July 13, 2004

• Well, since I have gotten involved in the web log concept, I’ve been arguing against using propaganda and sensationalism. Granted, “the opposition” gets good effect from these techniques, but in my ideal world, you don’t fool or trick people into doing what you want.

  I was very concerned that many of those against the war in Iraq tended to rely too heavily on these sorts of approaches and were going to get themselves in trouble by railing heavily on things that looked bad but were tenuous or unconfirmed.

  It now looks like one of these may come back to bite us all on the butt – the Nigerian Uranium issue. The Daily Howler has a good conversation on this topic. What really chaps me is that if one or two of these blow back, people are going to reject everything that was said against the war thinking that it was all hot air.

  The problem is, in many cases, our “leaders” didn’t lie. They presented information in a way which would be misinterpreted and then didn’t correct those misinterpretations. It h as the same effect and is still deceitful, objectionable, and – in my opinion – abhorrent. But, to call them lies is to also mislead. Nail them on what they actually did and maybe encourage people to learn to see through the rhetoric rather than just get bombarded by misleading exaggerations by both sides…

  ###

  StrangeBlackCat and I have been going back and forth on what our ideal political party “planks” would be. We were asked:
  

  Okay, another question for your your new party- how involved in social programs will your government be? Will there be funding/foundations/government organizations? If so, who gets to say how those organizations operate?

  Well, SBC and I may end up debating this one and I’m sure others will, but at a federal level, I’d say minimal to none. The country is too large for these to be run without inefficiency, pandering, and corruption, and it doesn’t seem right to enforce a “blanket solution” on everyone. I’d remove these from the federal government, reduce federal taxes, and let each state decide if they wish to raise their taxes and provide these programs, and if so, how they will run these programs.
  

  Also, for general stances: Euthanasia? Death Penalty?

  Euthanasia – I really can’t believe the audacity of a government trying to tell someone they aren’t allowed to die. Euthanasia should definitely be a personal right.

  It gets a bit more complicated when you start involving other people in the event. If someone asks to die and someone else pulls the trigger, is that Euthanasia or murder? If a doctor prescribes hemlock to someone who is suffering from treatable clinical depression, what happens? These issues do need to be considered.

  Death Penalty. No way. First, unless there is a 0.0% chance of error, don’t do it. Second, I believe our legal system should be aimed more at rehabilitation and compensation than towards punishment. The dead can’t be rehabilitated and they can’t compensate their victims.

  Now, of course, should someone sentenced to life without parole decide that he would like a good rope to reduce the length of that sentence, that’s a personal choice…

  To take a quick look at some of the topics mentioned by StrangeBlackCat (many of these need work):

  • Abortion: God, I hate this issue. There isn’t any good answer. As I said in SBC’s comments, I think it basically comes down to the fact that we, as a people, need to decide when someone is a human being and entitled to the rights therein. At that point, you may be able to have them removed from your body, but you shouldn’t be allowed to kill them (barring a triage situation). Before that point, they’re not a person.

    At 8.9 months, that’s a person in there. At 10 seconds, I just can’t see it. There’s a start, now narrow it down…

  • Agriculture: What About it?
  • Campaign Reform: Ooh, that’s a toughy.

    First of all, corporations aren’t people and should not be permitted to donate to a campaign. Of course, each and every member of that corporation may decide to donate, and that’s fine.

    Beyond that… It’s a matter of reducing the impact of money on government without limiting free speech. I’m not yet sure what the best way to do that is.

    One thing I’d definitely like to see: At some level, Campaign promises are oaths, and breaking them should be considered fraud.

  • Capital Punishment: Covered Above
  • Civil Rights: UN Declaration of Human Rights pretty much covers it. It may need a bit of tweaking, but a nation’s first and foremost responsibility should be protecting the Civil Rights of its’ people.
  • Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights: These have gotten way out of hand. Roll ‘em back to where they were at around the time of the framing of the constitution. No idea exists in a vacuum, and to a certain extent, every thought created was supported by the society around it – therefore, no idea can be owned. However, in the interests of progress (there’s a dangerous phrase), we want to give some incentive to people to move ahead with their better ideas. Therefore, we do want a limited copyright. Limited in time and effect.
  • Crime: What about it?

    There should be no such thing as a “consensual crime”. The criminal justice system should have three mandates:
    * Enable compensation of all victims of a crime : No one who committed a crime should be allowed to be wealth until all damages they have cause have been repaid.
    * Facilitate Rehabilitation whenever possible and as effectively as possible
    * Ensure the protection of society from those who are undergoing rehabilitation or who can not be rehabilitated.

  • Defense: Our borders are our borders. Defend them, but do not push national defense beyond them unless we are directly threatened (eg: We’re attacking you in a week) or are actually attacked. Our Defense budget should be reduced to something reasonable – probably not more than the rest of the world combined.
  • Economy: Ensure that promises are not broken without penalty. Enable open trade between our states. As to import/export, I still need some input/thought on this issue.
  • Education: I’m not sure that we are capable of nationally ensuring equal and quality education. Consider bumping this down to state level and reducing taxes so that the states can cover it.
  • Energy: This should, like the postal service, become a federal concern – energy is a basic need and we need to make a focused effort on developing renewable energy resources. Like FedEx, there can be private providers, but the government should be a primary provider. In some cases, this can be passed down to state/regional interests.
  • Environment: It can only take so much pollution and exploitation. Ensure that no one is permitted to exceed those amounts.
  • Euthanasia: Covered above – the right to cease living should be a matter of personal choice.
  • Foreign Policy: I believe we need to focus on improving and supporting the United Nations. If the UN requires military intervention, allow U.S. citizens (including military personnel) to volunteer, paid for by the UN. Of course, we (and other nations) need to ensure the UN has adequate funding and rigorous oversight.
  • Gun Control: At most, registration and accurate ballistic tracking.
  • Health: This is a toughy that needs to be discussed more. In general, I would like to support numerous Health Care Coops getting off the ground and providing basic coverage.
  • Immigration: Make sure we can support those who we allow to immigrate. Don’t allow immigration beyond that amount.
  • Media: Hoo Boy. Anything that presents itself as “news” (as opposed to editorial or entertainment) should be held accountable for deception or distortion. What else about media?
  • Natural Resources: See energy and environment
  • Privacy: It should be protected anywhere one has a reasonable expectation of it or in any case where it has been guaranteed by those collecting information. Beyond that, it doesn’t really exist.
  • Social Security: Hmm. In general, I’d like to see us make sure that no one starves or is unwillingly homeless. If that base need is met, SS is not as necessary. I’d probably make “providing the basics” a state issue.
  • Welfare: State Issue.

  So, all of those need to be discussed more – any requests? Any more topics that need to covered?

  ###

  And on the lighter side, here’s an interesting brain game:

  I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deson’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig yes?

  • 3:37 pm
  • 1 Comment