State

All posts tagged State

John Kerry And The Obama Administration Are Out Of Touch Concerning Russia Putin And The Ukraine

Posted by Modern Day Machiavelli on March 4, 2014
Posted in: Blog. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment

First of all I am not an Apologist for Vladimir Putin. I’m not a big fan of Russia and I was really against the Olympics being hosted in that country. The only positive aspect of the Olympics being hosted by Russia was the fact that many negative issues were brought to the forefront as a result. That being said, I think the United States had no business in the issue of Russia and the Ukraine.

Who are we to tell Russia how to handle a country that is in complete disarray that touches their border. I think it is extremely out of line politically and logically for the United States, a country half way around the world to tell a country next door how to respond to the chaos in that country. I just think that is completely out of touch. For example, if a similar situation happened in Mexico and if we felt it was in our National Security interest to enter that country and make some military moves to stabilize, it shouldn’t be the business of a country halfway around the world that has absolutely no realistic interest in the stability of that region. Yet we seem to think it is okay to do the same. What about when the State Department said that Russia interfering could disrupt the balance of the region. If the administration in control before the coup was Russian friendly how can Russia moving in there to “stablize” it upset the balance of the region? To make matters worse we periodically help US friendly leaders take control of countries on their continent. I just don’t understand this administrations logic on this….

Also, what in the world is Secretary of State John Kerry talking about when he gives these “warnings” to Russia concerning the Ukraine? The one that comes to mind first is where Kerry states that Russia invading the Ukraine would be a “grave mistake”. That quote really bothers me. That phrase has somewhat of a confrontational connotation to it. Is Kerry trying to tell Russia that if they invade the Ukraine we may take military action. I doubt that is what he meant, but when dealing with a country who we already have a rocky relationship should we choose our words a little more carefully? Not that they will lead to a war or anything but afterwards if we do nothing or very little it will just be another example of showing how weak this administration actually is….

The bottom line is that I am not sure we have any business in dictating how another country responds to serious unrest on their border. there is absolutely no logic involved in this position whatsoever.

Want to debate it, the Modern Day Machiavelli is ready as always!

Does The Loyal Opposition Exist Anymore?

Posted by Modern Day Machiavelli on February 12, 2013
Posted in: Blog. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

When I first began my quest in politics we referred to the opposing view as the loyal opposition. According to most experts the loyal opposition refers to the opposing party, usually the one not in power, in a two or more party system. This term originates in the parliamentary system in Great Britain but has evolved to include other systems of government where power is shared or routinely transferred between parties. Now it’s used to refer to the opposing party and how they can oppose the parties ideas and policy, but remain loyal to the government and country. It’s usually an endearing term used to describe a political adversary. When I think of loyal opposition as in the history of our country, I think of the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. These were people who were loyal to the government and the country in which the represented, but disagreed on the course it should take. Although each vehemently disagreed with the other, each new that the other had the best intentions for the country. There are many other examples throughout the history of our country, but I think you get the idea.

What I’m wondering as I write this, does the “loyal opposition even exist anymore”? I’m not sure it exist at all and if it does it is very small. There was once a time in my life where I believed the majority of the left could be considered the loyal opposition, while only a select few on the left did not have honest intentions whether they were right or wrong. Believe it or not, I would defend the left and refused to admit to anyone, or myself, that the Democrats and the left did not have the best intentions. Over the last 20 years it has become mor and more difficult to defend the vitriol, the actions, and even political platforms in which the left put forth. I guess the first time I noticed the left and their sadistic method in which they try to destroy not only the politics of anyone opposing them, but the person was the confirmation of Clarence Thomas. The manner in which Clarence Thomas was personally attacked was unconscionable. They didn’t attack Justice Thomas’ politics, they attacked his character and integrity in an attempted to smear him so bad that he would never be confirmed. Fortunately it didn’t work, but it wasn’t for a lack of trying. The people who attacked Justice Thomas was not part of the loyal opposition. Unfortunately it has gotten progressively worse over the years and there are no signs of easing.

The reason I bring this up now is the State Of The Union is scheduled for tonight and therefore Marco Rubio has been chosen to give the response. Instead of using allowing the President’s address to speak for itself, the DNC has chosen in on organized fashion to discredit Marco Rubio before the SOTU, and before the response. The only reason you would want to do this is to attack Rubio personally and discredit any platform in which Rubio is putting forth. I think this is a tactic that would not be used by the “loyal opposition”. If the DNC and the left believed that the President address was what was best for the country, and was genuine, why would they feel the need to discredit Rubio before he ever speaks? Because to the left it’s not about laying your ideas out there for the country to decide.

Yep, the loyal opposition to conservative ideas is a thing of the past, and it’s because I have come to the realization that the left is honest and genuine with their ideas anymore. They are putting their own self-interest above that of the country. The DNC and the left have “shown their cards” and it’s not the best interest of the country. They have two goals using entitlement programs to “buy” votes and discrediting anything the right has to say, and this prebuttal of the SOTU rebuttal is a perfect example. It is not about the exchange of ideas anymore, it’s about doing anything and everything possible to stay in power. I have said for years that the defining difference between the left and right is that the Right believes in country first and everything else second while the left believes in party above all else. The perfect example of this is the way minorities are treated who are conservative or right leaning. Two quick examples that come to mind are Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain. Because they don’t fall in line like the left thinks they should, the have been torn apart by the left. Instead of respectfully disagreeing with their politics and praising their achievements, the left has done everything to destroy these two individuals. That is why I believe, without a doubt, the left hasn’t been the loyal opposition for some time. Therefore its time to treat them like the enemy they are.

Have a different Opinion? I’ll debate anytime – anyplace.

I’m the Modern Day Machiavelli.

Another Angle on The Indiana Tragedy

Posted by Modern Day Machiavelli on August 15, 2011
Posted in: Blog. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , . 2 Comments

In my circle of friends and family I am the one known as the jerk. I speak my mind, most of the time saying very insensitive but true things about people, family, and events. Most of the time I say what everyone around me is thinking, I’m just the only one who has the fortitude to say regardless of the repercussions it may cause me. This morning was no different. As my coworkers and I gathered around the “water cooler” for the morning talk, of course the conversation turned to the tragedy at the Indian State Fair over the weekend. It seems as people gathered for an out-door Sugarland concert, the weather turned stormy collapsing the stage. It seems the strong winds and bad weather caused an outdoor, erected stage to topple into the crowd, injuring numerous would be concert attendees and killing five. Also, it seems as though another outdoor concert in the vicinity was canceled due to the weather and someone in charge at the Indiana State Fair should have done the same. It is a tragic story and I sure that between the media and the courts society will find someone to blame. And by blame I mean fork over money to the victims. It will be a big deal for a while and then appear briefly in the news from time to time, I wouldn’t even be surprised if we don’t see some “nanny state” legislator try to pass some legislation in attempt to “never let this happen again”. Unfortunately the above story is all over the internet and this is the only angle the reader will see…….not necessarily. I’m going to go out on limb and say that the attendees must share some of the blame concerning this incident, hell I’m even going to say that hold the “lions share” of the blame. There is an old saying that goes way back, even before my time that would be very applicable here. I’m not sure that even I am insensitive enough to say it but it is about human intelligence and the rain. Unbelievably hundreds of people stood in front of that flimsy stage, where just a few minutes earlier a severe weather warning had just been announced. According to people in attendance, the skies were thunderous and a storm was imminent, yet hundreds of people decided to stand out in it to see Sugarland. Yep, that’s right Sugarland. We are talking about a Country-Pop group, which are now mass-produced in Nashville like cheap cell phones. Am I saying that the fair and other organizers shouldn’t share some of the fault, no. Another point that seems to stick out in my head is the fact that Sugarland wasn’t out on stage. The reports that I read state that it was “prior to the performance”, but it makes me wonder if someone backstage exercised something the crowd didn’t, good judgement. What I am saying is that just because deaths are involved should we casually dismiss the fault of the people who chose to stay in the weather and made a decision, a bad one albeit, that led to their injury and death. If common sense would have prevailed, people could have taken shelter and waited a year or so and seen Sugarland at one of the many casinos on their irrelevant tour. All at the price of the bus fare in any major city’s transit system. Now don’t get me wrong this incident at the Indiana State Fair is definitely a tragedy, as a matter of fact there are two tragedies here. The first tragedy of course is the fact that several people are dead and more injured, but it is also a tragedy that people don’t have the sense of judgement to get out of bad weather over nothing more than a Sugarland concert.