It went by so fast I thought I might have been the only person who might have caught the most unintentionally hilarious line at tonight's Republican convention, but it looks like Wonkette caught it too. As they put it-
9:05 PM — John McCain’s dad had him bombed, but it didn’t work.
That's just a part of their play by play, of couse, up until shortly before McCain's speech at ten, which was actually much better than I thought it would be, even if it wasn't quite up to the level of his running mate.
It was also very moving. Still, there's one thing that bothered me, and even stuck in my craw, and its the same thing that always sticks in my craw about these things-the country first theme of the night.
Okay, I know that might sound unpatriotic to some, but I can't help but feel a little uneasy when a politician tells me I should put my country ahead of my own self-interest-especially when he's telling me that while trying to convince me to vote for him to lead that same country he's insisting I should put ahead of my own self-interest.
"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."
It sounds like a noble sentiment, but its a dangerous one, for the simple fact that way too many people, probably two thirds of them at least, have this unfortunate tendency to confuse "country" with "government". That's because people are, despite their pretensions, simple-minded folks who don't really know any better.
It's sort of like the old, old woman from the old country who genuflects in front of an icon of the Virgin Mary or some other saint, or Christ for that matter, and who when questioned insists she is not practicing idolatry. No, she will have you know, she is just using the image of the saint-or Christ-to focus her prayers to the actual saint-or to Christ-who dwells in heaven. She is using the image as a channel of sorts for her to direct her prayers to the genuine article.
And, of course, she is right. That is exactly what she's doing.
In other words, she is practicing idolatry.
In a somewhat similar vein, people who put their country before their own self-interest usually do so at the behest of some government entity. They are not really putting country first. They are putting government first, because that is the entity they are really bowing to. Whatever their stated intentions, that way too often is the actual fact of the matter. Or at least it all too often ends up that way.
People that truly want to put country first-not the government, but the country-are actually looking out for their own self-interest, and moreover they are well advised to do just that.
Hell, that's why our forefathers came here to begin with. The very act of leaving their original homelands and making the dangerous, uncertain journey to these shores involved looking out for their own self-interests, despite the hardships and sacrifices involved. They were looking at the bigger picture. They wanted something more. They wanted a life in a world where they might pursue their dreams of a better life. Failure meant misery and possibly death, but that was an irrelevant consideration. They felt they had nothing worth living for at the time anyway.
Since that time we as a nation, dedicated to individual rights and liberty, have consistently looked out for our own best interests. We do this collectively and individually. Why the hell else vote? Wouldn't it be kind of stupid to return to the kind of life our forefathers left, out of some misguided notion that we should "put country first"? Well, taken to its logical extreme, that's what it could lead to. I don't know about anybody else, but I don't intend to go that route.
Remember, "We The People" are the country. Right? The government is supposed to be our servants. McCain might well get that-in fact, I'll gladly take him at his word that he does-but I'm not so sure most people do, and that scares the hell out of me.
14 comments:
I have to say this to all my libertarian-minded fellow bloggers. It's balancing act, Patrick. "Country" is us, our families, friends and neighbors. Sure we have to be selfish to survive and succeed but there's such a thing as "enlightened self-interest" where one balances one's own needs against the needs of the community in which one lives.
Start small, and work your way up.
Do you want to live in a country where John McCain nominates Supreme Court justices, or would you rather give that power to Barack Obama?
Do you want to raise a family in a country where John McCain will allow the free market to find economic solutions to employment, health care, etc. or do you want to raise a family in a country where Barack Obama arrogantly calls his totalitarian socialist agendas "progress" as if implementing them on paper were the only hurdle to their pre-destined success?
Do you want your local community to not be touched by John McCain so it is able to pass ordinances that fine landlords that rent to illegal immigrants, or do you want the federal government to grant property rights to illegal immigrants under Barack Obama and have your fellow citizens jailed for hate crimes for denying housing to illegal immigrants, even as the government taxes you to pay for both the jail and the HUD housing?
And so on.
For me, the choice was easy. I wouldn't vote for a Democrat ever, as you know I sincerely believe that party was created for the purpose of destroying the United States of America. I've always put country first with my vote.
Wasn't gung ho excited for McCain.
And then he put Sarah Palin on the ticket, a libertarian-conservative's wet dream (pardon the pun).
Obama is toast. He was going to be toast as soon as the party philosophies had to be measured side by side.
Libertarianism trumps totalitarianism in every fair election.
conservative = fascist..Lol you have some nerve calling Democrats totalinarians.8 years of Der Fuhrer Bush and you still dont fucking get it..But you keep living that dillusion beamish, im sure it will keep you warm at night
Patrick-I like that phrase "enlightened self-interest", and of course I agree that we the people are the country, meaning as you said us, our friends, neighbors, families, etc.
I just think a whole lot of people tend to unconsciously identify "country" with "government", therefore its easy to get them to fall into line behind things they might not ordinarily be so willing to support.
Beamish-I definitely agree with you too. I don't buy the whole bit about the Democratic Party founded to destroy the country, but I do agree that the modern Democratic Party has just veered too far to the left over the last half-century and is ate up with far left ideologues.
To me, the deciding factor is the judges. I don't always agree with the decisions of conservative judges, but by and large I agree wholeheartedly with their interpretation of the constitution and their overall judicial philosophy. That trumps every other consideration, with me.
Don't worry, I'm still a firm and unyielding supporter of the McCain-Palin ticket (or as I like to say PALIN-McCAIN '08), but sometimes I think people need to stop and take a deep breath and consider the ramifications of certain things.
You and I know the difference between "country" and "government" but I'm not so sure a lot of other people do. That's why people like me and you have to do our admittedly small part (at least in my case) to keep government honest and in their place as SERVANTS of the people.
Shadowhawk-It all comes down to whether you want to live in freedom or whether you want to trade your freedom in, little by little, for one security blanket or another.
I was never a big fan of George W. Bush, though I have always tried to view him with objectivity. He has done some things that were quite good. He has done some things my conservative libertarian friends don't like that I think are good.
Things that, if a Democrat had done them, you would probably like, like his Medicare initiative, which for all its flaws has helped a lot of elderly destitute people, and which I view as an emergency measure similar to Roosevelts New Deal on a smaller scale.
If a Democrat had promoted the same measure, I don't say you, but most Democrats would be trumpeting it as an example of enlightened legislation.
Of course since it was a Republican president who promoted it all we hear from Democrats is nonsense about doughnut holes.
That's the difference between most Democrats and most Republicans. Republicans had to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote for the measure. Democrats are for the most part partisan hacks who put their own political gain before every other consideration.
The Democrats had sixty years of a nearly uninterrupted monopoly of power over the Congress. Forty-six of those years came after Truman announced the desire for some form of universal health care. They could never get it done, because they tried to turn it into yet another giant federal bureaucracy.
George Bush did it by offering tax incentives to the pharmaceutical companies, and the Democrats bitched about fiscal irresponsibility. That's what all this railing is about Cheney's meeting with the pharmaceutical companies. They just don't like it because they got tax breaks out of the deal. How are they supposed to offer these medications to the poor elderly people, for free? Come on man, get real. The real world just doesn't work in the way Democrats seem to think it should.
Maybe you can explain to me how Democrats think we are going to arrive at energy independence and combat Gorebal Warming if we don't drill for oil where we have it and if we don't utilize nuclear energy.
How are we supposed to accomplish all this, with wind farms?
Shadowhawk,
conservative = fascist..Lol you have some nerve calling Democrats totalinarians.8 years of Der Fuhrer Bush and you still dont fucking get it..But you keep living that dillusion beamish, im sure it will keep you warm at night>
Do you even know what a fascist is? Nationalization and state control of industries, anti-laissez faire economics / price controls, shutdowns of the free media, etc.? Fascism is leftist.
Please. If we're going to have an honest, rational, intellectual discussion, you're first going to have to concede that you're a fucking moron.
Der Fuhrer Bush?
Yes, Der Fuhrer Hitler always laughed off the daily criticisms he recieved in the Berlin newspaper editorials on his way to supporting a Jewish state in Israel.
Fuck you, you fucking leftist imbecile.
Ah did i hurt the wittle Beamish feelings..Face it your boy Mccains shit is WEAKK.. Current projected delegate count is 250 Obama 237Mccain..So how bout this, on November 5th, you come back here and kiss my Leftist ass..
Now on to PT..You seem to have a level head , so here goes my Response.. You talk about freedom in America. Yet in the last 8 years i have seen the Decline of freedom under Bush. As in the Patriot Act, as in the Formation of the Office of Homeland Security by which every American is assumed to be a terrorist, as in the deliberate wiretapping of MILLIONS of phones, as Bush assuming powers that are far outside the constitution. As in the tampering with the Miranda and writ of habeas corpus..Bush starting a war that had NOTHING to do with Iraq.. it was AL QAEDA , and Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan laughing at us.. Bush couldnt even catch Bin Laden at Tora Bora. Pretty sad
Now onto the health care issue, yea Bush gave the tax breaks to the drug companys, yet have the costs of prescription drugs gone down.. not 1 penny. And he has the nerve to deny the legal importation of CHEAPER life saving medications from Canada .Bush and the Repubs have NEVER gone far enough on health care. My mom is a Cancer survivor, getting ready to go in for surgery this week to reverse a colostomy she has. her medical bills from beggining to end could run close to 1 million dollars.. this is not hype. right now her total at last figure was about 550 thousand, and she may have 1 more surgery after this.She contacted an insurance agent to see how much it would cost her for coverage just for herself after this is over.. His quote.1000 a month. Now Mccain wants to decrease the amount paid out in Social security and raise the retirement age.. What will it be 70 years, 80 years before an older American can retire and enjoy there Golden years.Now finaly to your question on renewable Energy. First on Drilling for oil. Anwr is shale oil , we dont have a refinery in America to process it, meaning it will have to be processed outside the country. And did you ever stop to think that Exxon Mobilmight pull this on us..Lets say on day 1 they pull 100.000 barrels out of the ground. As a bussiness they want to sell that oil. Now what if China says We will give you 20 dollars more a barrel than an American investor or refiner would. We just drilled our own oil, which exxon being a bussiness just sold out from under us.. The way these oil companys are it can and will happen. As for nuclear, i dont trust it.. Yes i have my head in the 70s, and 80s.. 3 mile island and Chernobyl were real. Yes other countrys are Doing it, they bury there spent fuel rods. BUT.. when that shit is underground there are NO guarantees that radioactive materials wont leach out of its container and summarily contaminate ground water and other water supplys.. Im for all safe NON POLLUTING forms of energy. im not going to sacrifice my health just so i can run my heater 24/7 in the winter.,Bottom line America must put off the Republican regime. Mccain wants war.. he craves it.. He will start war with Iran, and maybe Russia too. Can you dodge a nuclear bullet.. i know i cant
Shadowhawk-
You make some good points, but you got a few facts wrong. When I say Bush gave the pharmaceutical companies tax breaks to lower medicine costs, I was specifically referring to the recent Medicare prescription drug bill. That's how it was funded, by tax breaks to the pharmaceutical companies. It's a good bill, despite its flaws.
Is it perfect? Hell no. Can it be improved? Without any doubt whatsoever. But, it is at least a hell of a good start.
We've already discussed the whole ANWAR is shell oil thing, so I won't dwell on that any longer, and I will point out I don't have a great deal of love for these companies either. Yes, I'm aware of the pitfalls in trusting them when it comes to the ANWAR oil. I'm not a laissez-fairre conservative libertarian. I believe STRONGLY in attaching conditions to tax breaks.
As for nuclear, yes, I understand the concerns, but one thing about dwelling in the seventies is that you let progress pass you by. I'm not just talking here about improvements in the overall functioning of nuclear plants, though that's a part of it.
Here is a very important point. Nuclear energy technology will, at some point in the future, be improved and advanced enough that it can be recycled. When that happens, no more spent fuel rods buried or submerged, or stored in mountains. They will simply be re-used, possibly multiple times, in various different ways.
Here's something else I bet you haven't thought about. I know you are a big proponent of solar energy, which that's fine, but what you should understand is that solar power is limited, for now, in its applications. Yes, it can be improved over time, just like anything else, but here's the thing-
Once it improves to the point where you can build a solar powered plant capable of producing energy to a wide, heavily poulated area, you have something that would be every bit as dangerous as a nuclear plant if something goes wrong. You are talking about something that must by its nature have the capability of storing and processing an incredible, unbelievable amount of solar energy within a limited area.
What if there's a leak, or some other kind of disruption? What if there's an explosion? See, things aren't always so black and white as people want to believe they are.
Shadowhawk,
Obama's projected delegate count has dropped to 250 already?
Daaaamn.
I knew the Biden pick was going to hurt, but damn.
Beamish-
It's not that Biden is that bad.
It's just that Palin is that damn good.
PT,
Well, yes. Sorta.
Halfway through the Republican convention, nearly a week after the Democratic convention was over, the mainstream media was still asking "Did Obama get a bump in the polls from his convention?"
Political pollster rule of thumb: if you have to ask that question, the answer is "hell no."
McCain was polling in a dead heat with Obama before the conventions. Never too far ahead, never much behind. Roughly tied across the board.
Not anymore. Obama's poll numbers are falling at the same McCain's are rising, and the numbers are moving in those directions fast.
Sarah Palin's convention speech drew more viewers than any moment in the Democratic convention.
McCain's convention speech drew more viewers than any convention speech in American history.
This is a break away of momentum that, if not stopped will have McCain in landslide victory territory come mid-October.
Hence, the panic from the Democrats.
I heard Obama might have got something like a five point bounce, which is not really much for a post convention bump. I think he's slightly ahead in the polls too, depending on what polling organization you look at.
A lot of these people you have to take with a grain of salt.
Rasmussen and Zogby are top shelf pollsters in terms of accuracy.
Everyone else just kinda sucks.
Zogby's numbers come out faster, but Rasmussen's are usually even more accurate (and worth the wait.)
The first official Rasmussen measurements of the McCain bounce from the GOP convention will be out Wednesday.
What we know already is that McCain picking Sarah Palin negated and erased Obama's "convention bounce."
Truth be told, Obama was behind McCain in the polls BEFORE the Democratic convention. A case can be made that the Joe Biden pick helped Obama drop in the polls.
Picture the campaign trail... Obama in one city, Biden in another... one drawing crowds the other drawing snores.
And McCain and Palin in seperate cities, each drawing crowds.
I know it's not sporting to kick three-legged chihuahuas in the face, but that's all the Democrats have run lately.
Why not kick them? It's fun, and they make it so easy. Sarah Palin has them foaming at the mouth. They are like rabid pit bulls stuck in a tar pit with no teeth. I think it's hilarious.
Post a Comment