Good work so far. But if memory serves me correctly, this past summer you had started to write a series of essays about what ails the conservative movement. You never got past the first part, but what I read was interesting and thought provoking. (A shame the election got in the way of you finishing that up.) Will these new series will be in a similar vein, or with an expanded view on the totality of conservatism?Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 6.02.2009 @ 23:51
I agree with Neo that Newt should run, but mainly to highlight the lack of brains of the majority of the Republican candidates. His presence at future debates would certainly grab everyone's attention. In fact, he could possibly win the nomination if he starts early and campaigns hard! However, Newt winning the Presidency against an (hypothetically) average-performing Obama in 2012...hmmm...perhaps he should wait for 2016?Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 3.02.2009 @ 17:42
I have never before thought to compare Newt with Adlai Stevenson, but now you have me thinking that Mr. Gingrich was put into political exile for thinking too hard and for not playing the role of an American politician very well. Stevenson was never a terribly good politician either, but nearly everyone at the time respected him for his principled stands and intelligence. Even my most leftist friends have fewer harsh words for Newt than nearly any other conservative, which is certainly due to the fact that the man undoubtedly has brains. I wish there were more like him on either side of the aisle,.Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 2.02.2009 @ 21:56
Hey Rick, relax on the "google bombing" of Bush, will ya? Turns out that Google didn't stop bombing against anybody until 2007, when they developed an algorithm to correct such behavior. So its really a non-issue that they only took a few day to deploy this action for Obama, because unlike 2003, they had the technology at hand to correct it!
I mean, what can "conservatives" really do about this "problem"? Develop an "family-friendly" alternative to Google? We all know know how well Conservapedia competes with Wikipedia...Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 3.02.2009 @ 08:41
I'm not sure how this comparison is relevant. There's a big difference between winter weather that was worse than expected and a category 4 storm that was being tracked for days. Also, Obama is still in his honeymoon phase; he doesn't "own" FEMA the same way that Bush Jr. did over 4 years after he was first elected. It's been less than 2 weeks since January 20, remember?
Obama could simply blame FEMA's weak response on the previous administration if he had to, but there's no need for that at this early stage. Were this to happen 3-6 months from now, blaming Bush Jr. for "gutting" FEMA could be a valid excuse; further beyond that point, FEMA will become the 44th President's property and all its success or failure will be his.Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 31.01.2009 @ 15:57
By the way cdor at #24, a sign saying “NO ADA FACILITIES” may as well just say "PLEASE SUE ME". While smoking regulations are primarily an issue for state and local municipalities and “SMOKING PERMITTED” could in fact be legit in many places, the ADA is considered to be a piece of federal civil rights legislation and therefore not open to negotiation.Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 30.01.2009 @ 00:00
Re: Socialized Medicine for #21 and #23... If uninsured people in the United States know that they have the right under law to walk into any emergency room and receive treatment, doesn't this mean that we already have Socialized Medicine in a halfassed way? Face it, we are already paying for everybody in the USA to get medical treatment in one way or another. Shouldn't our focus be on reducing the cost of said treatment rather than arguing against something that already exists?Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 29.01.2009 @ 23:55
Re: the ADA, I'm not sure if #15 and #17 understand my point which was that I feel that the ADA has been a net plus for freedom. Being disabled puts one in a minority quite unlike any other in that anybody can join the ranks of disabled at any time. (The numbers are actually far higher than 1%, as the law extends to the elderly, temporally disabled, pregnant women, young children, etc.) Certainly the ADA has shortcomings and can impose financial hardships. As an Architect, I know how crazy some of the rules can seem. Yet to anybody who has been disabled, (remember how angry Dick Cheney looked last week as he was being wheeled around at the inauguration?) anything less than equal physical accessibility is a major loss of one's own freedom.
Can we still afford all these rules as a nation going broke? That decision was already made 18 years ago, there's no going back now! Remember, disabled folks vote too...Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 29.01.2009 @ 20:04
I don't think that increased government involvement in our lives automatically means less freedom for all of us. Rather, some of us have less freedom and others have more freedom as a result of our government stepping in. The questions is, who gains and who loses their freedom?
The profession of Architecture is a case in point. As a result of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) signed into law under Bush Sr. in 1991, Architects and developers have less freedom to design and build their buildings and public spaces. For example, door knobs cannot be specified, door levers must be used instead. Parking spaces and toilet stalls must be set aside in certain quantities for the disabled. All entrances must be accessible or building plans will not be approved by the local authorities. In addition, business owners can be sued for not retrofitting their stores to accommodate the disabled! The ADA has certainly lessened my freedom as an Architect, no doubt most developers and business leaders would likewise agree.
Yet at the same time, people with disabilities now have the freedom to join their fellow Americans in going to the supermarket, using the post office, or even just getting down a sidewalk without hurting themselves. As rules also apply to those of us with temporary disabilities, more and more Americans now appreciate the fact that a broken limb does condemn them to weeks being unable to climb stairs or open a door. Ask anybody in a wheelchair if the ADA has increased their freedom and their answer will certainly be yes!
So in this case, I would say that increased government is a net plus for freedom. However, there are always losers of freedom when government increases its hold on our lives. It is our job as citizens to ensure that every time regulations grow that we understand who the losers and winners will be as a result of the increase in government.Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 28.01.2009 @ 23:14
Judging by the hate and acrimony here before Obama's first week is through, I have only 1 conclusion; it's going to be a long 8 years!Comment Posted By Surabaya Stew On 26.01.2009 @ 23:19