Yesterday I took my last article, Are You Nuts, to work for people to read. Someone who doesn’t normally read my articles happened to pick up a copy and start reading. After finishing the first paragraph she put it down and said, “You know Neal, you are a very good writer, but I don’t know why you have to be so negative and so insulting.”
Was I insulting or was I simply speaking the truth? You know, sometimes the truth does hurt. That does not make the person who speaks it negative or insulting. Maybe I could have been more tactful, on that I will agree. But when I said that making voting mandatory would only ensure that there were more idiots voting I don’t think it would have made much of a difference had I used dimwit, moron, or imbecile. Honestly, it is hard to find a polite word to describe people who don’t think before they act.
Still, I stand by what I said. Our country is in such sad shape because of the people that occupy it, not because of the politicians who occupy the seats of power in our nation’s capital and the capitals of the assorted 50 states. We elect them and it is our job to ensure that they do their job in accordance with the Constitution. If they do a bad job it is because we tolerate it or because we don’t know the first thing about the Constitution and therefore have no guide by which to compare their actions against. When we keep voting for clowns from the Republican party, or clowns from the Democratic party to office, thinking that we are really changing things, then we prove that we are, in fact, idiots.
But I see that you’re not convinced yet.
It’s bad enough that most people can’t see past the superficial facade these candidates present on the campaign trails and see their true nature. It’s bad enough that we compare them against each other by the statements they make regarding the ‘issues’ without for a moment comparing what they say against the Constitution. THAT is bad enough, but it is not the only problem.
Americans also have very short memories and can’t remember what candidate so and so said once they have been in office for awhile. So they cannot see that what they actually do once they are elected is rarely what they said they would do while they were campaigning.
Take for instance the following. On January 21, 2009 the newly elected emperor Barack Obama declared that his administration is “… committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.”
Then just yesterday the White House announced that it will no longer be subjected to regulations set forth in the Freedom of Information Act, which will allow the Office of the President to reject requests for records.
I won’t go into too much detail on this, but for those of you who don’t know what the Freedom of Information Act is, it was a law passed which allowed the people to request the release of certain documents held by the government.
So now Obama is unilaterally saying that he is no longer subject to these requests and can rubber stamp them NO, essentially thumbing his nose at us and reversing his own position on transparency in government.
All I have to say about this is a quote made by Patrick Henry in the Virginia Ratification Assembly on June 9, 1788, “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”
So you see, Americans, for the most part, can’t remember what a candidate said two weeks ago, let alone six months…a year…two years ago. So when they see them say something today it simply does not register that they are reversing the position they held on an issue previously.
While it is a person’s prerogative to change their position after learning new facts, it is not acceptable that a sitting president make decisions that limit our access to their decisions and actions, and which actions violate the Constitution. Government should be on full display for the people, aside from certain highly classified material. But as government grows bigger, and more powerful, it has deemed to make more and more of its actions classified and off limits for public viewing.
Unfortunately I have more evidence to provide to prove that there are a lot of idiots out there.
Do you know what a double standard is? A double standard is when a set of standards or principles is applied to one group while not being applied to another. I see this all the time. At work I see in that certain people are not expected to work to the same level as others, yet they expect the same pay as those who perform the same job they do. But this is not about work, and since I picked on Democrats for my first example I’ll pick on Republicans for this example.
The other day Texas Senator Ted Cruz threw his hat into the ring as the first Republican to announce his bid for the presidency in the 2016 election. The Republicans, particularly some of them considered to be ‘Tea Party’ Republicans, (Ted Cruz being among that group), have stated that Obama is wielding almost dictatorial powers with all his Executive Orders and end runs around the legislative authority of Congress.
Well Senator Cruz has declared that should he be elected he will repeal the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. Really?
I can’t count the number of messages and e mails I got from people saying they would vote for Cruz if he just did that one small thing. Every time I read one of those messages I shook my head in sadness because these people are such hypocrites.
As much as I hate the fact that Obamacare became law, it is in fact law now. Americans may nullify it en masse by refusing to comply with it, if they so choose. But the job of any president is to ensure that our laws be faithfully executed.
So where do double standards come into play? Well many Republicans accuse Obama of not ensuring that our laws are enforced, with immigration law being one of the hot topic laws that they accuse the president of not enforcing. Yet I didn’t hear them complaining about it when George Bush was in office and he didn’t enforce them either.
And as far as Senator Cruz’s pledge to repeal Obamacare, what the hell does he think he will be elected as…emperor or king? Show me where the Constitution allows a president to just up and repeal a law. Show me, I’ll wait while you look. Yet these same Republicans jump on the chance to accuse Obama of acting unconstitutionally.
That is the double standard. Either standards apply equally to all, or they apply to no one.
Should Senator Cruz become president he would have options, but repealing a standing law is not one of them. He might reject/veto any Congressional Spending Resolution as long as it contains funding for Obamacare. But that would lead to a budget showdown and possible shutdown of the government. I’m not sure he has the cojones to stand behind his principles enough to face the public’s outrage when their government goes into shutdown.
The point is that one party, or the people who support that party, are perfectly willing to allow their party to violate laws, assume powers the Constitution does not grant them, but then the moment the ‘other’ party does it they cry foul. That is a classic example of double standards…and I see it all the time, over and over and over again.
The point I’m trying to make is, when it comes to politics, most people don’t think. They don’t care to learn the system and how it is supposed to function, so they base their voting habits upon emotion or the best sounding liar running for office.
And if you ask me, that is the perfect example of idiocy. So yeah, I stand by what I said about mandatory voting just flooding the system with more idiot voters. It’s bad enough when barely 50% of the people vote in a presidential election. As George Carlin so famously said, “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
I rest my case. Prove me wrong…if you can.