Mideast Turmoil

“Turmoil in the Mideast:” There’s a headline that has been prevalent ever since the time of Moses. The only other news lede that has rivaled it in recent decades has been the ubiquitous “Mideast peace talks.” If you are a regular reader of this column, you know that “diplomatic” is a term that has never been used to describe me or my writing. It is, therefore, with a thorough understanding of my lack of nuance, my inability to appreciate the finer gray points of moral uncertainty, and my unrestrained desire to cut through the diplomatic crap, that I offer my observations about what appears to be happening across and around the Mediterranean. To save you some wasted moments I should confess that I do not expect anyone who has any scintilla of responsibility for foreign affairs to read this.

Let me begin with probably the most controversial of my assertions. I believe that if all the Mideastern thuggish and oppressive governments were overthrown by jihadist-incited mobs, it would improve the international situation for the United States. If the people of Yemen, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt and Tunisia (maybe Jordan also) all overthrow their present despotic governments, our diplomatic corps would have hissy fits and wet their pants. The immediate impulse for the Foggy Bottom striped-pants crowd is to protect our “friends,” but all that attitude does is embitter the people who oppose the regime. Egypt is a classic example of the Dilemma’s Horns of international affairs. Because Sadat yielded to Jimmy Carter’s pleas and agreed to the Camp David Accords, the U.S. has been funneling at least $10 billion per year in foreign aid to Egypt every year. Complicating matters is the fact that Egypt is the home of the Muslim Brotherhood which has been the incubator for international jihad including Al Qaida. So, as we have propped and subsidized the Egyptian government, the caldron of discontent has been bubbling among the people. If you recall, most of the 9-11 hijackers were from Egypt providing some small element of evidence that there is a vast amount of smoldering resentment there.

What we must do is to construct a more realistic foreign policy that is not wedded to the touchy-feely idealism of the Foreign Service wonks. So if Egypt were to become a jihadist state as a result of a rebellion, the United States could refuse to issue visas except for political refugees and stop the delusional foreign aid madness. There is a distinct difference in stark clarity between a Picasso and an Ansell Adams photograph. A state whose leaders profess to be supportive, but whose population resents us is not an ally. It is a mirage. I prefer to know who my enemies are, and to deal with them forthrightly and openly. Having an untrustworthy back-stabbing friend leads to a monumental waste of time, energy and resources. The Hamas situation with the PLO has made our diplomats and leaders somewhat gun shy about Mideastern nations’ efforts for self-determination. In an earlier time, Iran, too, became a theocracy following a popular movement, but as we can note, the people of Iran appear to have become weary of the mullahs and their iron-clad grip on Iran.

The cliché states that two wrongs do not make a right and supporting despotic leaders when the people chafe under their rule is doubly wrong…and for the long term, never right. Political leaders and diplomats are clever, but we require honest straightforward recognition of our limited ability to control the internal affairs of other nations in the age of the internet, the cell phone and Face Book. People are who they are, and no amount of wishful thinking by our political leadership can alter that reality. Let’s face the facts and remain vigilant.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com   or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Check out our page on FaceBook:  www.facebook.com/pages/Earl-for-Ohio/

The Real Extremists

Because we, you and I, believe in constitutional government and fiscal responsibility, we are often labeled as “extremists.” The sneering condescending lefties aren’t the only ones who describe us this way because the establishment GOP joins the chorus when they huddle in the cloak rooms and bars of Washington, Columbus and county seats across the nation. Apparently they identify people who think differently from them as extreme. Underlying their definition is the idea that anyone who questions or opposes the status quo is an outlier…outside the mainstream…extreme.

Politicians in the United States love to extol the contribution of the middle class to our nation. Phrases such as “the working people,” “small businesses,” and “everyday people” are commonly uttered and heard during political campaigns and in policy debates. It seems, at times, as if the entire political world were focused on the preservation and potential of the vast middle class. Our well-being is portrayed as the dominant impetus for every legislative and government initiative. Their rhetoric is misleading. Their efforts are not directed toward the benefit of the middle class because the political class is primarily composed of extremists. Yes, you read that correctly…politicians and the government bureaucracy are extremists.

Their extremism is rooted the fact that they view some entities as Too Big To Fail (TBTF) and at the same time view some of our citizens or residents as Too Small To Succeed. Even a cursory examination of the protected classes would illustrate that the powers, interests and resources of the government are primarily reserved to protect the most extreme elements of our economic population. The great unwashed middle gets lip service and IRS invoices. As the two-faced political leadership continues to sing the praises of the middle class, they implement policies that endanger it. Clearly a new song book is in order. To give you a mental image of how the base of our republic is abused, imagine the following:  You have a small pyramid and each side is 4 inches square. Also, you have a solid rubber ball that is 8 inches in diameter. Now, if you were asked to balance the pyramid on the ball, you could do it. It may require a few attempts for perfect balance, but in the end you would succeed. That image represents the delicate balance of an economic system undergirded by a solid, but flexible, group of producers. Now, balance the pyramid on the ball by using one of the points of the pyramid. I can almost guarantee that you will run out of patience before you succeed. The tangential point where the pyramid contacts the ball represents the smaller productive base that is available to support the system.

Each new law, regulation, tax and restriction has some measure of a negative impact on the producer; however the huge crony mega-corporation and the union harlots are immune from the ultimate damage because they are too big to fail. The non-producers are protected because of the government’s compassionate use of your productivity and money. The assumption is that you will become accustomed to the perpetual squeezing of your liberty, your property and your labor and meekly go along. Simple observation informs us that the pyramid cannot balance on the point for very long. It must topple. As I see it, the only answer for the preservation of the middle is to drive the extremists from power. We must shrink the pyramid, enlarge the ball, and destroy the extremists’ control of our lives and our livelihoods. Extremism has proven to be a seductive vice in our recent history. It is time to silence the siren’s song.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com  or  www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Check out “Earl for Ohio” on FaceBook, too:  www.facebook.com/pages/Earl-for-Ohio

                                        

Interest Inferno

You cannot drown an inferno by peeing on it. You can’t win a gunfight with a water pistol. You will never grow chickens by planting eggs, so why do career politicians expect us to believe that they are being responsible when they cut spending across the board by five per cent (5%)? The interest on the United States’ national debt is $600 million dollars per day…Six Hundred Million Dollars per day for interest on the national debt. Neither one defense armament nor one welfare check can theoretically be purchased or paid from the first six tenths of a billion dollars every day of the year. Obviously, there is no serious consideration about reducing the principle because our leaders continue to borrow funds to pay the interest on previously borrowed money. Good grief!

Cutting the federal budget in a meaningful fashion will require much more than token freezes and symbolic 5% across the board cuts. In order to implement significant reductions in federal outlays, the government must eliminate entire departments and their functions. Wholesale savings can be achieved only by re-orienting the federal mission from a “do all things for all people” to the constitutionally proscribed limited purpose for the government. We must, however, be cautious if the federal monolith were to suddenly rediscover its constitutional mandate because the nature of the political animal is to mandate that the states pick up the torch and provide the federally discarded programs. If you were to do an historical analysis of the Medicaid entitlement, you would be forewarned.

Alexander Pope wrote “Hope springs eternal in the human breast,” and expecting Congress to behave responsibly by massively reducing the size and reach of the federal government is like expecting elephants to fly in formation. As a result of their lack of courage, wisdom and integrity, we will be faced with a game of fiscal chicken in the United States. Cities, states and other governmental units will belly-up to the bailout trough while begging for some federal fiat funny money to put off the inevitable for a short time longer. If the federal government is the first to fail, it will have the same impact as a massive asteroid landing in the center of the nation….destroying much and disrupting everything. On the other hand, if one of the sates or several local governments were to collapse, then the ominous sound of clicking dominoes will reverberate throughout the land…and the globe.

Unfortunately for the sake of our nation, our citizens and our future, politicians lack the courage to do what’s right. Their priorities are to please all their constituencies and to kick the can down the road. The spending goes on, the borrowing continues (note the upcoming vote to increase the debt limit), the daily cost of interest grows larger, and “we the sheeple” get fleeced and slaughtered.

Oh, one final note. Even if they stop the borrowing (fat chance), and if interest rates climb upward, the $600 million dollars per day will be a pleasant memory.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com    or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Mother, May I?

“Take a step backward.”

“Mother, May I?”

You’ve probably played or observed that game when you were in elementary school. The premise was that no activity could be initiated until you requested the permission of “Mother.” If you failed to seek the approval of the “Mother,” you were prohibited from taking the action, and indeed, would be penalized. Isn’t it wonderful that during your formative years, you were being prepared to be a willing and docile member of the Nanny State? I was doing some research Sunday afternoon, and my mind wandered off into the weeds…a common occurrence. I tried to identify at least one element of my life that is not impacted by a law, rule, regulation, ordinance or covenant. There may be some, but I was unable to recall them.

You have probably seen a picture of Gulliver when he was restrained by the Lilliputians. There lies the big fellow with multiple lines restricting his movements. He’s apparently conscious and aware, but he is incapable of performing the simplest task without the permission of the “little people.” Jonathan Swift has been rightly celebrated as a brilliant political satirist, and the enduring nature of his work is made clear by the germaneness of the Gulliver word picture. His 18^th Century work maintains its resonance today. All around us we can find evidence that we are being controlled by the little people. “You must do this,” “you may not do that,””buy a license, pay a fee,” and be certain to read the fine print are seemingly the sum and substance of our daily lives.

While President Obama pleads for a more civil tone in Washington, his bureaucratic minions are forcing us to say “please” every time we wish to do something for ourselves. My experience has taught me that forced politeness or civility often leads to smoldering resentment. Compliance and conformity with rules and regulations consume valuable chunks of our time and patience as we wait on “hold” for a live human voice to resolve our issue. We angrily attempt to decipher where our problem fits into the inadequate menu delivered by the monotonic voice as we stumble through the numerical options she offers. Even though we feel detached and insignificant as we struggle through the bureaucratic maze, we also know that the tentacles, the strings are real. We suspect that we have become marinated marionettes…in a pickle with strings firmly attached.

Do this, do that, don’t do this, and by all means never do that. At times it seems as if I spend my life saying “Excuse me” as I continually bump into the Nanny as I attempt to live my life, my way. Liberty should not be adorned with strings, chains and cables. Liberty should be packaged with ribbons and those clever little stickers. Strings, chains and fetters are not the essence of liberty. They are the antithesis of freedom. It is past time for us to sever the annoying threads of too-big government. The moment has come for us to assert our natural God-given rights and insist that Big Brother, the Nanny State, Mother and the whole damned controlling governmental family leave us alone. It is time that we pay the COST for liberty and freedom. Cut Our Strings Today…the cost is commitment and perseverance. The payoff is freedom.

Comment: cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Hating Hate Crimes

Hate is a terrible emotion…but not always. Don’t we all agree (most of us anyway) that it’s acceptable to hate evil? Mercy, there are some people in the political class who apparently hate “hate.” It is a sad chapter in human affairs that people have historically hated and made scapegoats of certain classes and populations. Certainly there are cases when individuals for reasons either real or imagined have nourished a burning hate about another person. My personal view is that hate toward another person or group is a wasted nonproductive emotion. It often distracts one from a true purpose, and frequently leads to enormous errors of judgment.

Overt manifestations of hateful behavior should be proscribed by the state and social convention. People should not be allowed to damage the persons and property of others unless they have been directly threatened and provoked. On the other hand the state and the community at large should not be able to define which speech is hateful. Perhaps it’s denigrating or insulting, but the state cannot discern the motivation for the offensive language. The concept of “hate speech” is an artificial construct that is determined solely by the person, group or entity who designs the definition. While there may be some social penalty (banishment, spurning, ostracizing) for speech that may be considered hateful, the state has no legitimate stake in the restriction of expression. That will not stop them however. Certainly many of you have heard those who wish to limit speech cite the “can’t shout fire in a crowded theater” example. The Justice Potter Stewart opinion stated that it would be improper to “FALSELY” shout fire. In other words when one falsely creates an alarm that can result in damage to persons and property, then the shouter has overstepped the bounds of acceptable expression.

Using uncivil language such as “idiot” or “bonehead” cannot and must not be circumscribed. Neither of the terms, or others similar to them, generates an aura of impending harm, nor do they threaten the targeted person or his property. So-called violent, incendiary or inflammatory language exists in a similar realm. If uttered in a vacuum, no one knows, and no one reacts. If shouted in a crowd, then those who take violent action that harms another are responsible…not the speaker. If I were to read “Hamlet” aloud, and some unstable clown who was listening later attempted an assassination, would I be guilty of inciting a murder attempt? Would William Shakespeare and I share a cell? Should Quentin Tarantino be banned from producing material that could incite violence? The utterance and the film are not guilty of damaging property or persons. The perpetrator is. Many of us from time to time have had wicked thoughts cross our minds, but we refrain from acting on them. That is responsible and civilized behavior. Speakers should not be held accountable when unstable listeners leap into action.

Mind reading by government agents is even more insidious that their regulation of speech. If someone commits a heinous crime, and the all-knowing, all-seeing bureaucracy determines that the criminal was motivated by hate, then the penalty becomes more severe. Huh? If you’ve ever spent a lot of time with someone you hold dear, you might have been asked the following questions: “Do you love me?” “Are you certain that you really love me?” The questions come from someone with whom you’ve spent innumerable hours and shared a plethora of intimate secrets, and yet, they entertain doubt about your affection. So, pray tell, how can some lower- or middle-grade bureaucrat detect what was in your mind or your heart when you commit the unlawful act? The Amazing Kreskin couldn’t do it. The lie-detecting dude on television couldn’t do it. Maybe your spouse couldn’t do it, but just in case they can know what’s on your mind and in your heart, they do not have to testify against you.

For me the concept of hate crimes is hateful. I hate the speech police, and I loathe, despise and abhor the thought police. The bozo’s who promote this type of control must not be aware of an action called “venting.” They wish to tamp our free expression to the point where it might explode. They will hate the outcome.

Comment: cearlwriting@hotmail.com     or   www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com