Ron Paul: That Ted Cruz Is Owned By Goldman Sachs, But Sanders Has A Libertarian Streak
On Varney & Company, looney Ron Paul claims Ted Cruz is owned by big banks but Bolshevik Bernie Sanders is, well, …Read More »
“No law can give me the right to do what is wrong.”
A WORLD AT WAR?
Hot wars are always preceded by soft wars where values become so polarizing that killing and conquering seems the only recourse.
While there will always be militaristic zealots for causes making national self-defense an answer to physical attacks, the answer to all war is founded upon choice for moral conduct; what is best for others, a golden rule paradigm which clearly makes “right and wrong” a third option to the left and right politics which by nature separate people.
Politically I am a conservative and independent defined by belief in tried, true, and traditional cultural values and politics, proven by measurable results to be “right” and not “wrong” as to outcome.
Tagged “right” by the media, I do not object until they color it as radical and throw around silly terms reserved for Hitler and Mussolini’s socialist thuggery — the polar opposite to conservative and traditional American ideals, and those rights endowed by God such as freedom of speech and religion.
The following series of “Right and Wrong, Not Left and Right — America’s Third Option” posts will argue for an alternative to the polarizing effect that left and right categorizing generates among common sense thinking Americans.
MEDIA DRIVEN POLITICAL POLARIZATION HURDLE:
I believe like Adams that, “Facts are stubborn things…” And I know that facts must somehow be what hurdles the wall the mainstream media has built to protect a clearly progressive/liberal fantasy.
To side with fantasy over substance is to expect what its politics produce: dreams, fairy tales, and delusion but nothing of substance other than the outcome of every horror story.
That the media is largely liberal and progressive is based upon the evidence in biased reporting presented before us 24/7; a topic I will be covering later at length.
That they have conveniently and intentionally polarized political thought over the last 100 years into left and right camps, makes the simplest argument for the need to turn the conversation to right and wrong — something every average American can wrap their heads around.
WHAT IS RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS CONVENIENT:
The fact remains that decisions have consequences, but it is also true that a person steeped in liberal logic, but devoid of interest to do independent fact-finding, means they will most likely continue as lovers of the pretty political lies foisted upon them. This because fantasy favors immediate gratification and does not ask for hard work.
In all probability the conservative argument, billed as “right wing” by the press, will be largely ignored by Democrat Party and liberal thinking voters due to the paint used by the mainstream media to color it; black, scary and selfish.
As we know, nothing could be further from the truth, but then truth generally doesn’t make good liberal copy.
And there is this: Unless we can somehow offer plain and simple evidence that links consequences of liberal choices to actual disaster in such a way that the liberal thinker will have to ask themselves from a self-interested position, “Is this policy right or wrong for me?” we will largely lose the war of values in a head to head media battle.
Like the State Farm commercial: “It must be true, I found it on the internet,” she says to the insurance agent. “Oh here comes my date. He’s a French model.” State Farm agent asks, “Where did you meet him?” She replies, “On the internet.”
Granted, asking a liberal/progressive to think logically, using cause and effect as a barometer for political decision making, calls to Ronald Reagan’s statement when he uttered:
“It isn’t that liberals are ignorant, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
So how do we contest the liberal/progressive spin in a war of values?
There is, and always has been just one answer: Boldly offering indisputable evidence upon what is right and what is wrong.
Only inconvenient truth based principle can offer palatable evidence with satisfaction lasting far beyond the fantasy offered by political prophets dressed as a caring shepard; even as they lead the flock to the slaughter.
I offer this first post from the “Introduction” to a manuscript in production which shall be offered for free reading Part I in June 2013:
Right and Wrong, Not Left and Right — America’s Third Option”
“America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” — Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
I do not care if a leader is a Democrat or Republican. I only care if the elected leader does what is right, and by so doing generates a good outcome.
There are objective societal measurements for “right” just as there are objective weights for what is “wrong.”
Society can easily measure the effects of good or poor choices because of the ever present law of cause and effect which deals swiftly and fairly.
What Einstein is credited with saying in terms of results holds true:
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Children and innocent minds always get it right when two options are placed before them. If told one has never worked before and the other has, simple intuitive skill prevails.
Only in the world of power-seeking adults do we find fables and slogans turned into truth. In fantasy politics what is evil elsewhere can be spun into a virtue by citing “fairness” and “tolerance.” Never mind repeated results proving their power hungry point of view invalid.
Yet politicians so often seek to create their own set of “rights” to appeal to a self-interested constituency.
If by rights we mean to impose the special interests of certain groups or classes of people above other citizens, or if such “rights” are legislated against natural laws and the nature of time honored liberty, and thereby proven “wrong,” then we are on a fool’s errand seeking to make failure legal.
Make no mistake, we are at war as to values. As always we fight over elements found in opposing poles of thought which each position must determine as good or evil, right or wrong, moral or immoral.
The political war need not result in bloody tumult. And personal perspectives such as politically “conservative” and “liberal” have always been, and will always be, juxtaposed.
Yet there is “right” and there is “wrong” in the world. Some behaviors stand against historic results and basic human codes of decency and morality no matter how we may legally codify them.
Some political and economic theories when employed, repeatedly fail. Creating dependency upon government really does create reliance upon government bureaucracy and does not lift a citizen from poverty to independent prosperity. Subsistence is not abundance. Fairness is not taking from someone who worked hard to rise from subsistence to independence.
In the current political context right and wrong is filtered through the lens of “right” or “left,” and in the very act of doing so the moral quotient suffers from a distortions along party lines and definitions. Ronald Reagan clarified in his famous “A Time for Choosing” 1964 speech:
“You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down.”
What if there is no such thing as the political left or right as Reagan suggests, only “up or down?”
Good decisions yield good results. It really isn’t any more complicated than that. And you don’t need to be “left or right” to know the difference. You simply must embrace America’s third option, right or wrong.
Right and wrong governance was the primary motivator behind the creation of the most unique, powerful, and formerly free and abundant nation ever conceived on earth by man.
It began with the Declaration of Independence prior to the organizing document we call the Constitution of the United States of America. And that meant real war must be waged after the war on differing values had already commenced.
The Declaration of Independence built the foundation arguments from which all constitutionally directed legislative, judicial and executive decisions for the “good” of the people would flow upon this premise:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. “That to secure those rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the people…” (Declaration of Independence 1776)
Military struggles and life and death warfare always begin with the war on values.
We are now engaged — LIKE it or NOT — in a world war. How hot that will get will depend upon the embrace of good over evil, right over wrong.
RIGHT and WRONG, Not Left and Right – America’s Third Option, is meant to take the Founder’s meaning behind the creation of the US Constitution and appeal to the political establishment and constituency now called “left and right” so that the fundamental American ideals are clearly enshrined in the goodness Alexis de Tocqueville saw in 1831, that “…if America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
James Michael Pratt is a New York Times bestselling author of inspirational category fiction and non-fiction. More about his work may be found at www.jmpratt.com. He is also found on Facebook and Twitter and is editor for the middle east news consolidator www.jerusalemreports.com.