Teabagging to randomness

Probably should get this out of the way. If you want to know what "teabagging" is go here. This is why liberals like to refer to anyone who identifies themselves with the "Tea Party" movement as a "Teabagger." They find it quite funny. Hell, even I do.

Here is the problem though. I don't know that I am a teabagger. I certainly see some of their points. I agree that the government spends too much money and that they should work on fixing the spend to debt ratio. I think that they need to reevaluate their priorities.

I am not happy with the way the government is in spending my money. I am not happy with how much of my money they are taking. I am not happy about the fact that they are forcing me to carry "health insurance". I am not happy that they want to legislate to me how and what I should eat. I am not happy with the way that the government wants to punish me for lifestyle choices I may make. I am not happy with the choice to bail out financial institutions with my money because they are too big to fail and allow them to merge with institutions they decided NOT to save to get even BIGGER. I am not happy that federally backed mortgage institutions crapped out a bunch of loans to people who were not likely to be able to pay them back. I am not happy that the government solution to a faltering economy is to just print out more money, and more money, and more money. I am not happy that our government, in the face of a massive debt has decided that the best way to solve the problem is to borrow money in orders of magnitude more from countries that don't really like us that much. I don't like the fact that a government entity can come into my home, tell me to leave, and pay me a fraction of my home's value so that they can make room for a new strip mall "for the good of the community."

Let me be as clear as I can. I believe that we need a federal government. I believe that the federal government has, as its sworn duty, the obligation to provide for the safety, personal and financial, of us as citizens. I believe that the state governments exist as a check to the federal government and they are there to manage the day to day activities that affect our daily lives. I believe that there are well meaning people at all levels of government who genuinely think that they are doing things in the best way possible. I think that many of these government employees that serve in all of our forms of government are good people with good morals and in some cases a genuine desire to help people. Unfortunately for them, they are not the ones who make the headlines.

I believe there are some baaaad apples. I believe, regardless of why they became involved in government, they are only looking out for themselves. They seek to increase their wealth at the expense of others. They seek to expand their power at the cost of others rights. I believe that they have to be stopped.

I am not declaring that all democrats or liberals are socialists and that they are completely wrong. I think they make some valid points. I am not saying that all republicans or conservatives or, for that matter, libertarians are right. Neither side is right. I don't believe that all matters are black and white. Life is not binary. Everybody's opinion has value. I get really tired of watching "debates" about issues between people. It has gotten SO much worse since the pseudo-anonymity of the internet has come into the equation. At this stage of the game, exchanges go like this.

Person1: I think blah blah blah.
Person2: I think halb halb halb
Person1: How can you possibly think that. You don't agree with me, therefore you are an idiot.
Person2: Ditto, and your momma dresses you funny.

The debates are often filled with hypocrisy. Example courtesy of Rachel Maddow.

She ran a segment on how the tea party movement is full of hypocrites citing some good examples. People holding signs saying that government needs to stay out of people's lives while wearing a tee-shirt that says "Keep your hands off my social security." The hypocrisy was indeed staggering. The government needs to stay out of my life, but they better keep sending that check. Or the example that most of the protests, at least the well publicized ones, taking place in federally managed parks. Or the examples of people complaining that the government managed public transportation system was not handling the needs posed by the additional burden of the protesters. It is really quite entertaining. I believe you should check it out here.

I see her point. I even agree with her to an extent, but here's the problem. Why is it hypocritical to look at a situation where you have been conditioned that the government is going to take care of you in your old age, find out that by every measure of every economist, that the programs designed to do this are going to be bankrupt within your lifetime, possibly within the next decade, and be upset that the government, who has grossly mismanaged these programs is getting ready to start some more? Why is it hypocritical to look at a situation, evaluate the situation based on acquired knowledge and decide that the same thing that has been done before and failed, probably is not the best course of action? Changing your mind in the face of evidence is not hypocrisy. It is normal. Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, all people who gave people a new perspective and changed world views. Nobody thought that the people who looked at their new information and changed their minds were hypocrites. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein. That one is a personal favorite.

Do I think that Medicare should have been started? No. Do I think that Social Security should have been started? No...Regardless of if I what I think, they were and theree are a lot of people who have planned their life around these programs being there. I currently pay into the biggest Ponzi scheme going. I am currently paying into Social Security and it will likely be bankrupt by the time I could collect. I have absolutely no faith that I will see one dime from the program.

I don't like that when my desire to spend money and I don't have enough, I have to change my expectations. The government either, takes more money from me, borrows money from other sources, which ends up getting paid back with... my money, just prints more. I don't think that if I wanted to spend money, that my boss would just pony up more dough for me to by a new XBOX360. I am also pretty sure that if I were to borrow a bunch of money from a bank and then tell my boss that he needed to pay me more money so I could pay that debt after I let the debt fester for a few years, my boss would tell me to go pound sand. I am also pretty sure that if I wanted a new XBOX360 and decided to print out some money to buy it, that the Secret Service would have something to say to me. I'm not asking the government to shrivel up and blow away, but I AM asking the government to do what I would be expected to do if I didn't have enough funds to operate the way I wanted to. CUT YOUR SPENDING.

The government failing (specifically the SEC) to keep track of the financial institutions that created and sold these risky financial packages that trashed economy, infuriates me. Then instead instead of letting these financial institutions fail because of their shoddy business practices, we bail them out, with my money, and allow them to grow even further by acquiring more large institutions. Then instead of tackling the necessary financial reform and telling people to live within their means, the government instead tells the banks to lend people more money, saddling them with more debt, and ignores financial regulation reforms and instead drives health care reform that, depending on which polls you look at, most people don't want. Where are the priorities? How is capitalism supposed to function if you never let anyone fail? Not everyone gets to win all the time. You take risk you fail.

I'm pissed. I don't like what the government is doing. I don't like that my speaking out against the government could get me labeled as a right-wing violent extremist militia nutcase. Anyone that holds a sign with Obama in Hitler regalia is some sort of violent extremist. Holding signs of Bush in Hitler regalia was OK though. I don't like that I have to sit back and think about someone else's feelings before I say something because I might "offend" someone. I know that any of you who knows me can't really believe that I think before I speak and that those thoughts involve someone's feelings, but it does happen. It has to. That is how real discourse is achieved. I also don't like that other people can't seem to do this. Again, I blame the pseudo-anonymity of the internet on this. Hyper-reactivity to contrary opinions, not just political (Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux anyone) combined with this pseudo-anonymity contributes to a lack of accountability and some serious "dick" behavior. You're labeled as an idiot, or a nutcase. It can never end up as, "I see what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree." It makes it impossible to achieve compromise. Again, I don't see the world as black and white. Compromise is necessary. We are human beings and we have to live together. You don't like my views? Fine. You have yours, I have mine. Live and let live you tree-hugging hippie communist retard.

Yeah. I know it kind of went all over the place. Suck it. I'm tired and it is late. I had to get some of this stuff out of my head. Hopefully I can get some sleep now.