AT WHAT PRICE GOVERNESS?

Authored by William Robert Barber

Post, Alexis De Tocqueville’s essay on American democracy wherein the author noted the guiding principles of Americanism as those founded on individualism, a spirit of egalitarian, where liberty, property, and religion were honored as inalienable virtues. America has, since De Tocqueville, realized a steady reduction of the average American’s appreciation of individualism; egalitarianism has been replaced by concerns over income disparity, liberty has been traded for government oversight and benevolence, private property is subject to a government’s perception of public good, and religion must conform to government mandates respective of theological conflict.           

After two-hundred and twenty-three years of existence the ideological principles of the Federalist Party have captured the concept, vision, and political meaningfulness of America’s governing. The party, initiated in George Washington’s second term, originated and reflected the political will manifested in the likes of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and John Adams. The Federalist comprehensively chartered the philosophical means, the judgment criteria, and the basis of Chief Justice John Marshall monumental decisions; the ideals of the Federalist Party has decisively overwhelmed and superseded any of the Founder’s wildest apprehensions and hesitations.

The Federalist intentions of yesteryear, by means unapparent and enigmatic, have captured the essence of Federalist’s original intent by enveloping from the political left instead of the right.  The progressively leftist government of Obama has with the advent of presidential executive edicts, presidential appointments of czars that evade senatorial approval, the preponderance of congressional recess appointments, the unilateral unprecedented spending of taxpayer funds financed by a Federal Reserve that simply prints fiat currency to keep pace with spending. A defense department cabinet member that says a congressional declaration of war is not necessary as long as there is a United Nations. A President Obama, who lies, distorts, misdirects, and willfully usurps authority. One who is joyously applauded by an embracing main-stream media? Is this behavior in keeping with the ideals of the original Federalist? I don’t think so.

The central government is dominate, omnificent, omnipotent, coercive, and distant from the people. The present power of the federal government has diminished the meaningfulness of federalism, by mandate and adherents to federal regulations the central government regularly mocks the sovereignty of States, and has by process and governess eliminated the practical legitimacy of the Checks and Balances system integral to the application of Constitutional maxims.  

The congressional elected are occupiers, long-term residents of congressional offices. They are facilitators of and for like-same political affiliations. They pledge their attention to lobbyist with offerings and to persons-of-interest persuaders that feed campaign funding to their advantage.  The politicians of recent memories prefer the retaining or attaining of power above all other considerations.  They are apparatchik’s of an ideological allegiance, as long as, such allegiance serves their interest. Their beliefs fit the moment and have no independent veracity; if in power they vote to retain, if out of power they voice themselves as sang-froid contrarians. Political campaigns are not a transparent truthful rendering of the candidate’s intentions if elected; they are charades designed by Psephologists who, no matter the cost, are one of a coterie of win-the-election promoters.  

President Obama, with the aid and assist of political professionals produces, writes, directs, acts, and distributes his campaign for reelection. For President Obama his reelection campaign is as if a movie. The president understands that truthfulness in an election is irrelevant. He is bound by only a figment of his own imaginative. He knows that he is a law professor, a man of academia, a theorist who is quite pleased with the idea of propagating his brand of political philosophy, even if, his theoretical ideals have no bearing in a real world; he is satisfied with his theories though the effects are pragmatically detrimental or ineffectual. The president must act or act like he is acting; therefore, he gives a speech, well, many speeches. He knows he is not an implementer, a hands-on builder, he is not a leader. President understands that he is simply an actor in a play of his own making. His political persona is a ruse.

Regardless of evidence to the converse he artfully dramatizes his raison d’être as a reflective of sapient and sanguine merit. He portrays himself as a representative of Vox populi. His mannerisms and oral expressions portrait a Stupor mundi of a man but in fact he is an illiberal elitist a liberal progressive who has expunged all conservative inclinations from his being. Obama is a didactic hauteur. A Chicago politician who espouses the governing philosophy of statism; he is an autocrat of necessity. Which simply means, (as one example) President Obama will state that the health-care mandate is not a tax before an election and then charge his attorney general’s consul to pray that the mandate is a tax in front of the Supreme Court.     

America requires a renaissance, a recommitment to the ideals of limited government, of recognizing the potency of individualism as a political philosophy, as well as, the belief in the trinity of liberty, property, and the freedom of religious worship disrespectful of government mandates of conformation to its will.

The Growing Majority of Baffled Voters

The Voter Will Bequeaths Upon Itself
Authored by: William Robert Barber
Part 1 of Many

One eligible citizen; one vote, is the law of the land in America. Note the law does not distinguish between the institutionally highly educated and the less educated, ignorant or enlightened, the literate from the illiterate, the lawless from the law-a-biding; every eligible citizen has the right to vote. Thus for those aspirating for public office every vote, and voter requires attention of and to their concerns. The candidates are required to present themselves for consideration by the electorate so to explain their policy, management of problems, answer questions, and publicly debate issues with other contenders. For the contender this is a statutory whetting process wherein those who seek public office must earn the blessings of the electorate by gaining the citizen’s vote.

The processes of elections define the political concept of power entrenched with the people; it is the voter who in common cause with their fellow citizens form the American ideal of a democratically founded governing system. The truthfulness of this definition is apparent when one grades the fairness measure to the nation’s laws, diligence of its regulatory agencies, integrity of its legislators, the efficiency of its bureaucrats, openness of its judicial proceedings, taxation policy, the adherence to the constitution of its courts, and the apolitical behavior of its military. Clearly, because of the electoral process, in America, the electorate will consistently get the government it deserves.

To some measurable degree there exists a growing majority of voters who are baffled, confused, and perplexed by the sheer size and managerial weight of the national government. Additionally, because of the enormity and complexity of international, as well as, national issues; the average voter is either not able to comprehend, is not interested or not willing to spend the time to understand the details of governing/managing the multiplicity of issues of critical national importance.

There is an empirically founded assumption that in local (city & county) elections the voter is more cognitive of details and policy issues verses national elections. One reason is the obvious indifference caused by distance; the other is that most citizens have only a cursory understanding of the national government’s complex and increasingly ambiguous structure, functionaries, or operating gadgetry. Therefore, the nominee easily escapes the requirements for specificity; they speak in generalities, fanciful quips that enhance and decorate the exuberantly rhetorical context, but, are intentionally void of objective substance. They for the most part need only point to the popular, the simple, the ruse of lights and mirrors.

In their defense, these national nominees are hampered as well by the largeness of government, the inherent governmental bureaucracy that engine the operations of governing and the requirement of raising money for political campaigns. These nominees are speaking to an electorate, in the majority, that blatantly lack the vocabulary so to comprehend the workings of federal governing; an electorate who have only media source understanding of national/international events; coupling this limitation of awareness by the voters it is of small wonder why the nominee communicates with sound bites.

Those nominees, seeking election to the highest public office in the land is beholding to an electorate with a scanty, basic, only nominal understanding of governmental resources, methods and practices.

The challenge of communicating the essence of an political, economic, or foreign policy argument to the voters reside within the nation’s media, pundits, and editorials.

The furtherance of this theme and title are forthcoming…

More Taxes, Bigger Government, Less Freedom

Republican Tax Model
Authored By: William Robert Barber fear2.jpg

From the years 1900 to 2000 we Americans have seen an expediential growth in the overall size of government; this growth has occurred in all levels of governing. Every federal agency and department has expanded its responsibilities and authority; this expansion of government includes the increase of taxes and fees to pay for the costly services provided by the jurisdictions of cities, counties, and states. On a world wide scale, America’s government has grown by influence and infrastructure; since the offset of the Spanish American War to the present America’s prowess, supported by taxes and debt service, has reached the far corners of the world.

No person could have possibly envisioned the effect of this step by step, layer upon layer, taxpayer funded expansion of American government; an effect that would propel the United States into a perpetual motion of uncontrollable legislative taxing continuances resulting in the creation of an ambiguous, abstract, Byzantine, wholly ungovernable, giant governing bureaucracy. A bureaucracy of laws and regulations created by the elected to satisfy the insatiable demands of a divergent group of lobbyist and ever increasing costs of buying constituency votes. Read More »

America, Pay Attention To The Next Electoral Cycle, So Much Is At Stake

The Liberal Bias for Naiveté as a Matter of Policy
By:  William Robert Barber

 What has happened to the party of FDR and JFK? Seemingly, motivated by rationale influences; and the support of leading Democrats, the Speaker of the House decides to meet with the Syrian dictator: To open a dialogue, to exchange ideas, find common ground, solve differences; well, what exactly was the result of that meeting? The leader of the Senate boldly asserts that the war in Iraq is lost. Imagine the nation is at war and the leader of the Senate states with prideful disregard of sensibility that the war is lost. Moveon.org. the funding engine of the Democratic Party; declares to the world that the nations top General in Iraq is a liar, a traitor, and a political pawn of the Bush administration. Is it possible that the Democratic Party has run itself off the plateau of what is reasonable and into the abyss of leftist lunacy?  

Now we have Jimmy Carter suggesting that this nation should NOT contest Iran as to its interest in developing a nuclear bomb. What! What world does Jimmy Carter live in? Is he inhaling peanut shells! Iran is a serious geopolitical threat to the region; it plays well into the Russian game of causing tension allowing the market to lean toward increasing the price of oil and costing the United States blood, time, and treasury. Iran is and has been an enemy of the USA since Jimmy (lives on the planet Jupiter) Carter aided and abetted the removal of a friend to turning a blind eye to the instillation of an anti-American religious fanatic as head of government.

Read More »

Voters Aren’t Buying the Party’s Fiscal Message

The Failure of Leadership’s Communication
By Jim Stockdale 

All good leaders must be good communicators.   I am reminded of FDR with his fireside chats and Reagan and his stories which made a point.   These men knew they had to “sell, sell, sell”.   In today’s world, Newt Gingrich is a great communicator.  There may be others that don’t immediately come to mind.   For good or for bad, free trade has always been a core value in conservative thinking.   It has been successful–but perhaps more narrowly successful than broadly successful.  It has made fortunes for the men at Goldman Sachs but has not always trickled down to America‘s middle class.   New Studies are showing that our middle class may be shrinking–whether it is or not, most Americans think it is.  This is the failure of leadership’s communication.   It is very difficult for the average American to equate free trade being a benefit with a President who wants to open our borders to bring in cheap labor and additional public costs.   What America needs most is a public lecture on economics.   At this moment the lectern is empty.  

GOP Tax Dilemma
After years of waste in Congress, voters aren’t buying the party’s fiscal message.


BY STEPHEN MOORE
Friday, October 5, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

 

Politicians and their political nonsense

Compromise is an accepted measure of practice of politics
By William Robert Barber 

America of today has five all important elements of immense concern:  Immigration, the war, government entitlements, the costly methodology of civil litigation, taxation and the immensely frustrating irritant; it is imperative that these elements of concern (and the immensely frustrating irritant) are immediately addressed.  Nonetheless, these all important concerns cannot be affirmably managed because of the politicians and their political nonsense.  Both parties are overly focused on their preservation of power and this insistence on power preservation predominates and suppresses all obligations, responsibilities, and sensibilities.

This craziness, this lunacy, this behavioral malfunction of sensibility has been a vicious element of the democratic process since the concept of democratic governing in ancient Greece.  Within the United States surely since George Washington’s second administration and the start up of political parties’ sensibility was in deeply sincere competition and at times was totally replaced by loyalty, nepotism, affiliation, and networking or cross purpose connections.

In politics a practice is accepted as long as in some fashion the result is perceived to mutually benefit the contesting parties and or their political affiliations.  There is a political commonality of acceptance, wherein, one will tribute the least in the interest of compromise; such compromise may of course be in final form the contrary of original intent; nevertheless, compromise is an accepted measure of practice of politics.