The Impossible Dream

I was going to write about Michigan U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed this morning. But I'm not, or, at least, I'm only going to use his candidacy as a jumping off point towards something else. 

My original intent was to use quotes of his from his past (where else might they be found?) as fodder for why he doesn't deserve my vote. But we all know what would happen next. I would either be ignored, which is nearly the preferred response (though my comments would serve no purpose then), or countered vehemently. "He's retracted that statement!" "He's distanced himself from that!" Yadda yadda. Exactly like every other politician not named Donald Trump would try to do if he/she/they/it felt threatened. Har-umph.

As an aside, one of the things I actually like about Trump is that he bulls forward no matter what, almost as though saying, "Yeah? So what? It's out there, deal with it." I prefer that to dancing around legitimate issues and legitimate questions. 

But I digress.

I'm appalled at the idea of again falling into wormholes. It's tiresome. I shouldn't even bother to point out the self-serving and shallow hypocrisy inherent in such things, but I will. What my guy says goes for all times and all places and he's forever an infidel, yet your guy gets a pass. Both sides do it, at least to a degree. It cheapens each.

And it does not help anyone's identification, understanding, or appreciation of the real problems we face. We're all quite adept at seeing the splinter in the other guy's eye yet looking beyond the plank in ours.

Heavy sigh. We need better, but that's the impossible dream, isn't it?

Just Say No

I know that most readers prefer that I don't talk about politics, and I get it. Politics are something of a disease, quite frankly, and we make the game far more important than it ought to be. Still, I'll talk politics today, but I'll be brief.

As I hammer this out, Kevin McCarthy has lost a seventh straight vote in trying to become Speaker of the House. This means that House of Representatives can't organize itself. Many folks bemoan the disarray. Me? I welcome it.

Government ought to be inefficient. It ought to be difficult for the government to get things done. The entire reason we have the great Constitution we do is to diffuse power, precisely to keep things from happening too quickly. When things happen too quickly, well, COVID.

It might be better if this never gets resolved. If the new House can't be formed, Washington can't do anything. That might just be a dramatic improvement over how Congress typically acts: so very adept at forcing bad ideas and disastrous spending upon us. Not only our grandchildren but our great grandchildren (and their children) will yet be quite literally paying the price of 2023 government because of that.

So don't elect a Speaker. Don't organize government. I could live with that.

About the debate

Yeah, I know I've said that I wouldn't dabble into political issues much here, and I meant it. But I did reserve the right to do it every now and then. Well, today is now. Or then, take your pick.

I wanted to say something in light of the Democratic debate the last two nights. They sure like to spend your money, and I must stress your money, don't they?

I am a political conservative. Why? For many reasons, really, yet one does kind of stand out. I think we have to be very careful about taking other people's money and spending it however we like. The essence of government spending is exactly that: taking other people's money and spending it however we like.

I'm not arguing against any and all forms of taxing and spending. We need government, and government does need money in order to work. Still, the idea that something should have public money spent on it simply because I want it spent, or because that's how the majority of voters want it spent, is plain arrogance. No matter how good of an idea it might be on certain levels, and especially no matter how good of an idea you may think it is, it doesn't automatically follow that you should force other people to pay for it.

The simple guideline is that government should generally only spend for a substantial public interest. I would look at the 18 basic ways of public spending as outlined in Article 1 of the Constitution as a good guideline. After that, we really shouldn't be too quick to demand, yes, demand, that individuals cough up their cash for what someone else believes right and just. Simply put, that is the tyranny of the majority. That's as bad as the tyranny of a king.

Whither Herman Cain?

Pity Herman Cain. He has now been officially baptized into presidential politics. He carries the stain of scandal which so many of his forebears have had clearly marked upon their earlier campaigns. As likely as not, he thought it had all gone away.

Unfortunately such things vaporize only to condense and form rain another day. When running for President of the United States especially, accusations will manage to seep out of the woodwork. Ask Bill Clinton.

To be sure, if Cain is guilty of any serious transgression it is only fair to consider as much when thinking about giving him a vote; there is no grounds for a Republican double standard on the question. We called out then candidate Clinton on it; we should not ignore it when a similar thing happens to one of our own. Still, if what happened long enough ago and repentance is clear, we shouldn't necessarily hold it against an office seeker either.

If the allegations are true then it hardly matters where they came from. It is interesting that Mr. Cain has accused Rick Perry of spreading the word in that it only increases the mudslinging; perhaps that is the intent of course. Making someone else the bad guy to take attention away from yourself is itself a staple of American campaigning.

What Cain should do is own up if the things he's accused of doing actually happened, to show integrity while also getting the issue of the table as best he can. Conversely, if they are indeed untrue or inflated, then shout it from the rooftops and don't point fingers. If nothing else, remember that Clinton's dalliances didn't seem to affect him.

In the meantime, welcome to the world of big time American politics, Herman Cain. But take care not to make things worse. It will only hurt you in the long run.