Is Democracy Dead?

Recently there have been some attempts by Congress to bailout newspapers which are currently struggling financially.

Recently there is some thought that General Electric (GE), the parent company of MSNBC news, has effectively sold out and is using biased reporting on MSNBC to support a political view. If this view gains support, General Electric will profit significantly with increased Federal spending on GE goods and services.

There should be serious concern here. If journalism is paid for and rewarded by the government we have lost the battle. An Army of David, small, independent reporters have trouble competing with global news organizations which parrot the will of the government.

This seems to be one more step toward the path of centralization and Big Brother. Perhaps the first warning was issued by President Eisenhower who warned of the vast military industrial complex was gaining a foothold in government policy.

Then we have this unfortunate idea of public employee unions actively supporting a party or candidate who was most likely to return this support by overly compensating the employees with public money. This seems so galling and inherently wrong. An individual is allowed to voice his views. However, when he publicly identifies himself with his union in a partisian issue, he has crossed the ethical line. I have had the pleasure of working for two public organization that understood this problem and prohibited employees from publically identifying the organization with any partisian issue.

The governor of Texas raises the question about staying in the United States. This is a very interesting idea that is certainly worth pursuing. Clearly we have the second biggest divide ever in the US as President Obama is the most divisive President in recent years. States should have the freedom to secede. Roughly half of the population believes that the other roughly half is wacko for some reason or other.

And there would be advantages in reducing the size of the US. The US would become less of a world bully. We would no longer be the military and economic determinator. We would not be the world policeman.

Countries that don't like us would be happy. And all countries get annoyed with us from time to time.

And there was a good book written years ago about how a potential breakup of the US should look.

P.S. I am not advocating insurrection or treason. Just thinking out loud. Hopefully this is still legal.

http://simon-jester.org/2009/04/the-texas-question/

The idea that Republicans are irrational and don't believe in science while the Democrats are the rational ones full of scientific objectivity is just wrong. Both parties have a value system and a belief system that they subscribe to on faith. Any scientific evidence that reputes their idealogy is dismissed.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/132997.html

Some thoughts on religion freedom in the US, specifically the Boy Scouts.

There are 2 basic definitions of religion and 2 basic definitions of god. Religion: 1. the service and worship of God or the supernatural, 2) a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.God: 1) Deity worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe 2) the supreme or ultimate reality.The Boy Scouts 0f America does not define god. I was a life long agnostic and an Eagle Scout and holder of the BSA Religion in Life award. No problem.

The problem comes when people insist that the #1 definitions must be followed. These definitions seem to be judeochristian definitions, designed to provide authority to Christian religions. The #2 definitions are "secular" definitions, more inclusives and seem to understand that Buddhism and Unitarians, etc, are religions. Why force the judeochristian definition on the public. To me, the analogy is this "mother earth" stuff. There's no "mother earth" but I understand that just means nature.
I am not bothered by what seems to be minor things like words on a bill, the free speech of a Pres., words, in a oath. I am more concerned about people defining those words to mean something different than I define them.I am not offended by Thursday celebrating Thor, January celebrating Janus, the 2000 millenium,celebrating the 2000th birthday of Jesus. I am not offended by Chief Seattle quotes in Natl Parks about "the earth is our mother" No it is not.

If the courts ban the use of god then it seems as if they are accepting the #1 definition of god and are therefore establishing the judeochristians religions, (any probably Islam) as the only true religions. And, de facto, allowing any other "religion", such as Buddhism, Unitarianism, Humanism, etc, permission to be engaged in public discourse while denying Christianity, et al, the same rights.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/100-million-here-100-million-there/

One thing about Krugman, he is not a Democrat hack and actually has either a value system, or, heaven forbid, seeks the truth whereever it leads him. We need more people who place the facts over special interest partisianship. On "either" side. And, oh how I wish we had some more political parties in the US