Trump-Biden Debate 2020 (9/29) - Commentary

 

Trump-Biden Debate 2020 (9/29) - Commentary

A quick summary. Quite the debate.  Like a street fight, but Trump has been fighting the media for 3+ years and finally had his opportunity to speak to even the CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS crowd.  Wallace tilted left unfortunately as a moderator, supposedly balanced and all that, showed a leaning towards Biden.  Trump had much more to say than Biden as indeed his accomplishments in 47 months far exceed Biden’s 47 years.  You can say Trump may be better at the Art of the Deal than the Art of the Debate.  He had many opportunities to bury Joe but may have lost them to some extent, shrouded by his temperament.  Biden when he had a stream of intelligence to share wandered and confused in a fashion that if no one was paying close attention would believe he was making sense.  If left to speak without interruption Biden would have stumbled and bumbled.  Oddly even Twitter, most liberal historically, gave Trump a 60/40 edge.  If Trump was the debate winner, then Biden and Wallace were the losers. 

Some highlights and where Trump with some patience and moderately more decorum may well have debunked any Biden diatribe.  To open Biden’s greeting to Trump, “How you doing, man?”  That immediately struck a chord with me.  

 

On Covid:  Biden blames Trump for improperly handling Covid.   Not sure anyone could have handled this pandemic at the beginning properly. Everyone was humbled by this pandemic.  It was new, a deep dive into the unknown, with many scientists differing on a multitude of possibilities. Biden never made clear the scientists he would listen to, except for the Climate Control pundits, even then not by name. We know who Trump was listening to, to include Birx and Fauci, and who he questioned.  Even they vacillated on protocol.  From the 2019 year end impeachment focus clouding the pandemic storm, it was January when it first came to light.  China was the epicenter, and Trump closed travel to and from that country. Europe soon thereafter.  Biden, and other Democrats, were critics of presumptive actions in excess of their ideas, with cries of xenophobia, and generally a distaste for anything Trump proposed.  It did not appear Covid was in the forefront of Democrat thinking and rhetoric at the onset.  Democrats tend to react and draw conclusions without all the facts, as if their opinion is the only stream of conscious thought that matters.  It continues even as we, and the President, have learned more about this invasive problem.  The young are less susceptible.  With millions of cases the vast majority have suffered little and recovered rapidly.  Elderly are the most at risk, with the high risk categories involving age and co-morbidities.  Trump should have said Americans can walk and chew gum at the same time.  We can cope with Covid while opening the Economy, making decisions along the way to keep the virus at bay, Thus enabling the Economy steaming ahead.  And Joe’s classic comment, “And, by the way, the 200,000 people that have died on his (Trump’s) watch, how many of those have survived?” 

On Masks:  After a short exchange, Wallace wanted to hear from Biden on masks, and Biden spoke, “Look, the way to open businesses is give them the wherewithal to be able open. We provided money, the-,” then Wallace stepped in, “But I was asking you, sir, about masks.”

On Covid Vaccine:  Yes, there is no vaccine as yet.  Until there is and it is readily available and, for Biden, it cannot be from companies, so he expressed, Trump favors, like J & J, Moderna, or Pfizer. Biden would shut down the Economy. Lockdown Joe. This would be a two part process, a lockdown, no work, and masks, required for everyone.  Biden would prefer a basement environment for all until his preferred a non-Trump Covid vaccine was perfected, with a guarantee of no side-effects.  Note, we have had many flu vaccines for years and people still get the flu and die from the flu.  

On the Economy:  Biden gleefully emphasized a decline from Covid that impacted the jobs of entry level and less skilled workers, and many, many others to which I can contest. Biden took credit, he and Obama, for the economic recovery, ignoring Trump’s 3 years of huge growth and average worker pay increasing by thousands.  Of course the negative Covid impact, whatever, was Trump’s fault.  Joe, what about the Economy? Joe readily blames Trump for destroying it, destroying a vibrant Economy Trump dedicated his time in office to making great.  And those entry level and low-skilled workers Joe expressed concerns for, well, there would be no jobs under Biden.  How could they work when locked down?  But Trump is doing everything he can to get the Economy moving again, knowing the risks to our citizens are greater without a functioning Economy, and considering Covid’s impact and treatment protocols.  Trump does care for the Biden ‘little’ guy.  And as for the billionaires still earning, not all mind you, there are mostly non-billionaires that are trying hard to keep their businesses operating, scaled down, and the economy alive.  They are providing what jobs that are available, such as Amazon, Target, and Walmart, and Apple and Microsoft, and the grocery and drug store chains.  It is clearly mostly billionaires and non-billionaires, even non-millionaires, are not earning.  To include the shop owners, the mechanics, the waiters and waitresses, the restaurant owners, barbers and beauticians, and the providers considered, by politicians, as non-essential. They are in Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, New York City, Coast to Coast, Florida to Washington State, and elsewhere, even Delaware, making deliveries to Biden’s home address too. 

As to Essential Businesses: Those considered by politicians as not essential, when allowed to open, they were restricted to a few shoppers, when historically they only had a few shoppers pre-Covid anyway.  Why were they ever closed?

On Health Care:  Trump has been favorable towards pre-existing conditions day in and day out.  He knows it is important to voters. Biden says otherwise.  Biden fears Obama’s signature disastrous costly legislation to socialize medicine by way of the Affordable Care Act will be overturned by the Supreme Court when Amy Coney Barrett is appointed to SCOTUS.  He was touting the Democrat talking points on this issue, and not a lot needed to be debated.  Trump did note the costly and ineffective launch of the ACA along with the false claims made about reducing health care costs and maintaining your own doctor.  He just had to emphasize that the Biden/Obama emphasis on lowering costs by $2500 for those insured, in practice, increased by that much and more as the deductible continues to rise as well.  Under Trump most Americans will continue with the health care they prefer and if changes occur for the under-insured, or the non-insured (those Biden wants to buy his insurance, by force as necessary), they will have access, just not under the Obama/Biden Plan but a better program. All in keeping with making America Greater.  Wallace kept inserting his comments and asking about Obamacare, challenging Trump’s accomplishments, and then when allowed to speak Trump began, “Well, first of all, I guess I'm debating you (referring to Wallace), not him, but that's okay. I'm not surprised.”

On SCOTUS and ACB.  That is a non-starter.  If a Democrat is President and has a Senate majority they would not hesitate to do the same in an election year.  That said, no more need be said.  The Democrats and Biden are just whining.  As to retaliation when and if Democrats regain the power they so desperately seek by adding more justices to SCOTUS, Biden was mute.  He did not demonstrate any leadership, certainly not as the current head of the Democratic Party and its policy-making as he claimed. Biden’s comment was, “The American people have a right to have a say in who the Supreme Court nominee is and that say occurs when they vote for United States Senators and when they vote for the President of United States.” to which Trump could have responded, “The people did speak when they elected me and in 2018 voted for a Republican Senate majority. So Joe, I agree with you.”  

On Roe v Wade.  Joe said it is (Roe v Wade) on the ballot, referring to the SCOTUS pick.  Trump’s response, “You don't know what's on the ballot. Why is it on the ballot? Why is it on the ballot? It's not on the ballot.”  Soon thereafter Wallace intervened anew to move on. “we’ll come back to Roe v. Wade.”  Not certain that ever happened. 

On Law and Order.  Biden was wishy-washy.  To tell you the truth his position was never clarified.  When asked if he ever, as the Democratic Party head (and boss), called Seattle or Portland to see what they needed or discuss what his Party can do, his expression was blank.  That is the job of the President, he noted.  Indeed Trump did call them, more than once.  But Biden as a leader, the Party Domo, did nada.  That did not sit well with me.  But then Harris and Biden never expressed a concern for the police officers shot in LA by a rogue gunman, but did visit a rapist thug, Blake, shot by police in Kenosha, caught on video by a cell phone camera from behind a screened window of a neighboring apartment. Biden did not express any concern for over-reactions and pre-judgments made by Democrats, his own running-mate, and violent agitators that continue to show up in cities where the police act in a fashion that raises concerns as to overreaction, and may be, but the whole picture in every case is not clear.  Except for the Breonna Taylor shooting, whereas we now know the police only fired after being fired upon.  She was not in her bed, but behind her boyfriend who fired his weapon first (admitting so to a Grand Jury).  But the crowd reaction was to say that the facts do not matter.  A policeman shot a black man and that is just not allowed, whether shot upon first, whether resisting arrest, or in a rage and threatening with a knife, or after stealing and running from a crime scene. Biden objects to the violence, but said nothing of the calls to defund the police.  He spoke words in defense of the police while saying they need social workers and mental psychologists or the like to accompany officers to help them access situations.  Oh my, and to repurpose police departments.  But how and for what or why is never put forth by Joe or Kamala. Trump is clear.  He supports police, understands how difficult their jobs are, and Trump is aware there can be problem cops, and that then becomes a departmental issue.  The Democrats talk little about Union protection of cops, as they are conflicted, loving the Union and hating the cop.  A dilemma.  A final note, Biden did call for an end to systematic racism in policing, with little explanation as to the system and the racists.  Sounded good in his head.   Also Trump noted the violent Democrat cities program and intent, “it’s really because they want to defund the police, and [Joe] Biden wants to defund the police.”  Interestingly enough it was Chris Wallace, the moderator, that interrupted, "No, he (Biden) — sir, he does not.”  What was with that? And where there are violent protestors, regardless of Covid, those local economies are not being helped at all.  Trump did note these were mainly Democrat run and controlled cities, big ones.  And crime there is on the rise. Wallace then pointed out, do not know why, Tulsa and another Republican led city, Fort Worth, with less than peaceful protests and increases in homicides.  Was that his role?  To dilute Trump’s discussion and the point he was making is not what a moderator does, only what a biased opinion oriented moderator does.

On Suburbs.  Most suburbanites are unaware of the act Obama/Biden passed that would enable low-income housing to be built in suburban areas, neighborhoods, without any possible objection,  The decision could be made by neighboring blighted areas.  “We ended that rule that was a very horrible rule for people in suburbia,” said Trump.  And he did.  Labelled Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, Obama/Biden slipped a fast one onto suburban policy makers that stripped them of their ability to decide. Passed in a fog of confusion with a fancy name this bill could have been quite disruptive to rural America.  

On Climate Control.  What can be said other than Chris Wallace must think climate control is necessary.  It was not even a subject slated to be discussed. Trump was correct about the fires in California.  The State forest floors contained tinder, he called it, that should have been removed regularly, as the Federal Forest Services does on Federal lands.  Tinder is quite flammable and if properly addressed can be easily removed and help prevent the rapid spread of fires.  It is not the climate.  Trump could have addressed the extent to which coal power plants today are clean energy producers, without an impact on wildlife, as the case with windmills and solar, and without the need for subsidies.  California had to place a couple online to address power shortages due to normal summer heat. As for hurricanes, how is Biden going to prevent hurricanes. And the Paris Climate Accord was a boondoggle at the expense of America for other nations, who did and do little to curb their emissions, while the representatives live lifestyles that generate a significant carbon footprint.  Then there is the balance as to the impact on the Economy, the cost to consumers, the ‘little’ guy, by the rules, regulations, bigger government bureaucracies, and increases on product costs that Biden and most Democrats, the progressives, the Squad, ignore. Biden wants to rebuild every building, re-insulate, and use green energy to power all buildings in America, with no common sense as to the cost or impact on US all. 

On Packing the Court (SCOTUS).  Joe was asked directly if he would pack the Supreme Court, adding many justices, if elected.  To which he would not answer, getting a bit testy, and when challenged by Trump, saying, “Will you shut up, man?”  Bicen’s puppet stings on this topic were showing.  

On Personal Income Taxes.  Wallace went down the NYT path asking Trump about taxes paid.  His response, “millions.” What Wallace ignored, referring to only $750 paid, was the article was about corporate taxes, not personal taxes.  It was a hit piece with inadequate preparation. And there was no violation of tax law.  

As to General Accomplishments.  Trumps comment may have been the most poignant, “Hey, Joe, let me just tell you.… In 47 months, I've done more than you've done in 47 years, Joe. We've done things that you never even thought of doing.”

On the Biden Government.  Question Wallace asked, “if you were to be elected president (your policy) focuses a lot on big government, big taxes, big spending. I want to focus first on the taxes. You propose more than $4 trillion over a decade in new taxes on individuals making more than $400,000 a year and on corporations. President Trump says that that kind of an increase in taxes is going to hurt the economy as it's just coming out of a recession.”  Biden’s response was a discussion on spending, jobs, buy American, etc., making Wallace the moderator say again, “But respectfully, sir, I'm talking about taxes, not spending.”  Biden altered course, “…I'm going to eliminate a significant number of the taxes. I'm going to make the corporate tax 28%. It shouldn't be 21%.” So much for eliminating taxes.  To Joe it seems eliminate means to raise taxes.

On Sensitivity (racial) Training and Critical Race Theory.  An interesting topic that most Americans are not even aware of required to take place in many institutions, the military and government offices and agencies.  Trump ended the program and requirements.  His comment, “I ended it because it's racist. I ended it because a lot of people were complaining that they were asked to do things that were absolutely insane. That it’s a radical revolution that was taking place in our military, in our schools, all over the place….we were paying people hundreds of thousands of dollars to teach very bad ideas and frankly, very sick ideas. And really, they were teaching people to hate our country And I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to allow that to happen. We have to go back to the core values of this country. They were teaching people that our country is a horrible place. It's a racist place. And they were teaching people to hate our country.…”  Biden favors keeping the practice of discussing white fragilities and systematic racism in America to which caucasians and the privileged should be found guilty. 

As for Hunter Biden:  That came up and Biden defended his son.  Not really well though.  Trump made the issue, but did not call Biden himself corrupt, implied maybe. Biden did not respond to the $3.5 million from Moscow mayor’s wife. At one time he talked about his son Bo, when the subject was Hunter.  Biden needed to be corrected. 

There was more and this is already too much.  Trump had facts, listened and often reacted quickly to comments made.  Biden had few facts and created a wall to any question that requested a position issue. The Green New Deal, case in point, for energy and climate control is not his plan, so he said, trying to be a centrist, but when outlined it certainly spelled Green New Deal. AOC has Biden under her wing. Biden huffed, puffed, inserted a number of ‘mans’, called Trump a liar, worst President ever, told him to ‘shut up, man’, kept repeating ‘not true’, ‘not true,’ and was generally on the Trump attack more than sharing facts or cogent programs.  His comment on programs was that if he said anything, that is all anyone would talk about.   But isn’t that the idea, let people know what you are about and what your are for.  He was evasive, non-committal and lacked clarity, except on his ad hominem and ill-will towards the President. 

Next debate may find Trump as well-equipped, but more calm in his efforts to make clear his position.  Biden has no real position.  Actually 2 minutes for each topic is clearly not enough for Trump and too much for Biden.  

By

Thomas W. Balderston

Author and Blogger.  Books on Kindle. 

 

Education in America

Education in America

Many today are frustrated with America’s education system.  The problem, call it symptomatic, is the liberal bias that has become a component of what is being taught.  Such teaching is not just in colleges and universities, but at the High School level, and now penetrating into the Elementary School system.  Public institutions are most prone to the problem for the simple reason they are governed, as it were, by the Federal Government.  States have some influence, but the primary charge is put forward by the Federal Government.  In addition to the Federal Government, another influencing group, is the Labor Unions, primarily the teacher’s Union.  

Consider this.  Under President Jimmy Carter (#39) Congress in 1979 created the Department of Education as a Cabinet position. One purpose was to “improve the coordination of Federal education programs.”  This would include curriculums.  History records the successor to Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson (#17), formed an education department, or office, to collect information and statistics on our schools. At that time there were concerns over the control, power, the Federal Government might impose over local control of schools, thus a Cabinet position was not established.  In the 60’s LBJ (#37) in his ‘War on Poverty’ sought to create programs to improve education for the poor at all levels. From the time of the Emancipation our government has been most accommodating towards minorities, blacks principally, to better their position in America and enable them to reap the benefits of freedom, independence and the opportunities America offered, and were put forth in the constitution and Declaration of Independence. 

History shows that progressives, Democrats, when in power in DC, continuously seek ways in which to deny States Rights by taking control of functions at the Federal level.  Over the years this has happened with Labor, Commerce, Education, energy and others.  

Today, with a budget over $60 Billion (2010), and 4,000-4,500 employees to guide our Nation’s schools, the Federal government rules national education.  The mistake, as I see it, is having one vision for education, inputs from the experts acknowledged, and not the possibility of 50 visions, which would be the case if this Cabinet position did not exist and the office of Education retained a fact gathering mission. History shows the goal of Federalizing Education has not been attained.  Politics, at the National level, the President and Party in power, have too much say in what is said in our institutions of learning.  

The liberal progressive nature of Presidents since LBJ, to include Carter, Clinton (#42), and Obama (#44), and the make-up of the Education Department, has contributed to a left leaning, bias filled, tenured professors and teachers, that have turned our centers of learning into indoctrination centers, the emphasis being liberal progressive ideals that tend to ignore family and religion;  replacing them with government as parent and God.  There is an imbalance in teaching, more liberal than conservative, with less emphasis on actual history and more revisionist history, such as the 1619 Project and White Fragilities.  The revisions favor the narrative of the radical left.  The Democratic left preaches that America is a nation of oppression, citing the Constitution as imperfect and misdirected. It dwells on slavery, as if advances and progress have never taken place, ignoring too that many minorities, subsequent to the arrival of black slaves, have achieved great success in America due to what our Nation offers everyone.  You do not hear Mexicans, hispanics, Asians, the Irish, and other minority groups calling for reparations.  They honor those that have been successful and overcome poverty and other hardships, because of America, not in spite of America.  The progressive Democrat despises capitalism, free enterprise, and ignores the reality of disparities, regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion, instead regarding such differences in the nature of people and outcomes as discrimination.  The progressive Democrat also loves Big Government.   Opportunities can be equal,  outcomes cannot. 

Not every State is Democrat controlled nor Republican controlled, neither liberal nor conservative.  This means there is opportunity for education influenced by the left and right to exist depending on the State you choose and the governance voted into power. There would not be one voice dictating to every State how or what they must teach in order to receive Federal funding.  Such suppresses freedom of expression and creativity in teaching. 

Unions must also be broken and the archaic and intransigent nature of tenure for educators eliminated.  Technology today can then be properly and aggressively applied to teaching. Those that have lost their enthusiasm, their drive and desire to teach, would be dismissed.  Instead of 3000 algebra teachers there could be a few, assisted by TA’s in classrooms, providing virtual instruction in small classroom settings, the best educators, and the best lesson plan and the best methods for imparting knowledge to be provided every student.  Same for literature and history, a liberal arts education that even Mortimer Adler would love. The emphasis would be on students, not on teachers. That is as it should be.  States and localities could find the best and brightest to teach their children.  As with school choice, there would be choice, freedom on the part of parents to choose how their children learn and what their children learn.  

Food for thought.

by  T. W. Balderston

Author: Damascus Quran (available at Amazon, on Kindle), other books:  Wake Up Wake Up - The Testimony of a Layman, The Proven God, The Wonder of Terra.  Blog:  Understand-Islam.com 

Who Does America, Who Do We, Stand For? What Do We Stand For?

 Who Does America, Who Do We, Stand For?  What Do We Stand For?

During this RNC convention, and post the DNC Convention, we can reflect on a bit of American History.  This is not a look at progress, especially for minorities, which has occurred and continues.  Equality for all is more equal and in line with the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.  What we are going to take a look at is ‘we the people’ of America.  

Presidents since the turn of the 20th Century, from 1900, have had a tendency towards progressivism, and that is not a positive term for those that seek success on their own.  We are not a perfect union, we are not comprised of perfect people, but we have achieved more than any other Nation in the world in a rather short period of time. The founding fathers, as it were, the originators of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, were scribes of a system more perfect than themselves. The freedoms for all we enjoy today were the freedoms as purposed, but not as lived at the time and for many years after.  The documents were adopted as the guiding principles for America, the United States, but unfortunately they were not fully ascribed to on day one. There were issues, many resolved, and some still being dealt with.  With the Constitution as our continuing guide the end results, fully adjudicated, will be a more than perfect Union. 

Now to address the questions raised. 

Do you prefer self-rule or to be ruled by elites, intellectuals, political representatives, and their staff, that decide everything for you?  As a starter it was Ronald Reagan that said, “Government in not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.”  What is interesting is that the question posed offers a ‘choice.’ Much of what we discuss involves choice, whether people prefer to choose or have decisions made for them. 

Does Size Matter

With that as a starting point, consider the size of government; the bigger the government, the bigger the problem.  The corollary is obvious.  And the bigger the government the more things the employees need to find to do to justify their positions and continued existence.  This translates into regulations, finding and regulating everything they can, leaving no activity, purpose, employee, employer, business or pocketbook untouched.  From the water you drink to the way you think big government needs to departmentalize, to organize, to oversee, to regulate and to control possibilities and outcomes.  The advent of business success through exploration, as oil, to railroads, the automobile, and manufacturing, of many items Americans never knew they did not need, enabled many to become very wealthy.  There were concerns, to which there was some truth, that employees were being exploited. The debate was over lower wages to keep prices low to maintain competition and create demand.  But also workplace conditions, hours engaged, even child labor became issues.  There were more employees than there were wealthy entrepreneurs, those that created the jobs the employees worked, and thus more voter potential.  So the progressives believed they could hold office, appeal to the majority voter, by protecting the worker, transferring wealth, and restricting the entrepreneur from getting out of hand, thus curbing monopolies, conglomerates, and that which they referred to as big business.  Yet we are reminded that no business is too big to fail.  Protectionism of some businesses that were in decline was considered proper thinking, to protect the job and the employee, but apply that to the buggy whip, and you have people employed making products nobody any longer needs. 

To protect workers the Department of Labor was formed. Due to a few greedy business owners, a minority in my view at the time, an entire Federal Department was created to impose sanctions, regulate and oversee conditions in manufacturing.  Today that Department’s major purpose is to insure the existence of Unions.   Unions vote for those that will maintain their status.  This Department provides the guidelines for Posters you see in every workplace.  With the Covid there are many directives for not just workers but all of us to distance, mask-up, lockdown, dine outside, not inside, and avoid crowds, so suggested.  Then there is insurance, unemployment insurance, an agency to provide payments when you lose your job, not when you quit, mind you, but when you lose your job. Then there are the standards set for family leave, minimum age, minimum wage, work hours, hours permitted to work, safety factors, and more.  Much of the latter is justification for those Department employees.  It is the Unions that are given the grace of government. Question.  Is the Department of Labor needed any longer?  What about States Rights?  I’ll get to that.

To Your Own Self Be True

Lest we forget, self-rule.  What is that?  It is what you can do for yourself.  You can create, innovate, manufacture, provide a service, such as being a barber, physician, beautician, realtor, gardener, musician, cook, chef, artist, entrepreneur, carpenter, plumber, electrician, auto mechanic, bus or truck driver, Uber or Lyft driver, boat captain, pilot, educator, and more.  The only impediment may be, can be, and in many cases is education, licensure, regulation or permission, and qualifications.  That is when self-rule meets government. You can start a social network, and you are free to do as you will, until considered too big, too important, too much for the government operatives to accept and thus become regulated. Before regulation comes congressional hearings.  Regulation is considered by those regulating, ‘good for the people.’ Terms are used that are politically correct to make the meaning of restrictions on freedoms to operate acceptable to the masses, those that vote more than the others (the creators, implementors, doers).  One such term, often used, is ‘fairness.’ What is ‘fair?’  Add to that ambiguous words as ‘right’ and ‘just.’  

America achieved its greatness via self-rule, entrepreneurship, innovation and success in selling its goods, agriculture, and services nationally and worldwide.  Today many want to curb the extent of America’s ability to manufacture and supply the world, even where to manufacture and what to manufacture.  For instance silver and gold is not processed in the USA, but in other countries.  We can dig for the ore, but not turn that ore into a finished product, by regulation, unless we go outside the States.  Regulation became so restrictive, and expensive to comply, it was necessary to find offshore locations whose regulatory environment to the processor was more favorable.  Competitive edge is important to self-rule, it is an objective, it is why people innovate. But to the progressives if an advantage is achieved there is a problem. That means ‘disparity’ (another word of convenience), and thus discrimination (which progressives link to ‘disparity’) towards those that are not as competitive.  The term used, applying our nations’ creed of equality, is ‘equal outcomes.’  But that is a misnomer.  As equal results are not possible.  There may be an occasional tie, but even in sports there are playoffs to determine the victor.  

Equal

We are equal in God’s eyes, and in terms of human rights. We have equal rights as to protection under the law, as to how we start, such as in education and opportunities. But after that there are many, many variables. Yet the obstacles are obvious: human size, sex, innate ability, talent, intellect, motivation, environment, family, and desire, et al.  Overcoming the obstacles can result in disparities making one person more successful than another.  Then to those who all too often are referred to as ‘left behind’ come the cries of ‘discrimination.’  The cries may be direct or indirect.  The indirect cries are from third parties, mostly political, seeking their own personal advantage, or taking advantage of an opportunity.  Rhetoric often supersedes action. 

Our society needs daily encouragement, not discouragement. We need to herald our champions, those that overcome the hurdles and make something of themselves, to include happiness.  ‘Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,’ that is America’s mantra.  We live, we are free, and as such can overcome hurdles, if we so choose.  It may take many attempts. 

On a race track oval there are starting blocks for the competitors.  We can assume they have all trained for the event, but if there is an open spot anyone could take it.  When the gun goes off the race begins.  That is the first hurdle, just starting.  Then everyone proceeds at their own pace, some faster than others.  Hurdles along the way or not, just a smooth track, the one that crosses the finish line first, breaks the tape, receives the reward.  Is that ‘fair’?  To some they know their limits, others may return to training,  knowing with hard work, extra effort, they can exceed their current limits, personal hurdles, and the next time do better, and even break the tape.  The same applies to education, skills with musical instruments, vocational trades, services, not just sports. Everyone needs someone at the end of the line encouraging, even if it is to just finish.  The victors should stay at the finish line to encourage all the others to complete the task, cross the line, achieve their own personal best. It is not just the winners than can be happy, but those that do their best as well.  There is more than one way to be a winner. 

All the Same

Sameness is boring. Even when it comes to computers they are not the same.  An Apple is not a Microsoft, Dell or Hewlett Packard computer.  Or cars, as a Lexus is not a Ford, or Buick, or Jeep or a Kia. In every sector those that produce try to make their products better, more appealing, faster, smarter, and even more profitable, if not per unit, by volume.  Not every car is attractive to every person. There are automobiles attractive to some and not to others.  Ugly may be beautiful and visa versa. It is all in the eyes of the individual, based on personal ‘choice.’  In the progressive ideal world, as in Russia (socialist, communist) your car choices are limited, in many cases even as to color. Choice is limited due to government dictates, as a parent decision for you. Under self-rule choice is exponential, you decide.  The prevailing argument always is there are exceptions, reasons to restrict choices; some obvious impediments, some not so, such as affordability, availability, sensibility or compatibility. 

Because we do have choice, what we are offered is not the same.  As what is offered becomes less, our choices are restrained.  Education is an example.  There are many schools.  Having your children go to a school of your choosing would be wonderful.  There may be reasons to pick one over another, but just having the choice would be good.  Today Unions oppose, in many areas, parents making or having the right to choose.  Same applies to education in each State.  During the Carter Administration a Department of Education, at the Federal level, was created.  This reduces having 50 State’s deciding how to offer education in their areas, limiting the decision to just one voice, that of the Federal Government.  To me this imposes significant restraint on the potential for new and creative, innovative ideas, in education, ideas that if successful can be shared, with the other 49.  It is the progressive ideal to have one source for everything, the Federal establishment.  They want to replace mother, father, and mentor with their own ideas, thoughts and history.  They want to control every aspect of your lives, even the choices you make.  And they want you to believe what they are doing is for you, is in your best interest. 

Health Care is another area, such as progressives offering universal health care. They call it Medicare-for-All. The system to be controlled by the Federal Government.  You will have but a single choice; the Government’s choice for you.  Your doctor, your hospital, your walk-in clinic, the extent of care received, even whether or not you deserve the care necessary, such as for age reasons, will no longer be your decision.  What you can afford will not matter.  There has even been talk of death panels, which do exist already in several countries that offer universal health care.  Self-rule is out the window.  This is another area that should be left to the States.  Let Governors and their elected State officials decide on health care delivery systems for their residents, giving residents a vote on the matter.  

States Rights were an important mandate to those that structured our government.  It remains important today, while the progressives seek to centralize all decisions at the Federal level.  At one time Senators were not elected by the people in their States but selected by the Governors and State legislatures (who were voted in by the residents), thus having House representatives for the people, and the Senators for the State’s interests.  That was changed during President Wilson’s (28th) reign and the 17th Amendment. The progressives trampled on State’s rights again. President Wilson oversaw the passage of legislative policies of a progressive nature which until the1933 New Deal, under FDR (32nd), were unprecedented.

Beware, not everything ordained by Government is the same for everyone. If fact often what the Government dictates is more favorable to government and its officials, which you elect and then the elected appoint or hire employees (with onerous dismissal clauses in employment contracts), than the people.  Hearing the description ‘deep state’ conjures up conspiracy theories, which in truth have some validity.  It is difficult for a new President to reduce staff due to tenure and work rules created by previous administrations.  This is most inefficient and costly.  It also leaves important posts occupied with opposing party loyalists that become dissenters, leakers and internal obstacles to succeeding for the masses.  The masses are We The People, the tax-payers.  And then there is the ‘pork.’  Government using our dollars to support their favored backers and loyalists.  The bigger the government the more potential for corruption, the bigger the cost of operations and the easier to hide and disguise expenditures and uses less favorable to citizens.  

Labor Department

In my view, established in March 1913 by then outgoing President Taft (27th) and incoming President Wilson, this Department of the Government, Labor, a Cabinet position, has done more harm to creativity and productivity in America than helped.  It heralded the Progressive doctrine towards oversight of individuals.  It purpose is "to foster, promote and develop the welfare of working people, to improve their working conditions, and to enhance their opportunities for profitable employment.”  However profitable employment is productive employment, not jobs burdened with costly regulations.  

I am not opposed to proper clean and safe working conductions, but question whether a political Union protection racket was necessary. For the businessman the Department of Labor restricts his abilities, and thus the instinct to find job opportunities, by imposing the will of government upon the will of the entrepreneur. And this can occur via the Union.  Unions make demands, often unwarranted and although beneficial to the employees that pay into the Union, not to the possible outcomes on students, consumers, households or the economy.  An example today is in education,  Teachers Unions making demands to return to teach that increase the cost of education for all of us, limit the choice of a parent to have their children go to a preferred school, even homeschooled (‘school choice’), and in some cases oppose parents from monitoring how there kids are taught and what they are taught.  And we cannot ignore tenured teachers that have lost their drive, are more rote and mundane in their methods, and have little creativity.  Fresh ideas are ignored for the protection of a class of educators, not for the benefit or the ability to learn and gain knowledge of the student. 

Another example; Unions in the automobile industry were able to garner higher and higher wages for the worker, but the result was to move manufacturing to foreign lower wage countries, a loss of American jobs, opportunity and tax revenue, as well as engender an increase in competition from imported foreign cars at lower prices.  

President Regan (40th) 

In 1980 Ronald Regan was elected, a conservative, a self-rule believer, after years of progressivism.  Ben Shapiro, his book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps, wrote (pg. 160), “Regan’s economic agenda was threefold: first, lowering taxes in order to stop punishing businesses for success, and to incentivize investment and growth; second, to relieve regulatory burdens that had hamstrung entrepreneurs; and finally, to stop inflation in its tracks, granting the predictable basis for economic growth missing since the advent of government growth under LBJ (36th).”  Needless to say at the end of his administration America's “economy was booming.”  This was because Regan got the Government out of the way of free enterprise as much as he could.  Today we can say the same thing about Trump. Unfortunately, the impediment for both was and is the size of government and federal spending, an inability to curb the oversized growth of each.  

20th Century

There were 17 Presidents in the period 1900 to 2000, starting with Teddy Roosevelt and ending with Bill Clinton.  Under Teddy we had a “Square Deal” that would address his primary concerns for the era—the three C’s: control of corporations, consumer protection, and conservation.  Woodrow Wilson focused on Banks and Trade.  Wilson was the most progressive seeking as much Federal government intervention and involvement as possible. He passed the Clayton Act  (1914) which provided support for labor unions by exempting labor from antitrust prosecution and legalizing strikes and peaceful picketing. The progressive process enabling government to take a greater role in controlling the lives of American citizens had begun.  From the end of the Wilson era (1923) until FDR’s election (1933) America experienced the death of a President, scandals in congress (Teapot Dome), a quiet period of growth with respect for States Rights (Coolidge - 30th), and the Crash of 1929. With FDR came the New Deal, and a resurgence of progressivism resulting in the growth of the Federal Government.  The next dramatic phase of progressivism in the 20th century was under LBJ, and the Civil rights Act of 1964 along with Medicare and Medicaid.  

But more recently it has been the Obama/Biden Administration that reinvigorated the Progressives. Ben Shapiro (his book mentioned previously) noted (pg. 163), “the Obama administration became a proponent for identity politics centering on a narrative of America as an oppressive country, with racism baked into its DNA.” Obama understood the effectiveness of class politics, a specialty of FDR, and agreed that the “government was the solution to every problem” (pg. 151).  Educators, professors, and writers from Charles Beard to Richard Hofstadter to Howard Zinn to Noam Chomsky and 1619’s own Nikole Hannah-Jones have been allowed to dominate and be spewed from the mouths of teachers inviting many in our schools to embrace their anti-conservative, anti-capitalistic, history more as “politically driven ‘social science’” (pg. 179), blaming the present for the past (ignoring reality and progress), and codifying America as an inherently “power hierarchy” (pg. 175). None of which is correct.  

Jimmy Carter, responsible for the oil crisis, the takeover of Iran by the ayatollah, and a continued decline in our Education system was weak compared to Obama.  Obama, however, was ill-equipped and surrounded himself with incompetents.  He kindled the fire of rage and racism today we see in the knee-jerk reactions and pre-judgement of the likes of the BLM activists.  His beer summit with a policemen and black intellectual, locked out of his home and investigated by the cops for trying to break-in, did not ease racial tensions, but exacerbated them.  There was no racial bias noted in this situation.  As with George Floyd, the Ferguson affair, and Jacob Blake, without proof criticisms were made, condemnation and prosecution sought, guilt assumed. In this instance a disorderly conduct misunderstanding was portrayed as a racial incident.  This as the example of repeated incidents that lacked sufficient evidence for final judgment resulting in riots, burning of property, threats, attacks on police officers, occupation by violent protestors, destruction and deaths. 

One particular Ben Shapiro comment found most poignant, having to do with political posturing by leftist progressive democrats, “When demand for victimization narratives exceeded supply, (these politicos) mine American history for … oppression, then declare the modern ills can be attributed to historical injustices” (pg.170).  Racial progress is constantly downplayed by these, those I refer to as, ‘divisivists.’ 

Socialism

There is much discussion today about socialism.  The progressive movement takes many of its directives from marxist and socialist ideas, whereupon business success is shared with the employees, healthcare is offered everyone at government (tax-payer) expense, and wealth is redistributed as much as possible.  Examples of socialism exist today in Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, much of China, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, although the latter three are not strictly socialist.  Natural resources of these small countries are shared and help to provide for the welfare of the whole. Socialism is also the methodology in many Muslim majority nations.  An unfortunate aspect of socialism is a lack of incentive by workers to innovate, create, or be as productive as possible, as the consequences are a taking or sharing of the potential wealth produced, and a lack of justification to work harder, as there is no additional reward for doing so.  The government oversight becomes that of a dominant party insisting on production, with penalties exceeding benefits. Those persons that are creative may seek to leave to find a more open, self-governed society, if possible.  Those that are critical of the system, or the dissenters, are removed, their voices quelled, so as not to have any adversity caused.  No protests. In some cases peaceful protests are permitted, closely monitored, to give the appearance of a more civilized, objective, leadership. 

What Does America Stand For? Viewpoints Right and Left

The concern is whose side are you on? What do you believe?  What have you been taught?

Right, Red, Conservative

From the GOP viewpoint, or that of Republicans, and Trumpians.  The position favors capitalism, entrepreneurship, family, religion (God), personal charity, small government, more incentives and less entitlements, deregulation, school choice, balanced curriculums (more conservative viewpoints added to counter today’s overwhelming liberal concepts being taught), reduced government spending, teaching actual American history (the bad and the good), anti-communism, anti-socialism, patriotism (love of Country), America’s uniqueness, equality of opportunity, realistic about equality of outcomes, freedom, freedom of speech, nationalism, closed borders, self-rule, self-defense (gun rights), independence, immigration control, health care as individual’s choose, voter ID’s (all citizens to vote), States Rights, illegals do not receive same benefits (tuition & health care) as citizens, rights of individuals (granted  by God) precede rights of government (granted by humans), right to life, government of laws (moral and biblical), government to not be political, and fiscal responsibility, of individual and government.  The Conservatives believe opportunity is equal, but encouragement, incentives, family (direct or indirect), and desire are also needed, instilled through proper educators and mentors. Failure only means you get up and try anew. Relying on government is an error of judgment. God’s role and importance to our society is to remain and be embraced. 

Left, Blue, Liberal

From the Democratic viewpoint, that of Obama, Sanders, FDR, LBJ, and Biden. The position favors socialism, labor Unions, welfare, government as overseer of everyone, government as the nation’s charity (at the expense of bureaucracy), secularism, increased welfare and entitlements, consumer protectionism through regulation, limits on education, continued progressive and liberal politically charged social science ideals in curriculums, revisionist history to reflect an evil and oppressive nature of America, wealth transfer, equal outcomes, making, identifying and maintaining victims in society to advance political narratives, America is not unique, government as a power hierarchy deciding for people, downplaying racial progress, individualism until it becomes costly to society, limits on freedom of speech, globalism, open borders, no limits on immigration, universal health care, no voter ID’s, federal control over States, free health care for illegals, free tuition for illegals, activist government, government determines people’s rights, right to choose life (abortion OK), government of morals as determined by humans (not biblical), government and politics are joined, and taxation to achieve redistribution and ‘fairness.’ The Left believes opportunity is not equal, disparities translate to discrimination and must be balanced by oppressive regulation and welfare.  Discouragement, downplaying one’s individual abilities, as a victim, is common.  Failure is not an individuals hurdle, it is a product of the system, either as part of the system or not.  Reliance on Government is recommended. 

What About You

Where do you fit?  In what hole do you prefer to insert your peg? When considering the factors what leads towards unity? What leads to division? What do you prefer?  Are you for more Federal Government or less.  What about the role of the States?  Progressives have succeeded in bringing to Washington, creating Cabinet Posts, the Department of Labor, the Department of Education and the Department of Energy, all to impose controls nationwide on the workplace, workers and employers, teachers, students and curriculums, and the use and development of energy in the USA, from speed limits, to tax on gasoline, to the climate-control ruse to compel less fossil fuel in favor of alternative sources. 

All our actions when we vote have an impact on Government, its direction and its size, certainly the personalities that sit in judgment, their opinions and biases, and those that influence legislation, such as lobbyists, wealthy individuals and corporations.  There is much to consider whenever we fill in a circle, trip a lever or otherwise choose a politician as representative or issue to become law. What do you stand for?  What do you want America to be?

 

by Thomas W. Balderston, author, blogger.