Can I jump in, Harv?
Can you, who I respect for your ability to see and create functional fine art from standard steel shapes, and for your ability to describe that process to us so we can try it (thank you), tell me exactly what it is that irks you about our current administration? It seems to me that statements about judicial activism, which are strongly felt to be true (and I agree with), are mirrored by a similarly difficult to describe yet strongly held (you repeatedly allude to it) unrest in you because of our current President.
Can you tell me what specifically bothers you about our President? Further, what specifically bothers you about the philosophy he represents? I can tell you that my specific problem with the philisophy that is alternately described as "liberal" or "moderate" (as if all other ideas are radical /w3tcompact/icons/grin.gif), be it in the executive, legislative, or judicial branch, is the general lack of faith in the individual.
I am particularly bothered by the "liberal's" constant talk about being for the "little guy", and portrayal of all other philosophies as being for "fat cats" or "big business", while in reality the promoters of this rhetoric have a brazen elitist view (and are fat cats, themselves). This elitist view is evidenced by their increasing promotion of a large and ponderous bureacracy as needed to think and act for the individual (themselves excepted, by the way). This promotion of bigger government is nearly always cloaked in the guise of solving some urgent public problem, which in itself is a sign of the denial of personal responsibility. Even one of our most flagrant government-expanding presidents, FDR, is said to have had the opinion that social programs steal people's pride and create dependence. Another person with a famous set of initials - JFK - asked us to ask not what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country. As I stood and read those words chiseled into the granite, I wondered how many of the "people's representatives" (including his brother), ever even visited that place, much less thought of his words. Notice that both of these presidents were aligned with the current philosophy with which I have the most trouble. I oppose the elitist view wherever it shows up, and align myself with those who promote personal freedom and responsibility, regardless opf political affiliation.
The denial of individual responsibility and power is in direct contradiction to the themes clearly stated in our founding documents, which recognize & promote self determination. My vote always goes for the person who espouses and promotes personal responsibility and individual freedom.
I hope this might be specific enough for you - as we are really talking about philosophical viewpoints. Should you demand chapter and verse, I guess it would be good enough to start with the effects of the Great Society's programs and the resulting exponential increase of individuals who can't seem to care for themselves. We could also talk about elitist assaults on the Second Ammendment (My view: recind all laws back to the 1936 "ban" via heavy taxation on automatic weapons transfer, open government arsenals for the public to purchase the current military small arms, provide private training and qualification for such armament, and watch crime disappear and the economy soar).
Should you demand specifics regarding judicial activism, I would point to Roe v Wade, which created a "right" out of thin air based on what we now know to be a lie (the crime never took place), and it's continued "interpretation" to apply to those who choose abortion as a method of birth control rather than the elimination of criminal intrusions upon a person's body. By the way, I think Roe v Wade should be "interpreted" to allow men and women to sue or otherwise seek retribution against someone who gives them a disease. It'd be fun to see how our politically correct elitist leaders react to an attempt to make laws allowing those with dangerous communicable diseases to be punished in any form for their affect on others.
In case you deicide to beat the "little guy" drum, you should know ahead of time that I'd like to see all dishonest fat cats who mismanage funds publically stripped, tarred, feathered, and carried out of town on a fence rail (think about that - owwwwww!). We could start with the IRS, the Department of Education, the Social Security Administration, Health and Welfare (or whatever euphemism we currently employ), the Senate, House of Reps, then maybe the Pentagon, Agricultural, Commerce, Amtrak, etc. I think we'd be busy for a long time before we got around to worrying about Enron, World Com, and Martha, don't you?
Sorry this got long - I guess I'm incapable of succinct comment. Thanks again for your mechanical contributions, and a more grudging thanks for your philosophical views, which make me think too much.
