So, according to the mainstream press and mainstream blogs, Herman Cain is a serial, sexual harasser.
Does anyone know what that means? Seriously, what is "sexual harassment?"
I've read it's saying something that makes another person "uncomfortable," or that makes another person feel that what's been said is "inappropriate."
Come on.
Politics is a blood sport and that's my only takeaway from this mess.
It reminds me of high school student council. All the student politicians and their teacher advisors took themselves way too seriously. The rest of us could have cared less. We had young lives to live, sports to play, girls to date.
The difference, of course, is that in high school the student council was a sham, a completely powerless organization that had little to do with nothing. No wonder the rest of us didn't concern ourselves with their silly campaigns and political hysteria. In America today Congress and the President, our elite citizen governing council, affect our lives in too many ways to count. We can hardly sneeze without political permission.
We made the biggest mistake of our lives when we got out of high school and gave politicians real power. POWER! That's what this is all about. When you give a small number of people virtually unlimited power over everything and everyone, individuls are going to struggle, bite, scratch and claw their way into that small circle that wields power.
Herman Cain is running for President, which as things stand today means he wants to be King of America. The mainstream media wants to be King-makers. Two-bit, self-important bloggers want some kind of say in the matter as well, so they publish half-truths and innuendo designed to stir things up and further the career of their favorite, prospective King.
As a libertarian (for lack of a better description) my response is: Let's go back to high school. Let's take the power away from politicians and put it back into the hands of individuals. We have lives to live, families to raise.
Without real power at stake individuals would still run for President and politics would still be a blood sport. But the rest of us wouldn't give a damn because we, not they, are in charge of and in control of what matters in our lives.
The election of 2012 is not about jobs, the federal debt or even federal spending. Boiled down to its basics, this election is about drastically reducing the POWER the Washington Elite has over our individual lives. If you don't see it that way, then we are not on the same page.
If we could elect politicians of the sort we elected at the nation's beginning: citizen farmers, citizen businessmen, citizen lawyers, just plain citizens rather than career politicians, we could afford to watch the politicians bite and claw for the remaining bits of power left and be amused by their crazy antics.
"Side by side with the word 'property' in the program of liberalism one may quite appropriately place the words 'freedom' and 'peace.'" Ludwig von Mises, "Liberalism, In The Classical Tradition"
About This Blog
Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) was the greatest economist of my time. His greatest works can be accessed here at no charge.
Mises believed that property, freedom and peace are and should be the hallmarks of a satisfying and prosperous society. I agree. Mises proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the prospect for general and individual prosperity is maximized, indeed, is only possible, if the principle of private property reigns supreme. What's yours is yours. What's mine is mine. When the line between yours and mine is smudged, the door to conflict opens. Without freedom (individual liberty of action) the principle of private property is neutered and the free market, which is the child of property and freedom and the mother of prosperity and satisfaction, cannot exist. Peace is the goal of a prosperous and satisfying society of free individuals, not peace which is purchased by submission to the enemies of property and freedom, but peace which results from the unyielding defense of these principles against all who challenge them.
In this blog I measure American society against the metrics of property, freedom and peace.
Mises believed that property, freedom and peace are and should be the hallmarks of a satisfying and prosperous society. I agree. Mises proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the prospect for general and individual prosperity is maximized, indeed, is only possible, if the principle of private property reigns supreme. What's yours is yours. What's mine is mine. When the line between yours and mine is smudged, the door to conflict opens. Without freedom (individual liberty of action) the principle of private property is neutered and the free market, which is the child of property and freedom and the mother of prosperity and satisfaction, cannot exist. Peace is the goal of a prosperous and satisfying society of free individuals, not peace which is purchased by submission to the enemies of property and freedom, but peace which results from the unyielding defense of these principles against all who challenge them.
In this blog I measure American society against the metrics of property, freedom and peace.
2 comments:
Someone suggested at my blog today that the Republicans were shooting themselves in the foot with this debacle. I replied that they had moved past shooting their feet and had taken a shot at their heads. This entire primary season has been silly and they are in the process of making us all out to be the laughingstock of America, I am afraid.
LD, I hope you're wrong and this episode winds up biting the opposition, as the facts turn out to be sillier than the innuendo.
I read at Legal Insurrection that one of Cain's accusers (a young woman at a radio station) was made uncomfortable by Cain's: "Darling, do you mind doctoring my tea for me?" Such nonsense!
I also read at The Blaze that Cain's wife is about to be interviewed at FOX. She is apparently a very, very low key family-oriented, Christian homemaker, which means the progressive press will have a field day ripping her to shreds. This may also backfire.
But I expect you're right. In a culture that tears off every scab, turns every wound into an open sore, then openly and publically debates the merits or demerits of the injury, what hope is there?
Post a Comment