestic terms, I think an extraordinarily able shepherd is needed.

About Ron Paul, whom I often agree with about things like the social waste of bureaucracy and the ideal of a hard, fixed-commodity currency, I am left to wonder to what extent the unconcern for the Iraqi people is denial or indifference.

You and others who disdain anyone with an ® after their name today, do not exhibit that indifference,but many clearly do. As you know, most people would identify me as having constitutionalist ideals, to which Sophie and Ron Paul appeal. But basic humanity lies beneath The Constitution in the foundation of a moral disposition.

In terms of respect for his character, I am convinced that Ron Paul is honest and serious, as is Joe Lieberman in the opposite direction. But I have a great deal more uncertainty about the accuracy of Ron Paul’s belief that it would be better for America if we pulled right out of Iraq, leave aside what horrible calamity may or may not befall people in Iraq. And the matters at stake are unprecedentedly huge.

But I wouldn’t say that about most Democratic politicians. My impression has been that the most sober and able of the Democratic presidential candidates would be Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. Biden balked at the slandering of General Petraeus’ character, while Richardson has joined the rest of them in jumping over each other to advocate for the most expeditious withdrawal, in an effort to attract even a sidelong glance from the moveon.org type activist Democratic voters.

Biden would be a sober and responsible president, though I would disagree with him about most everything, especially the essential nature of cultivating and maintaining a respect for human life in the American consciousness. I don’t believe that Richardson would follow through on the immediate pullout plan that he has proposed, either. He needs the attention, but he isn’t stupid. In fact, I don’t believe that Hillary or even Edwards (who near to makes my skin crawl) would, either. I doubt Barack O’Bama would, though I think he might make one of the most under qualified presidents that we have ever had.

I really look at the situation and very seriously consider that the nation might be better off today, if Al Gore had won in 2000. Don’t get me wrong, I think Al Gore was an outright ridiculous candidate. But, if he had won,

1) he wouldn’t have made an occupation of flogging the Chicken Little anthropomorphic global warming fear-mongering, behind which I see no scientific/logical substance.

2) There wouldn’t have been the national trauma about the terrible nature of whatever he had to do in The Middle East. When he said it was necessary, it would have been accepted as necessary, rather than him being called the lying evil genius worst disaster of a president in American history, except by a minority, most of them Republicans!

3) Republicans in Congress would have resisted his suggestions of expanding government, instead of rolling over like a puppy as they did for George W. Bush ®, and bathing in the corruption of power. And, they probably wouldn’t have been kicked out of office.

4) The bottom-line is that we probably would not be quite the hair-pulling, eye-scratching, hating, screeching popular culture that we are, today. The visceral unreflective venom that fills the blogosphere on both sides is ugly and dismaying. The most basic problem our society has is not one of whose dogma (speaking as a reputed dogmatist), but of disposition. That is the major reason that I support Mike Huckabee. Though he’s not off the map on the most vital issues, as he says, “I’m a conservative, but I’m not mad at anyone about it.” Boy, could this nation use a little moderation of demeanor.

4 comments:

Anne said...

Richardson for President is censoring blog postings from people who are asking him to help fight child sexual abuse

I am involved in helping a family whose daughter was sexually abused by her grandfather. Her name is Madison and she lives in El Paso, TX. The grandfather is a resident of Hobbs, NM. Judge William A. McBee of the Fifth Judicial District Court for Chaves, Eddy & Lea Counties in New Mexico recently awarded the grandfather unsupervised visitation with Madison, against the advice of Madison's therapist, who testified that the grandfather had, indeed, molested Madison. I have launched a campaign to get this decision reversed and to protect Madison.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson advised Madison's father through his staffer, Elizabeth Osorio, that he wouldn't get involved to help Madison because her case is "too complex." Governor Richardson is running for President. How can he be trusted with the multitude of complex issues he would face as our President if the concept of protecting innocent children from pedophiles is "too complex" for him? I posted two blogs on the Richardson for President website, hoping to get some action on behalf of this child. Oh, I got action, all right. THEY DELETED MY BLOGS AND DISABLED MY ACCOUNT. I immediately set up a new account and reposted my comments, but the new blog was deleted and the new account was disabled. This has not only happened to me, but to several other users, as well, all for posting comments on this topic.

Here are the deleted blogs and disabled accounts:
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/akbooher
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/annebooher
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/amiedavis
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/amycaudillo
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/candicetschauner
http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/blog/mistyperkins

Please look into this. It's bad enough that Richardson isn't interested in helping protect a five year-old child that was sexually molested in his state, but now he's trying to censor those of us who DO want to help. This is NOT anyone who should ever be the president of this great nation.

Thank you,
Anne Booher

http://www.petitiononline.com/Madison/petition.html
http://www.geocities.com/campaign4madison/C4M.html
akbooher@hotmail.com

Larry Perrault said...

Anne:

You should understand that I am not a Richardson supporter, but he only struck me as not the pathetic empty vessel that most of the other Democratic candidates have, especially their high-profile 3 of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards.

It's obvious to me that Richardson's contortions to get some attention have been futile if the story is true precisely as you describe it and it hasn't even earned a peep of media attention.

Secondly, it's also difficult for me to umagine that ANY candidate would demonstrate or allow even the appearance of demonstration of indifference to child sexual abuse. Such a person would find it difficult to be elected a dogcatcher in Vermont.

Nevertheless, best wishes for the pursuit of justice in Madison's case, especially if she is threatened with any sort of the situation you describe.

Jim Baxter said...

Every September, I recall that is more than half a century (62 years) since I landed at Nagasaki with the 2nd Marine Division in the original occupation of Japan following World War II. This time every year, I have watched and listened to the light-hearted "peaceniks" and their light-headed symbolism-without-substance of ringing bells, flying pigeons, floating candles, and sonorous chanting and I recall again that "Peace is not a cause - it is an effect."

In July, 1945, my fellow 8th RCT Marines [I was a BARman] and I returned to Saipan following the successful conclusion of the Battle of Okinawa. We were issued new equipment and replacements joined each outfit in preparation for our coming amphibious assault on the home islands of Japan.

B-29 bombing had leveled the major cities of Japan, including Kobe, Osaka, Nagoya, Yokohama, Yokosuka, and Tokyo.

We were informed we would land three Marine divisions and six Army divisions, perhaps abreast, with large reserves following us in. It was estimated that it would cost half a million casualties to subdue the Japanese homeland.

In August, the A-bomb was dropped on Hiroshima but the Japanese government refused to surrender. Three days later a second A-bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. The Imperial Japanese government finally surrendered.

Following the 1941 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, a Japanese admiral said, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." Indeed, they had. Not surprisingly, the atomic bomb was produced by a free people functioning in a free environment. Not surprisingly because the creative process is a natural human choice-making process and inventiveness occurs most readily where choice-making opportunities abound. America!

Tamper with a giant, indeed! Tyrants, beware: Free men are nature's pit bulls of Liberty! The Japanese learned the hard way what tyrants of any generation should know: Never start a war with a free people - you never know what they may invent!

As a newly assigned member of a U.S. Marine intelligence section, I had a unique opportunity to visit many major cities of Japan, including Tokyo and Hiroshima, within weeks of their destruction. For a full year I observed the beaches, weapons, and troops we would have assaulted had the A-bombs not been dropped. Yes, it would have been very destructive for all, but especially for the people of Japan.

When we landed in Japan, for what came to be the finest and most humane occupation of a defeated enemy in recorded history, it was with great appreciation, thanksgiving, and praise for the atomic bomb team, including the aircrew of the Enola Gay. A half million American homes had been spared the Gold Star flag, including, I'm sure, my own.

Whenever I hear the apologists expressing guilt and shame for A-bombing and ending the war Japan had started (they ignore the cause-effect relation between Pearl Harbor and Nagasaki), I have noted that neither the effete critics nor the puff-adder politicians are among us in the assault landing-craft or the stinking rice paddies of their suggested alternative, "conventional" warfare. Stammering reluctance is obvious and continuous, but they do love to pontificate about the Rights that others, and the Bomb, have bought and preserved for them.

The vanities of ignorance and camouflaged cowardice abound as license for the assertion of virtuous "rights" purchased by the blood of others - those others who have borne the burden and physical expense of Rights whining apologists so casually and self-righteously claim.

At best, these fakers manifest a profound and cryptic ignorance of causal relations, myopic perception, and dull I.Q. At worst, there is a word and description in The Constitution defining those who love the enemy more than they love their own countrymen and their own posterity. Every Yankee Doodle Dandy knows what that word is.

In 1945, America was the only nation in the world with the Bomb and it behaved responsibly and respectfully. It remained so until two among us betrayed it to the Kremlin. Still, this American weapon system has been the prime deterrent to earth's latest model world- tyranny: Seventy years of Soviet collectivist definition, coercion, and domination of individual human beings.

The message is this: Trust Freedom. Remember, tyrants never learn. The restriction of Freedom is the limitation of human choice, and choice is the fulcrum-point of the creative process in human affairs. As earth's choicemaker, it is our human identity on nature's beautiful blue planet and the natural premise of man's free institutions, environments, and respectful relations with one another. Made in the image of our Creator, free men choose, create, and progress - or die.

Free men should not fear the moon-god-crowd oppressor nor choose any of his ways. Recall with a confident Job and a victorious David, "Know ye not you are in league with the stones of the field?"

Semper Fidelis
Jim Baxter
Sgt. USMC
WW II and Korean War

Job 5:23 Proverbs 3:31 I Samuel 17:40
See: http://www.choicemaker.net/

VOTE HUCK! He is my man! jfb

Larry Perrault said...

Jim:

Thanks for coming by and thanks for your comments and your support of Mike Huckabee, whom I think America will be passing up an opportunity to add an unusual element of social healing, if it passes him up.

The "peaceniks" aren't fakers in the sense that they aren't mostly sincere. They are fakers in the sense that they inhabit a make-believe world. They imagine that we can just mind our own business and be IN heaven. We can't.

Unbelievers in that heaven-on-earth, through the sacrifice of soldiers like you, provide the pillows and the platforms for their tears and sermons about that heaven. Freedom makes the hard and innovative choices. And freedom provides the lap of perpetual infancy of unrealism.