The Moderate Liberal

Much is being made these days about the passport requirement on the Canadian boarder, and voter ID requirements.

I believe ID is a good thing. Being able to positively ID yourself to customs agents and at the voting booth is a good thing.

But if its required, then the ID and passpors must be free.

Democrats argue correctly that forcing elderly people and non-drivers to present ID is burdensom, and I agree.  The solution is to provide each U.S. citizen a passport. 

As a father of 3 kids who lives near the Canadian border and who enjoyes visiting Canada, and who is married to a British citizen, I realize just how freakin’ expensive it is to get a passport.  And for kids, you have to update them every 5 years.  It may cost hundreds of dollars in “fees” and an afternoon off from work to acquire passports for your family.

Set aside for a moment how ridiculous it is to be focused on securing the Northern Border with Canada, all the while the Southern Border with Mexico is more porus than Sponge Bob Square Pants (see, told you I had kids).

If we can afford to send $150 billion in free money to all Americans in the name of stimulating the economy, then surely government can issue free ID’s and passports to all Americans in the name of national security and voter enfranchisement.

The financial news these days is just amazing.  The Fed is slashing interest rates to de-constipate freaked out banks who don’t trust each other enough to loan each other money.  The Government wants to send each American — sorry, I mean “Consumer” — a big fat check so that they’ll “consume.”  Meanwhile, the government continues to spend more than it takes in in taxes, adding to our monster national debt, which will tick over $10 trillion this year.  Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to import far, far more than it exports. Meanwhile, the Fed continues to helicopter drop money into the U.S. economy in order to make certain it is sufficiently “liquid.”  Meanwhile, home values are dropping nationwide, while millions of Americans are on the verge of losing their homes because mortgage rates are “adjusting” upwards.  Meanwhile, the world fears that the U.S. economy is on the verge of recession.  Meanwhile, the war in Iraq is costing us upwards of $275 million per day (which is low by some estimates). Meanwhile, babyboomers are now officially eligible for retirement benefits.

Is it just me, or does it appear that our government is running out of fingers to stick into the cracks in the dike which is the U.S. economy? Meanwhile, inflation is going up (no matter what the discredited official government inflation numbers say — they exclude energy (oil) from their calculations, something that I can not do in my real life budget).

What really truly honestly bugs me is that no presidential candidate, other than Ron Paul, is talking about our country’s big, gigantic, huge financial problems. I fear that we may never have the political resolve and courage to address this problem.   The U.S. is living like a family who is charging their daily expenses on credit careds, and  hopes to  make their monthly payments by charging them onto a the same credit card.

How long can this house of cards continue?  I am truly beginning to wonder.  Like you, I do not want to wake up one morning and find out that our money is worthless. But I can really now begin to see how that could happen?

What will happen when all of these expatriot U.S. dollars being held in “foreign reserve” begin to return home?  What will that do to inflation? What will that mean for foreign ownership of U.S. assets? What will that mean for our independence as a nation?

Where or where is the political leadership to address these problems, that continue to mount with interest?  If the Government is planning to “inflate” their way out of the problem, then let me know now so tha tI can dump the U.S. dollar and buy some gold.

Another thing that really chaps my rear end is when I hear Government officials blaming everyone but themselves for these problems.  The Fed, who created the housing bubble and the subsequent bust by keeping rates so unbelievably low for so unbelievably long, blames the stupid people and unscrupulous lenders.  The Government blames the dumb consumers for the slowing economy.

The Government must get its financial house in order and raise revenues to cover what it is actually spending. It is unfair to ask our children to pay for the excesses of George Bush’s failed, discredited administration.

Mr. Cheney — deficits do indeed matter.  You and Bush have demonstrated this to the world.

The results from Iowa, and the anticipated results from New Hampshire, are proving what we said here several times last year:  the moderates/independents are going to make this election.  And why not? It is high time that forces of moderation become active in the primary process, rather than leave it to the party hardliners to nominate the candidate. 

Although Clinton’s campaign is nowhere near dead, we are not surprised by the rise of Obama and Edwards against the “inevitability” of a Clinton presidency, only that it took so long.

As moderate liberals, we are still greatly troubled at the prospect that the American Kingdom could be ruled by two royal families (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton) for up to 28 years!  We’ve said it before:  America can do better than this. 

As we have learned with the little Bush presidency, there are grave dangers to American-style democracy when administrations are recycled. We would expect a Billary administration to recycle the old Clinton Whitehouse. And while Hillary pronounces that the only way to deliver “change” is to get things done, Moderate Liberals want a certain kind of change — and it doesn’t come by bringing in the old guard to take another crack it. It comes from a vision, the sort that Edwards and Obama are articulating, and that Clinton just can’t project.

While Clinton scolds the media for being too “soft” on Obama, and she continues to flat out ignore Edwards, she then scolds their supporters, essentially calling them naive for wanting to believe that change is possible. 

Hillary remains our 4th choice, behind Edwards, Obama, and Richards. However, with so much at stake in this Presidential election, we have decided not to be distracted by 3rd party candidacies.   New York’s Bloomberg continues to make overtures in this direction, and its anticipated that this wealthy liberal former-Republican could skim enough independent voters away from the Democrats to tip the Whitehouse in favor of the Republicons.  This is no year for a protest vote, and if a broad swath of Americans continue to be active in the nomination process, rather than simply have a bad candidate foisted upon them by party radicals, there should be less perceived need to cast such a protest vote.

We are also enjoying watching Ron Paul rile the Republicon establishment.  The most Republican of all candidates, we are watching Ron Paul to see if he will run as the Libertarian party candidate.  His vocal supporters seem to be everywhere — just take a drive in the country and you will probably pass any number of “Ron Paul” banners taped to old trucks  along dirt roads.   Rather than ridiculing and belittling Paul, Republicons should be thankful to him as probably the only candidate who has brought some new DNA to the Republicon party in 30 years.

Although Clinton remains our 4th choice among Democrats, we’ve decided that we will vote for her if she receives the party’s nomination, if for no other reason than the Republicon Party must be disarmed.