Emotions and Politics

“The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” Jeremiah 17:9

I am constantly amazed at how people are so easily manipulated through their emotions, and constantly disgusted at how politicians will exploit this fact to gain power.

Emotions are an important part of our lives. Emotions allow us to relate to one another, to have friendship, to have empathy for those in need. Emotions can also bring people to fits of rage or send them cowering in fear. Emotion is an important ingredient in art and music.

Emotions, however, are also transitory and unpredictable. They cannot be relied on as a basis of decision making or governance. Emotions are like sand, ever shifting and unreliable as a foundation. Certainly they can be considered when planning or making decisions, but they must be kept in proper perspective.

I still marvel at how quickly some peoples' emotions changed from rage at seeing thousands of their fellow countrymen senselessly killed in the 9-11 attacks to guilt, believing that we somehow brought it on ourselves…and some to mistrust thinking that it was orchestrated by our own government. I also marvel at how quickly many politicians, after hurrying to portray themselves as pro-war hawks, realigned themselves to anti-war doves once their supporters shifted their stand. This was a shining example of the lack of solid principles of many in government.

For decades we have been exhorted to rely more on our emotions. Don’t over analyze things, we are told, follow your heart. This has had the effect of dumbing-down our society. It has been seen in education where we are told it is more important how a child feels about themselves than what they learn…self-esteem is more important than knowledge. This was taken to the ridiculous extreme by some educators who said it was not important that a child properly solve a math problem, but it was how they felt about math that was important. This is ludicrous. A math solution is either right or it is wrong…black and white…and it is important for students to learn math, regardless of how they feel about it.

Politicians know how easily public emotions can be manipulated. “Never waste a good crisis,” as Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel have said. And this government is not squandering any opportunity. We are constantly assaulted with huge appeals to our emotions through so-called crises. They play to our sympathy with images of a baby polar bear on an ice drift and stories of some elderly lady who could not afford her prescription drugs. They elicit fear with horrifying tales of coming natural disasters, crop failures and the end of life as we know it. They make us feel guilty for being so successful when there are those in the world who have so little. And all the while, they tell us that they are our only hope. If only we give them more control, more taxes, more of our lives, they can make it all better. Don’t think or analyze too much they say, now is a time for action or baby polar bears will die…the planet will die…old ladies will die. Trust us, your sacrifice will be worth it.

This is not the way our republic was built. The founding fathers were men of deep passion who were given to fiery oratory and heated disagreements. They were also men of great learning and deep thought. They brought about a form of government that had been theorized in parts by many different scholars for centuries but never before implemented. They drew from history and classical writings. They studied past successes and failures of government. They saw the tyranny of power centralized in the hands of too few and that of power given to the whims of the masses. They crafted the Constitution with great deliberation to give our government a balance between totalitarianism and anarchy that was ingenious and has stood the test of years. The founders, when presenting the new document to the states, appealed to logic and the soundness of the principles therein contained. These principles have provided the United States of America with greater levels of freedom and prosperity for the largest portion of its population than in any other country at any other time.

In these times of 24-hour news cycles and the 30 second sound byte, of constant imagery flooding into our homes, we need to be more careful than ever as to what we believe. We must look at all proposed “solutions” offered by government with a critical and wary eye. Of course bad things happen to good people, but are anecdotal tales of woe worth sacrificing the principles of our great republic? Are the pending crises real, or fabricated to evoke the proper response? And, if real, do the proposed solutions really solve anything, or just gather power to the politicians?

The examples of this type of emotional manipulation are endless, but the point is that in time of crisis, of pending sweeping change, we must appeal to sound reason and solid, proven principle rather than the vagaries of emotion. We must be ever vigilant to safeguard our freedoms and way of life from those who would capitalize on misfortune. Americans are a big-hearted people. We give more to the world and our own in need than any other country. We should not lose that gift…but we should also not lose the gifts of liberty. Care for the sick, the oppressed, those with no voice, but base it on the solid foundation of sound reason.

Feel deeply, but think deeply also, for “Liberty once lost is lost forever.” – John Adams.

Fox News and the Freedom of the Press

Whether you like Fox News, and agree with their commentators, or not...you have to be worried about the Obama White House's attempts to shut Fox out because they run stories opposing the President. Even the other news outlets in the White House pool think they have gone too far.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/white-house-loses-bid-exclude-fox-news-pay-czar-interview/

Using the power of the Executive Branch to exclude press that questions the President or his policies and to "suggest" that other news organizations also shun them is an assult on the First Ammendment.

Global Warming? - Follow-up

In the headlines on the Drudge Report this morning:

Heavy snow expected in PA...
“Cold high pressure will nose in from the north today and tonight. A low pressure system will move from the lower Mississippi valley to the Carolina coast by Thursday...then off the east coast. This storm will pull lots of Atlantic moisture into pa on deep easterly flow. This could lead to a possibly damaging early- season snow late Thursday into Friday night. A upper level low will linger overhead for the rest of the weekend...but a warming trend is seen next week.”

Chicago record breaking cold continues...
“Chicago has spent the last 17 days with below-average temperatures, and a high of a mere 47 degrees made Tuesday the coldest Oct. 13 in 82 years, CBS 2's Mary Kay Kleist says.”

Montana records fall...
“A strong arctic air mass pushed across the continental divide settling very cold and dry arctic air into the valley locations across western Montana and north central Idaho. The initial push of the arctic air was brought through a surface cold front that brought snow to part of west central Montana Friday morning. For the following weekend days...cold temperatures were the headline feature...keeping afternoon highs and overnight lows well below seasonal normals. Several records were broken...some by a difference of almost 15 degrees in the coldest locations.”

FORECASTS BLOWN: '09 Atlantic hurricane season quietest in decade...
”Thanks to El Nino, the 2009 Atlantic hurricane season has been the quietest in more than a decade, offering a reprieve for residents in the danger zone and a chance for insurance firms to refill depleted coffers.”

Don’t you hate Global Warming?

None of this was in the predictions of the Global Warming alarmists. They have gotten it wrong for at least the last 11 years.  They will probably come up with some reason why this is still dire Climate Change that has to be stopped through higher taxes and government control..

Do we want to significantly change our economy and lifestyle based on such faulty predictions.

Say NO to Cap and Trade!

Global Warming?

Well, according to an article by the BBC, global temperatures have not increased since 1998…11 years ago. Was the globe warming before that? Absolutely. And that is the nature of global cycles. While the current warming trend seems to have ended in 1998, the climate models, so touted by the climate change alarmists, did not predict it…they predicted continued rising temperatures.

I am old enough to remember the first Earth Day in 1970. Back then, when activists were flying their Ecology Flags, the big fear was that the world was about to enter the next ice age. The world was cooling and the ice caps were going to advance and our ability to grow enough food was going to be greatly impacted. These scare tactics were also eaten up by many well meaning but myopic folks who cannot see more than a few months…or years at most…into the past. Why were the alarmists convinced that there would be a new ice age? Simple, the earth was in the midst of a cooling cycle that went from 1945 to 1977 corresponding to a cold Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) of the oceanic cycles.

When the whole Global Warming issue first began to hit the news, I immediately dismissed it as alarmist quackery. The reason is that within a year or two before that time, I had read an interesting article in a scientific magazine (Discover, I think) about a group of scientists who were studying samples of air that was trapped in the polar ice. What they found was that the level of carbon-dioxide in the air varied as the depth changed. The depth of the ice directly correlated with the age of the air sample. As they gathered the data from the air samples across thousands of years of history, they found that the Earth moved through long, climatic change cycles. And these cycles were in place long before the industrial age. I also remembered the previous warnings of a coming ice age.

So, what causes these climate change cycles to occur? I believe that it is a combination of many dynamic processes that are constantly in motion. These processes include ocean cycles, solar cycles and other things like volcanic activity. A single volcanic eruption spews more so-called “greenhouse gasses” than the whole industrial world can produce in a year. Of course I’m no scientist, but more and more real climate scientists are speaking out against the notion of “Man Made Global Warming.” Is there climate change…of course there is. It is an ever changing system that brought us the mini ice age of the eighteenth century and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. It goes on with, or without our influence. It predates both Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used for air-conditioning and SUVs.

So, you may ask, if I am right and all of this climate change is just a part of a natural cycle of the Earth, why are so many people pushing the Global Warming agenda? Well, it seems to me that it is more politics than science. The “Left” has always used crisis to increase their power. In his book “Liberal Fascism,” Jonah Goldberg says that environmentalisms “most tangible fascistic ingredient is that it is an invaluable ‘crisis mechanism.’ Al Gore constantly insists that global warming is the defining crisis of our time.” He also states that “In practical terms this means we must surrender to the global nanny state and create the sort of ‘economic dictatorship’ progressives yearn for.” Goldberg also chronicles that though environmentalism predated Nazism “it was used to expand its base of support.” Not to say that if you care about the environment, you’re a Nazi…but it has been used before for political purposes.

What better way to get otherwise well meaning and intelligent people to willingly surrender their personal freedoms than a good old threat of global destruction? But, do you want to lose freedoms to an unfounded and contrived crisis? I don’t.

Waiting "On the Beach?"

It’s been a very long time since I read the book “On the Beach” by Nevil Shute. This book was written back in the late 1950’s and the plot, as I remember, was set mostly around a U.S. nuclear submarine crew in a time just after a nuclear holocaust had killed most of the world’s population. Only some in the southern hemisphere were still alive…but the radioactivity was working its way south, and it was only a matter of time.

The key point I remember about this book was that nuclear Armageddon was not started by the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. or even China. It was some small, relatively insignificant country in the Middle East, a mouse of a country that, because they had obtained nuclear weapons, roared.

I have thought of this book many times over the years. During the Iranian hostage crisis, I thought of this book.  When “The Wall” came down in Soviet controlled East Germany, I thought of this book. During the first Gulf War, after 9-11, and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, I thought of this book. Again this week, with the news of a “secret” UN report that concludes that Iran has acquired "sufficient information to be able to design and produce" an atom bomb, I’m thinking of this book.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, many people wanted to believe that the world was a safer place. In some ways they were right…but in other ways, the world became a much scarier place. I said then, and believe now, that while we needed to win the “Cold War,’ we could not let down our guard because now there are many more rogue nations and factions out there who want to see our destruction.

The focus of danger in the world today is radical Islam which seeks to convert or destroy the rest of the world.  President Obama seems to want to talk them out of their beliefs. He seems to think that if we can all just talk out our differences, we can come to a mutually beneficial outcome. The problem is, the only outcome they are willing to accept is the destruction of Israel and all others they consider infidels. They believe that they are faith bound to kill the infidel even at the cost of their own life…and now, some of them are very close to having nukes.

How do you respond to such a threat? Do you wait until we experience a nuclear 9-11? Or, do you take them at their word that they want to kill us and stop them before they can act. I believe the latter is the only moral stance. I believe that we can stop the Iranian regime now through conventional military measures before ten’s of thousands of innocent people are murdered by these mad men. To burry our heads and believe that they will not try to kill us if they can is suicide.

At the end of the book, all the characters could do was sit on the beach and wait for the radiation to come. It was too late, the damage was done. There was no safety to be found. How will the world respond to Iran’s threat? Will we proactively move against the threat to stop the Iranians from completing a bomb, or we wait until there’s nothing left to do but count the dead? Will we act now, or wait on the beach later.