I Don't Have To Tell You Things Are Bad...

"I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad..." Peter Finch as Howard Beale in Network (1976)

We all know things are bad. Especially with regard to our government. The people we elected to represent us have betrayed us and sold out for money, power, influence. It seems no one can be trusted. The Consitution is being torn apart, disregarded, even called irrelevant. The very freedoms this country was founded on are being destroyed. More and more people rely on the government for their source of existence. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are merely empty mantras recited by politicians on the election trail. Corruption is a way of life for many, if not most, in Washington. Yes, things are bad.

Why? What is the cause of this corruption? How did we stray so far from the intent of our founders? Why is it that so many people have lost faith in their government while at the same time relying on it so much? Why is it that things are bad? What is the solution?

Over the past month I have been searching for answers to the question of what the root cause of this corrupt government is. I have a hypothesis, but whether it is correct or not remains to be seen.

My opinion is that government mirrors culture. The personal values of a culture will be reflected in their government. If a culture is moral, their government will be a moral government. If the culture is immoral, the government will be immoral. One of the reasons I came to this conclusion is from observing politicians and watching how their views on government relate to their views on personal morality. The few politicians who lead moral and decent private lives also tend to lead the same type of public life.

Our culture has lost so much as far as common decency. There is no longer right and wrong. It's all a matter of perspective and circumstance. Morality is old fashioned. It's this type of thinking that also creeps into our government. What else would you expect? Would you expect politicians who don't have a personal sense of right and wrong to uphold those concepts in government?

Beyond that, the few people who still believe in right and wrong have become apathetic. Our country may be going to hell in a hand basket, but I'm just one person, what can I do? Apathy is like a leech on the soul, sucking away the vitality of life. To take another phrase from Network, we need to say, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" We need to take responsibility for our actions. We need to start with what is wrong in our life and once we get our lives straightened out, then we will be ready to take on anything.



Comments? Agree? Disagree? Think there's more to it? Let me know in the comments.

It's All About Image...Or Is It?

How important is the image of the tea parties? With the media attacking the tea parties as racist, violent, homophobic, conspiracy theorists, it's easy to get caught up in defending the image of the tea party. But is that really necessary? Those of us involved in the movement know full well that it is about freedom and limited government. We know it's not racist, violent, or any of the other things the media says. Yes, there are some instances where fringe elements of the tea party have acted innapropriately, but the movement as a whole is a very peaceful movement. My question is, can the goals of the tea party be accomplished despite all the false negative publicity? And if they can be, wouldn't it be more productive to focus on getting the job done, e.g. downsizing government and electing Constitutionalists, rather than focusing on keeping a squeaky clean image? Or will the message be hindered because of the image of the tea parties?

What about Ronald Reagan? Commonly acknowledged as on of the great presidents and maybe the greatest in recent history, he ran on a platform of cutting government. Whether he actually accomplished that or not is an arguement for another day. But why was it he got elected with wide support from more than just one party? Republicans voted for him, Democrats voted for him, Independants voted for him. Why? Because he explained the limited government message in a charismatic way. People liked him, trusted him.
But where did he spring out of and where did his message of limited government come from? Barry Goldwater, who also had run for president in 1964 and lost. Goldwater lost because the media portrayed him as a kook, on the fringe. But despite his loss, his views lived on in Reagan who was elected president in 1980.
How does this translate to today? Well, I see the tea party as a continuation of the R3VOLution sparked by Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. Much like Goldwater, Paul was a liberty minded candidate who lost because the media protrayed him as a kook. But his message of freedom is spreading and despite the media's bad image of the tea parties, it will continue to spread and hopefully will culminate in the election of a freedom loving, limited government president in the not too distant future.

Re-Thinking The Tea Party

So, I've been thinking about the Tea Parties lately and whether they still serve a useful purpose now that their main focus point - Obamacare - has been passed. They were started to protest the stimulus bills originally and moved on to healthcare once those were passed, but they are basically a protest of big government and big spending. My question, is big government too general of an issue to be effectively protested by standing on a street corner? Are there more effective ways to cut government expansion?

I believe the answer is yes. While standing on a street corner (though it may help) is not going to get someone out of office, voting will. An elected official votes for more government, higher taxes, whatever - vote that official out.

I will say though, that having at least occasional Tea Parties will send a message that we are still here and we are watching. If you vote for more government, we will vote you out of office. That HAS to be followed by action. If you say you will vote someone out and then don't do it, what is that politician going to think? He wil think that you're not really serious about what you say and go on expanding government. Action is the key.

Another maybe more effective strategy is to campaign for Constitutionaly minded candidates for office at every level. There are plenty of them out there. Go third party if you have to. Find someone who supports the Constitution and limited government and donate to their campaign or volunteer for them.

With that being said, I do believe the Tea Party is great for getting together with other concerned citizens and getting a chance to hear good speakers talk about the issues of the day. And I think from what I saw at the Tea Party in Clayton this evening was not so much a protest as a rally. A rally for freedom, for the Constitution and for limited government.

To sum it up, I do believe the Tea Party is still useful. I think they should and are changing their strategy to be more focused on actually doing something about the problem of big government rather than just protesting. Protests are useful and serve a purpose, but it will take more than protests to take back our country.