Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Politically Homeless 3: Democratic Party



Well, I will start this portion of my analysis of the parties with the Democratic party. I must say that I find very little to agree with them on. I think that the Democrats of old were more in touch than the current Democrats are. I believe that there are still a few Democrats who I can relate to like Zell Miller. Unfortunately (or fortunately), the liberal arm of the Democratic party is bent on running these people out. Anyway, here we go.

Government Size
The Democratic party tends to believe that the government should provide a lot of services for the citizenry of the United States. This is the party that brought the U.S. Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, and took a shot at Hillary-care. They tend to believe that the government should always provide a safety net for people and should make sure that no one feels pain.

State/Federal (Federalist)
The Democratic party tend to believe that things should be provided at the Federal level. This position can be pointed out by the fact that many Democrats immediately pointed at the Federal government for the poor response during Katrina. Although the local and state governments had responsibility the Democrats decried the horrible job FEMA did.

Foreign Policy
The basic foreign policy of the Democratic party is make friends with everyone and sign alliances. They believe that no action should be taken without the blessing of the U.N., NATO, or all of our allies. They also tend to lean toward appeasement instead of confrontation. This can be illustrated by President Clinton offering light-water reactors to North Korea in exchange for their "promise" of behaving themselves. In a perfect world, this foreign policy may work but in the real world it shows weakness.

Taxes/Spending
As I stated in the government size section, Democrats believe that the government should be the provider for many services. This of course, points to increased spending which logically points to increased taxes. In my opinion this is not an economically sound concept.

Military Issues
In the foreign policy section I outlined the belief that we should form alliances with everyone and use the "world body" opinion to judge our fights. This attitude tends to push Democrats to not spend as much on military and spend more on social programs. They do not like to utilize the military in a war-fighting mode but prefer they act as a police force. Again, I do not think this projects strength.

Social Issues
As with much of the Democratic mindset this is a place where the government needs to control things. The government needs to handle retirement, medicine, prices, wages, education, etc. They like to legislate social norms instead of trying to change the mindset through intellectual debate.

Business
The Democratic party claims to believe in the American dream but they are the first to attack business. Everytime they need to spend more money they try to either tax evil business or evil rich people. They attack companies like WalMart for not paying their people more. They attack business by constantly trying to increase minimum wage or adding required benefits.

I believe that the Democratic party has a vision. I believe that it is a socialist vision. I want to say that I do not mean that in a negative manner but in the true definition of the word. They would like the government to have strong controls over the economy, industry, jobs, social norms, medicine, etc. They would tax people and then would provide the "necessary" services. This is a socialist mindset. On the political diagram in my previous post they would typically qualify as a Left/Liberal Authoritarian.

I personally have a lot of respect for the socialist/marxist ideas, I just simply don't believe that they work in the real world. Capitalism works even though many times it can be ugly. I would tend to believe that the Democratic party will never be my home.

Your thoughts on my opinions?

Technorati Tags: ,, ,

Friday, May 26, 2006

Politically Homeless 2: Some Definition

As a follow-up to last night's post I want to clarify a few things before I go on my exploration. First of all when I use terms like conservative, liberal, socialist, libertarian, etc. I mean it in the true political sense not with any derrogatory meaning. I like the following diagram to describe politcal leanings instead of the typical right-left dicotomy.



On the same web page they give a great explanation of each of the terms used in the diagram. Take a look. I personally consider myself a conservative leaning libertarian. The "World's Smallest Politcal Quiz" confirms that belief. In my opinion, there is no political party that currently fits that set of beliefs.

I have also decided that I want to use the following categories as rating categories for me:
  • Government size
  • State/Federal (Federalist argument)
  • Foreign policy
  • Taxes/Spending
  • Military issues
  • Social Issues
  • Business

So with that I am going to do some research. I will continue to post as I look. I will go through the 3 or 4 "major" parties. As I said, if you have something to add let me know.


Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Politically Homeless

As I continue to read about decisions that our glorious politicians are making regarding spending our money, energy policy, taxes, and immigration I am coming to the conclusion that I have no political party that I can call home. I thought that the base views of the Republican party were closest to my beliefs but that is definitely proving to not be true.

To start here are a summary points of my political beliefs:
  • Government is bureaucratic so it doesn't really do anything efficiently
  • Smaller federal government is better from a financial, economic, and personal perspective
  • The Federal Government should not interfere in business with some basic exceptions of OSHA, very small portions of EPA, EEOC. Basically enough that we don't have children working in coal mines or people working in life threatening situations unless they are duly informed. But there should not be corporate welfare. If companies can't make on their merits they should not exist
  • States rights should outweigh federal rights (As the constitution intended)
  • States should be allowed to govern as they see fit with only exceptions as to where the constitution SPECIFICALLY defines federal jurisdiction. This does not include education, roads, health care, retirement accounts, income tax, etc., etc., etc.
  • Taxes should be fair for the entire population. Just because people make more does not mean they should pay a higher percentage. Just by paying the same percentage the rich pay more. We should also remove the loopholes such as mortgage tax credits, earned income credits, etc.
  • The tax code should not be the largest document in world history!!!
  • Competition should be allowed to reign in most markets. This would allow for better schools, cheaper gasoline, more efficient airlines, no tax subsidies for phony rail companies, etc.
  • Saving should be encouraged by removing the tax burdens and removing stupid class warfare tactics from investment accounts. Instead of saving the broken social security program encourage and train people how to do it themselves.
  • France and Germany are NOT global superpowers and we should not use them as role models to create a welfare state
  • The United Nations was designed as a place to discuss issues with other countries not as a government body. Reform it or remove it.
  • War is never pretty and should always be a last resort but is sometimes required. Fight to win.
  • War is best left to the military and not politicians.
  • As Teddy Roosevelt said: "Speak softly and carry a big stick". We need to have the biggest heaviest stick that we can possibly create. We also need to learn how to speak softly.

I have many other opinions but I think this starts the discussion. I am going to try to explore a few of the major parties and why I don't think that they fit the bill. If you have ideas I am open.


Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Finally...

I just read a speech by Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana. The speech was in regards to a plan that he will be proposing in the House regarding immigration reform. This is a topic that has been talked about a lot but I have not heard a solid solution from a politician until now. I encourage you to take a look at this speech (it's kind of long but a great plan).

Transcript of Speech

What are your thoughts? Will you contact your representatives and senators about this plan?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Monday, May 22, 2006

Hypocritical?

With everything that is currently going on in the United States ILLEGAL immigration debate, it is kind of interesting to find out what Mexico's laws are. They make it very difficult for LEGAL immigrants to be part of their society. Yet they want the U.S. to ease policies for ILLEGAL immigrants. Here is an article that describes some of Mexico's laws:

Article: Mexico Works to Bar Non-Natives From Jobs

A little hypocritical?

Technorati Tags: , ,

Friday, May 19, 2006

Is Iran an issue?

I was shocked today when I read the article about Iran preparing to pass a law requiring Muslims to wear specific clothing and requiring non-Muslims to wear badges of their religion. This is very reminiscent of the 1930s and 1940s. I find it to a very chilling move on the part of the Iranians.

Article: Iran eyes badges for Jews

That on top of the fact that they have called the holocaust a hoax and called for the destruction of Israel. How far will they be allowed to progress with their weapons programs and their very aggressive statements and moves toward Jews before some says "enough is enough"? In my opinion Iran continues to move itself closer and closer to military action almost on a daily basis.

Very scary developments.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Tax Cuts will break the government

To put to rest another falsehood that the Democrats were selling during the discussion of tax cuts here is the real data:

Article: April Tax Revenue 2nd-Highest in History

I wonder why they aren't admitting that they were wrong about the tax cuts CAUSING the deficits? If the revenue is the higher than before, what could possibly be causing the deficits? Hmmmm... maybe spending?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Monday, May 08, 2006

Taxation by U.N.

I have read about it before and I see that they are not changing their tune. The U.N. is again pushing the idea of taxation by the "world government". Of course with the frivolous and unregulated spending that they have going on they are running out of funds. That on top of the fact that they can no longer make money on the "Oil For Food" program. So they think that they should be able to tax global citizens without going through the sovereign countries that are their members.

Article: UN Taxation of Americans – A Persistent Problem

I must say that I think that it is ridiculous for us to even allow the U.N. to consider this idea to take away sovereignty from us. Also, I think that the U.N. has done a great job of proving that they are not in need of more money but more oversight. For me personally I would rather see the U.S. pull out of the U.N. (not a completely bad idea) than to allow the U.N. to bypass the federal government to directly tax citizens (terrible idea).
Remember no U.N. officials are elected by public election. Many countries that are members are cruel oppressive dictators

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Friday, May 05, 2006

Rotten Economy


Well, less than a year ago everyone was talking about how terrible the economy was (even though it wasn't). Why is no one talking about how well it is doing now? Didn't they talk about during the 1990s?

The Dow broke 11,500 this morning. Unemployment is something like 4.7% nationally (BTW - Many economists will say that 4% is full employment) . Over a hundred thousand jobs added. Increases in salaries. All of this in an environment where oil prices are high and interest rates keep rising. I would have to say the economy is roaring again.

Even the federal government is bringing in more money than they were before the tax cuts. The size of the deficit is shrinking each year. Maybe they could stop the increased spending to pull that a little tighter. Do we really need a bridge to nowhere?

It is quite apparent to me that the Democrats must be right -- Tax Cuts don't work! All they do is damage the economy.

What is your opinion? Was the negativity about the economy just electioneering or did they have a point?


Technorati Tags: ,

Monday, May 01, 2006

Oil Price Explanation

Okay, I can't believe that I am doing this but I am going to link to an NPR article about the explanation behind the rising oil prices. (I am not a fan of NPR or their public paid for politics) This is a great article that describes the problem and the possible solutions (much to the dismay of many politicians).

Article: Q&A: What's Behind High Gas Prices?

What do you think?

Technorati Tags: , , ,