Christmas, Wolves, Sheep, and Everything In-Between

Per usual custom, I spent Christmas Day at my grandparent’s, surrounded by family and more food than usually imaginable.

It was a very unusual Christmas, however, as nearly everyone stayed far later than usual, probably to see what “surprise” gift my uncle got that was forbidden to be opened until 6P.M. Either way, the inevitable happened: Someone mentioned something political.

The reference was something involving “Big Brother”. Had I been a fox, my ears would have visibly perked. Instantly, my realm of hearing focused on the conversation. For the record, the bulk of my family is pretty hardcore Republican, primarily due to the fact that they don’t feel many politicians are worthy of being voted into office, and so they default to the less intrusive of the two major political parties. Someone made the statement that under Barack Obama’s leadership, we were in for a big surprise, insisting that a surge in “Big Brother” activity was inevitable.

Instantly, I was somewhat irritated. Witnessing what has taken place over the past eight years, including the USA PATRIOT act, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, and the use of sonic hearing devices in law enforcement vehicles, I was shocked. I quickly made the interjection that, “I highly doubt anyone could do more damage than George W. Bush has done”. A few quick “Just you wait”s came out and I decided that the argument wasn’t worth my time.

Don’t get me wrong, any president that can dodge a shoe as well as Mr. Bush certainly deserves a bit of respect. In fact, that video alone gave me more respect for him than his being president for the past four years. I’m not a “Bush Basher”. I agree with the foreign policy he ran on in his campaigns; limited government, non-interventionalism, the good stuff.

The point I wanted to make was not that we would see a lack in Big Brother activity. My point, for one, was that Big Brother has grown incredibly the past eight years, all of it behind-the-scenes and under the stage. I don’t see the behemoth growing that exponentially in the next four years. In addition, I believe any increase we see in “Big Brother” under Barack Obama’s leadership will certainly be rivaled by any behind-the-scenes increase that G.W. made. I could be wrong. Who knows.

The second point that I really wanted to make but knew would fall on deaf ears was more of a plea than a point. No president does things alone. While our system of checks and balances lies in wreckage and shambles, it still exists and is still legally binding. We elect senators and representatives to stand up for us in the face of tyrannical injustice. Without their approval, as things stand, the president meets a brick wall with his orders and desires. Unfortunately, we as Americans have grown so distanced from the political forum that we no longer elect people to protect us. We elect people that will lead us on endlessly, even if it is in a negative direction. When things go sour, we blame our president, never the men that we gave the opportunity to say “No, Mr. President” and didn’t. Why is it that when a senator does not do his job properly and continues supporting higher taxes and less freedom we do not simply reject him? We will not hesitate to get the cook at McDonald’s fired for forgetting ketchup on our burger, but we certainly do not care enough to fire the man or woman responsible for protecting us from tyranny? I know that I, for one, have written many many letters to congressmen, either supporting, denouncing, or offering potential changes to a piece of legislation.

I was told in elementary school by a teacher that there were two types of people in the world; sheep and wolves. She said that sheep were fairly happy with the necessities; food, water, shelter, etc., but that they were dumb, easily confused and scared. Then she said that wolves were smart and clever and, while they sometimes went hungry, they always seemed to be able to get back on their feet and when they did manage to get food, it was an amazing meal, generally of sheep. She then asked the class delicately, “Are you a sheep or a wolf?” In a room of no more than thirty, only about three or four people raised their hands claiming to be sheep, the remainder claimed to be wolves. She then established that, in life, wolves would be the leaders and sheep the followers. Obviously nearly everyone in the room lied; victims of a false positive self-image. If the majority of that classroom were truly wolves we, as Americans, would not be nearly as clueless as we are today.

I did not raise my hand to be a wolf. My hand was soft and quiet. I was a sheep, complacent with my place in the world.

Times have changed.

Presidential Confusion

I really have tried hard not to think about this, especially since it is so far away, but I’ve seen at least one news article on the subject every day for the past couple of weeks. There seems to either be some huge GOP support, some crazy GOP supporters, or some weird media infatuation with her, but there has been an immense amount of talk, speculation, and suspicion that Sarah Palin will be running for the Republican presidential candidate in 2012.

Really?

Are Republicans really that ignorant? It doesn’t really affect my view of her that she and McCain lost, after all, I’ve already tackled that here. But really? Sarah Palin? The woman who said that she actively read every newspaper in print? The woman who could not do an interview properly without John McCain by her side? The woman who did not understand a single piece of economic literature handed to her? The woman who used more buzzwords by herself than either John McCain or Barack Obama combined? This is the person that the Republican party is excited about? The woman who has less international relations experience than a college student who failed International Relations because it was at 7:30 in the morning? This is what the GOP wants?

Again, it is simply early speculation, and I really hope that she doesn’t even receive a single vote if she decides to run. Wait, let me rephrase that: I really hope that she doesn’t receive a single vote if she decides to run. It is simply absurd to think that this woman can somehow run the country. She was a nice, down-to-Earth person, but lacked any real convictions other than the almost radical conservative religious viewpoints that made her almost tyrannical. Sarah Palin is in no way qualified to run our country.

One of the biggest points I’ve heard made about her is that she put the Alaskan state budget on-line for citizens to view. I will most certainly agree that that is a remarkably good idea. However, if you look at Alaskan itemized budgets compared to, let’s say Texan itemized budgets, Alaska is seriously lacking in both complexity and volume. The idea is a great one, but we cannot say that she’s some sort of fiscal angel because of it. The problem is that it simply wouldn’t work in larger states (though I wish it would) and it certainly wouldn’t work in a modern day federal government (though I wish it would).

The Republican party is currently trying to acquire a fresh face to counter the Democratic party. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to realize that simply because a candidate is young does not mean that the candidate is fresh and viable.

An Unexpected Knight

During the Republican primaries I was fairly offset by Mitt Romney. Not because of his pro-pharmaceutical statement at one of the debates, not because of his Mormon faith, not because of his lack of disclosure on his torture platform, but just because he looked so fake.

Romney looked young and presentable, but had a hard time appealing to middle-class Americans. He was just way too rich!

However, scouring the web at 4:00A.M. CST unable to sleep, led me to an article written by Mitt Romney for the New York Times. To be blunt- I was amazed. Romney calls for no bailout for the “Big Three”, insisting that it only delays their inevitable bankruptcy. Instead, Romney says that the automobile industries need to rethink their production model, cut retirement benefits, and hire new, fresh management while kicking out the old, failed management. In fact, reading the article, I thought I could hear aspects of free market capitalism being mentioned; no bailout, renegotiate/eliminate union contracts and even “rectify the [embedded] tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers”.

While I do not support everything that Mr. Romney mentions in his article, I found it an interesting read from a very unexpected person. Who would have known that free market capitalism was still a prominent thing? Certainly not I, with all of the government regulation, subsidization, and nationalization spreading around so vehemently by members of both parties.

The article can be found at the New York Times’ website under the title Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.