The Happy Slave

This is my surrender to the Powers that Be, who wish we all were just happy little slaves, tooling along without a care in the world, doing what our better-educated masters tell us to do, not daring to step out of line. I'm so bad at surrender...

Name:
Location: Indianapolis, United States

I'm an old-fashioned Get-out-of-my-face-atarian. So long as the gubmint left me alone, I had no problems with it. Gubmint wants to run my life, so I'm doing something about it. (Not just blogging, either.)

Monday, December 19, 2005

The glory of socialized medicine

Chalk up another victory for socialized medicine! I'm sure that we can all look forward to medical care of equal quality once the nanny-staters get their way with us all.

Link Restoration

Links will be restored as soon as I've the time. I switched formats and only noticed after the fact that the new format does not have any provision for links built in.

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Remember when "conservative" had SOMETHING to do with morality?

Well, golly and goshamighty, it looks like some well-known Bushusuru has just been forced out of his job. That's right, the infamous Diebold CEO who promised to "deliver Ohio" (illegally) to Bush le fils is now severely under fire on matters of securities fraud/insider trading and mismanagement of elections in Georgia and--wait for it--Ohio. When I was but a simple Hoosier lad, I was taught by my conservative grandparents and conservative great-grandparents that, whatever flaws our beliefs might have, the one thing that would set us off politically is that we chose to adhere to old-fashioned moral values. These included simple honesty. Evidently, simple honesty is no longer acceptable among what passes for "conservativism". I've no doubt that the barking dogs of the right have already started their spin control, trying to explain away everything that has happened in connection with Diebold. The plain truth is that a culture of corruption has entrenched itself within the corridors of both our business world and government. George Will has aptly pointed out that the Republican Party has abandoned conservativism. What has taken its place is jingoistic theocratism. Republicans have replaced conservative political philosophy with reactionary political religiousity--and I'm not just talking about the religious proclivities of individual Republicans. What the Republicans have done is a symptom of what infects so many of the political groups of this day. They have ceased being a political party and become a political religion. Dogmatism has replaced philosophy. Both major political parties are guilty of this, as are many "alternative" parties. When a political party becomes a political religion, we have opened ourselves up to tyranny. When one is in a political religion, nothing is ever actually immoral in the the service of that religion. This is why we have things like the Killian memos. Democrats saw nothing wrong with forging documents that "proved" what they already believed. After all, they did so in a higher cause. Even when pushed to the wall, high priests of that particular political cult, like Dan Rather, insisted that, even if the memos were fraudulent, they should still be accepted because what they said agreed witht heir personal political dogmas. But that merely makes the Democrats and their hangers-on no different than the Republicans. Backroom deals with Enron, more and more signs of vote fraud and/or misappropriations of federal funds, it all adds up to one thing. We have replaced honest politics with a form of religion. So long as one is in the "correct" party, one cannot commit an immoral act, and the only immoral act left is to disagree with the "correct" party. Forge memos? Diddle with elections? Who cares? It's for a Greater Cause, right? If we keep this up, we will flush our Republic down the toilet. We will give ourselves a tyranny far more oppressive than any previously known, one that will be all the worse because it will encroach by degrees, carefully numbing us with little concessions to personal comfort. We will have enslaved ourselves, and deservedly so. PS: Libertarians and Greens, I've not forgotten you--you two indulge in some of the worst excesses of political religiousity.

Friday, December 09, 2005

"Thou shalt not remonstrate"

Off the bat, I'm in agreement that forced annexation into Fishers is something that's flat-out wrong in our political tradition. Yes, it's been done a lot, but Jim Crow and slavery used to be done a lot, too. However, that being said, I do have to put up a question: What is the history of the non-remonstrance clauses in the covenants for properties around Geist? Were they actively concealed from the current owners, or were the current owners merely too lazy or stupid to read the full covenants before purchase? When I bought my house, I went over all the documents with a flea comb. It's a little thing called "due diligence". If the current residents in the area threatened with annexation didn't bother to check for covenant restrictions upon purchase, then they really just dug their own hole--they merely reap what they sow. Opposing forced annexation on solid political philosophy grounds is one thing, but the selfsame political philosophy that would oppose forced annexation likewise invariably says that poor people have to "stand on their own feet" and should not look to the governanny to keep them safe from themselves. Now that it's rich people who might have voluntarily bought a pig in a poke, there's a hue and cry over "thou shalt not remonstrate" covenants. If these covenants were concealed from the current owners or the owners were told that these covenants had no enforceability, then a valid argument could be made that they are inherently invalid. However, if the current owners had every reasonable opportunity to discover covenants, there was no concealment, then the covenants should stand--or does "self-reliance" and "take the consequences of your actions" not apply to Geist residents? Are morality and American social virtues only to be practiced by the poor?