I have been swamped lately (to say the least), so I apologize for not posting anything of value in some while.
Among other things, I just finished with a very busy couple weeks at work, and I've been struggling with a health problem that has since turned out not to be nearly as serious as I had feared but has still been a distraction of epic proportions.
As soon as I am done with a project that I should have been done with last weekend, I promise a full update and a return to normality.
Of course you may wish to know my thoughts on the State of the Union address.
C'mon, you silly people! You know my thoughts on that issue.
"The Union, next to our liberties, the most dear."--John C. Calhoun
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Aristos v. Murdock Part II
Over at his blog, Murdock pointed out that no one, including me (gasp) is without flaws. At one point in time, everyone has lied and been a hypocrite.
He is correct. However, when I lie, no one dies. When I'm a hypocrite, no one's freedoms and property go down the tubes.
This president's lies and hypocrisy damage the lives, liberties, and properties of the people. Such a man deserves respect, but not in the manner that Murdock wants. No, the president should command the same kind of respect as a gun--you're best to watch the muzzle, set the safety, and always assume that it is loaded and dangerous. There may be a time that you need it's power, but until that time comes, keep it locked away where it cannot cause any unintended mischief.
But default respect for the man because of his office? I decline to confer upon the presidency the privileges known more commonly to nobility.
He is correct. However, when I lie, no one dies. When I'm a hypocrite, no one's freedoms and property go down the tubes.
This president's lies and hypocrisy damage the lives, liberties, and properties of the people. Such a man deserves respect, but not in the manner that Murdock wants. No, the president should command the same kind of respect as a gun--you're best to watch the muzzle, set the safety, and always assume that it is loaded and dangerous. There may be a time that you need it's power, but until that time comes, keep it locked away where it cannot cause any unintended mischief.
But default respect for the man because of his office? I decline to confer upon the presidency the privileges known more commonly to nobility.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Aristos v. Murdock Part I
My friend "Howling Mad" Murdock posts recently on how the recent string of presidents have degraded the office--Obama, he adds, is no exception--, but that he is nostalgic for a time when people at least respected the office of the president.
I disagree.
Respect is not something that anyone deserves automatically, especially just because of that person's station in life. That's old-school monarchical/oligarchical thinking.
No, a man deserves respect because he conducts himself in a respectful manner.
Anyone who is clearly a liar and a hypocrite deserves not an ounce of respect, be he a stranger on the bus, a colleague, a priest, or even the president of the United States.
If Murdock wants me to respect a president, then I ask for a respectable president. Until then, I and everyone else should call it like we see it.
By the way, take a look at some of the criticisms of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson during their political contest in 1800. So much for Murdock's nostalgic "When I was a boy, people respected the president..."
He is the symbol and spokesperson for us. And because of that he deserves a modicum of our respect and support.
I disagree.
Respect is not something that anyone deserves automatically, especially just because of that person's station in life. That's old-school monarchical/oligarchical thinking.
No, a man deserves respect because he conducts himself in a respectful manner.
Anyone who is clearly a liar and a hypocrite deserves not an ounce of respect, be he a stranger on the bus, a colleague, a priest, or even the president of the United States.
If Murdock wants me to respect a president, then I ask for a respectable president. Until then, I and everyone else should call it like we see it.
By the way, take a look at some of the criticisms of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson during their political contest in 1800. So much for Murdock's nostalgic "When I was a boy, people respected the president..."
Sunday, January 03, 2010
What's New About the New Year?
What's new about the new year? To me, it seems that we celebrate the occasion as part of what Patrick Henry called "the delusive phantom of hope." Most people seem to think that a different number for the year means that things have really changed. They celebrate the holiday as a kind of pagan offering to Dionysus, never once considering that other than the passing of the solstice, there is no real difference between November passing to December and December passing to January and so forth (other than the fact that the Lions' season is in its final days).
It's not a new year that we need. The people and government that made 2009 suck are still in power, and even if parties change at mid-term elections, no real change will occur. I offer the presidency of GW Bush as proof of that.
No, we need something more. If you want change, then you need far more than a change from one old party to the other old party.
To heck with the New Year and our pagan way of offering the day as a bribe for better times to come.
And to answer your question, yes, I'm a bit on edge right now.
It's not a new year that we need. The people and government that made 2009 suck are still in power, and even if parties change at mid-term elections, no real change will occur. I offer the presidency of GW Bush as proof of that.
No, we need something more. If you want change, then you need far more than a change from one old party to the other old party.
To heck with the New Year and our pagan way of offering the day as a bribe for better times to come.
And to answer your question, yes, I'm a bit on edge right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)