Trumps Acceptance Speech

Ok, so some of the wording in Trump's speech had me and other libertarians worried, those libertarians being John Stossel and Glenn Beck.  Basically something did not sit right and sounded very fascistic.

In the speech the words "I am the Law and Order candidate", “I am your voice", "I will fix the problems", "I will end the violence" were all used.  It felt very top down.  As if a President Trump would be akin to an emperor and order all our problems away.  That the people had nothing to do but do as they were told.  For libertarians like myself this is antithetical to our thinking.  A president to many of my ilk want a President to hold back the corruption and say "yes you the people will" and "I will empower you and protect your freedom".  But instead we got chants from the crowd saying "yes you will" with Trump being the "YOU" as the person to take care of everything.  Essentially we are chaining ourselves to someone as metaphorical slaves.

On top of the aforementioned, Trump said that he will not allow businesses to move overseas, a statement reiterated by Ryan Priebus (current head of the GOP) and some of Trump's children.  Basically a fascist policy of punishing businesses from going overseas (a sentiment shared with the Democratic Party to my knowledge).  Problem is, no law and no government is allowed to infringe upon a business's right to leave the country or to do any sort of business overseas.  This is based on the principle of tacit consent where if you do not like the laws in your home country you can move with the expectation of obeying the laws of the place you move too.  Basically you can choose which laws to follow by moving somewhere else.  But the way it sounds from Trump and the current RNC is that freedom will be taken away.

Final Thought:  These are the key points that made libertarians wonder if Trump is the lesser of two evils and if such a concept can be accepted in American politics anymore.  At the rate it is going, Hillary and Trump are both potentially equally as bad as each other (Hillary being as bad with respect to government takeovers of businesses, the economy and health care).  Hopefully me, Beck and Stossel are wrong and that those words are merely for the impact and not the policy, but words tend to have deeper meanings behind them.  I hope I am wrong.

RNC reaction

We have come a long way from the old school politics of backroom deals, or have we?  The Republican National Convention and this week's Democratic National Convention both give the illusion of choice with respect to which candidates are chosen to possibly lead.  However, like all Presidential picks, it is the party uplifting select members of the party and then having the core of the party choose who will represent them.  In this case it is Donald Trump.  Which basically means he was chosen because he can bring in more votes than the other potential candidates and thus a win for the Republican Party this November.

Like most conventions, the family of the candidate is used like a chess piece.  You need to humanize the candidate so that people know that despite being well off that they are family men and women and thus can emphasize with the little people.  Also, if you notice that the media made sure to place emphasis on the fact that Trump and his children did not use Teleprompters.  This in part is a dig at President Obama and at the same time to show that these kids and this potential President are special (not many people can memorize a 50 to 120 minute speech and then say it as well as they did).  

There were some well-deserved critics of some of the speakers though.  Governor Christie among others mocked Hillary, but this was neither the time nor the place to do so according to analysts at Fox news.  The analysts said that this is supposed to be a time to prop the candidate up and show support, not a time to attack.   Needless to say when President Bush and his family, along with Senator Cruz said they will not be supporting Donald Trump it caused a stir in the crowd, especially Cruz's speech which was all about being principled.  Cruz of course was mocked, but he is standing up to his principles and there should not be anything wrong with that.

Final Thought:  In my opinion, the RNC did what it normally does.  There was nothing unexpected that occurred at all during the event save Cruz's speech.  However Trumps acceptance speech for the nomination had some disturbing elements which I will be focusing on tomorrow.  Overall rating of the convention by me is a 5 out of 10.  It appealed to the base and people who are patriotic and that is it.

News overshadows News

It was an eventful and saddening weekend to say the least.  Thursday was a terror attack in France, then Friday was the coup in Turkey and then Sunday the Police being murdered in Baton Rouge.  With each incident the stories got overshadowed by one another in the media, even Trumps Vice presidential pick.  A cycle of attention flipping that seems to be never ending. Once Turkey's coup occurred the American media went silent on France, and then on Sunday they went silent on Turkey for the shooting of the police.  It goes to show you that when a news event occurs they are more concerned about ratings rather than the story that needs to be told.  All the events are important and should not overshadow one another in my opinion.  

This overshadowing I think plays into corporate greed and our attention spans.  The Media jumps from one event to another to keep people watching their ads. and entice more companies to buy ad space so that they make money.  Basically, the more attention grabbing stories will get all the focus because it is new and fresh. Thus  yesterday’s story becomes just that, yesterdays.  I find the lack of analysis annoying.  I want more details and knowledge of potential impacts on my way of life and the world at large, but the media just wants you and your money.

Final Thought:  Reporters are supposed to be historians as the first recorders of history.  They have an obligation to wrench out every little detail and then confirm all the facts so that history does not get it wrong and that we can learn lessons from these incidents.  But news just flips from one subject to another to accommodate our short attention spans while filling the news media's pockets with cash.  It is upsetting to me because the victims and those sacrificed in these incidents, including potential future victims, deserve more from our media.  They deserve more from us so that we learn how to prevent evil from occurring again.

Louisiana Police Shooting

On Sunday, Louisiana had a different kind of terrorist incident.  In this case it was domestic terrorists who sought to murder police in reaction (as far as we know) to police/black American conflicts.  

Police (according to CNN) responded to a call that a man was walking while carrying a rifle along the highway in Baton Rouge.  Once the police arrived the suspect and potentially two other suspects opened fire killing three officers and wounding another three.  The firefight apparently took place in a known drug trafficking area at a spot where police regularly go to for coffee.  Police were even concerned about potential bombs and the area had to be cleared and secured.  

It seems people are forgetting that our Justice system is supposed to judge criminals, not vigilantes, but in this case the murderers are terrorists through and through.  They did not act for the sake of justice in my mind, but instead targeted cops who had nothing to do with any of the past cop vs black American shootings.  While real vigilantes fight for justice, this was cold blooded murder.

Final thought:  Baton Rouge is now being described as a powder keg ready to explode.  It seems some people want a race war and more police on black American incidents.  Our nation is burning and crying out for peace and true justice, not cold blooded murder.  Pray for the families who have lost their loved ones.  Pray that this situation gets resolved before it is too late. 

Turkey's Coup.

On Friday last week the Turkish military attempted a Coup to take control from its current President Erdogan.  The military sees itself as a protector of secularism and democracy in Turkey and this coup was a direct reaction to Erdogan's Islamist policies and his crackdown on democratic freedoms such as freedom of the press.  However the coup failed.

This coup was the fourth in Turkey's history and this one failed.  The military failed to gain public support or even support from the rest of the Turkish security and military forces.  As such Erdogan escaped and is now using the security forces he has to rout out all the members of the military and government that plotted the attempt.  According to the BBC over 6,000 have been arrested so far and more are expected to be as military and governmental facilities are taken back one by one.  Interestingly, the Turkish people see Erdogan as tyrannical and yet they did not back the militaries attempted takeover.  This could mean two things.  One, the Turkish people favor democracy and its ideals and thus trust their system and or two, there is enough refugees from Syria and other places that believe in Erdogan's version of Islamic politics that the Turkish citizens are intimidated into supporting Erdogan and his dictatorial policies.  That, or they are more fearful of Erdogan and what he can do to them if they support the other side.

Final Thought:  The situation obviously ended in failure for Turkey's military.  But the question is, did the United States and other countries back the wrong horse? (Yea America backed Erdogan).  Should we have supported Turkey's military coup as a means to save their democracy and the gateway to Europe rather than let the country fall into Islamic Fascism and become a terrorist haven?  In this only time will tell.

July 14th Terror Attack

Yet again France was attacked, this time on their Independence Day, Bastille Day.  What occurred was horrific.  A terrorist used a truck to slam into a crowd of people killing over 80 people.  The evil man responsible waited for the police to remove the vehicle barriers and disperse so that the truck could obtain its maximum killing potential.  As terrorist plowed through the crowed he began shooting from the crew cab as some heroic members of the crowed tried to grab on to remove the driver.  That terrorist was shot and killed by police.  It was planned and it will happen again.  

This is what we can expect from terrorists from now on.  They seek death and destruction alone and everyone is fair game.  Isis/Isil of course later claimed responsibility for this heinous attack on innocents.  These terror organizations have to be taken far more seriously and we have to be willing to get our hands dirtier.  These people use others as human shields and some of those "human shields" do so purposefully.  But because of how the Middle East is and its culture you cannot tell who is good or bad or even what side they will be on that given day.  Even Senator John McCain was embarrassed to find that he had taken a picture with a known Isis/Isil terrorist when he was in Syria.  These terrorists, Jihadists, flock from terror group to terror group seeking martyrdom and death.  People think we are taking this situation seriously, but in my opinion we are not.  Simply using drones to bomb the enemy will not work.  Also, according to a report from the "Blaze" show "For the Record" they are not even bombing all the targets of opportunity such as Isis/Isil headquarters in Dabiq Syria because it is in the middle of the city.  We Americans have become squeamish in this fight.

Final thought: France and other countries are suffering because of terrorism because we are failing to use the full resources available to strike back.  These people in France, or the terror attack last month in Istanbul or anywhere should not die needlessly because we fail to fight back.  We must mourn our lost loved ones and then strike in the same way a General Sherman or a General Patton would and rend the enemy asunder. 

Tax Returns: Public Knowledge!!!

Should how much we pay in taxes be made accessible to the public?  Let us review some of the arguments for and against.

The against unsurprisingly sights privacy.  You can see how much people pay along with how much they deduct for their debts, medical bills and even charity.  Some people don't want others to know they have high debts or medical bills as they feel embarrassed or they feel it may hurt them when interacting with their peers or potential job opportunities.  Basically, an employer, or group can see if you look like a liability more easily, or people can learn of your financial situation and try to take advantage of you.

Those in favor of release, it helps insure people pay by embarrassing people who try to dodge their taxes.  So it makes it harder to hide them siphoning money into a tax haven, and prevents corruption as all eyes are now on the people who earn so much yet contribute so little.  It basically leaves no place to hide for people with respect to paying their taxes.  Additionally, Sweden, Norway, and Finland all have public tax records.  Their reasoning according to the Economist is that it spurs continuous debate on the tax code to see that it is not too burdensome and that it helps people see if they are pulling their own weight with respect to contributing to the government in taxes.

Conclusion:  I find myself siding against people's privacy on this issue for government is something that is owned by the people and people do need to see who is pulling their weight with respect to contributions.  Not to mention embarrassing people into not having a tax haven and preventing corruption and tax dodging is an extreme benefit as we can boycott those people who try to usurp the system.  It even ensures that our politicians don't take bribes as we can see all the money in all of the bank accounts if they multiple and are able to ask where the additional money came from that they did not earn through their job.  Basically we can tackle corruption and tax dodgers all at once.