The Endorsement

In what is euphemistically called the ‘presidential primary season’, a time when the populace cast their votes for a slate of candidates presented by inept and conspiratorial private business enterprises believing they are government, one of the apparently forgotten tenets of a free and democratic republic is the concept of the secret ballot.

The principle of the secret ballot is singularly thus: citizens are allowed to have their voice heard, without fear of governmental sanction or retribution.

The right to vote can duly take its place amongst the higher echelons of the precious gifts given to us by the framers and the founders who in their wisdom understood that a free and open democracy relies on the safety and security of an unconstrained electorate.

The fight to protect this fundamental tenet of American democracy has been waged and won by the blood of those who understood the importance of America and gave their lives to defend her principles.

The electorate needs to remember this when the cult of personality infects the body politic under the guise of a political ‘endorsement’ and attempts to subjugate democracy to political short term expediency.

The premise of the endorsement is as follows, given the examples set in recent years.

A potential candidate, seeking to secure a position of political power and leadership, buttressed by claims of a singular focus to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, seeks short term electoral advantage by garnering a public show of support from a popular non-candidate, or from a recently vanquished political rival.

The absurdity of this minor bit of incestuous pas de deux seems to be missed by the media at large, and by a majority of the nation as a whole.

Consider the true nature of what an endorsement is: a private citizen casting aside their sacred right, and their civic responsibility to defend the right to a secret ballot, for the fleeting flaccid opportunity to bask in the fluorescent glow of vapid citizenship.

The arrogance of the endorser, primped and primed for their public display of ignorance exemplifies the insidious nature of politics today. The solipsistic belief that a public seal of approval from such a singular show of support flies in direct opposition to the secret ballot and displays a lack of intellectual heft.

This demonstrative shallow understanding of the heart of American independence should give every citizen serious cause for pause; a candidate that believes a voter will sway towards them merely because of a vote of confidence from anyone so willing to dismiss their own civic responsibility for mere momentary popularity is not an individual who should be given the opportunity to serve in government.

The price of freedom is to accept the diligent responsibility to protect and respect that freedom.

The American electorate needs to display their birthright of a secret ballot by shunning those who would both accept a political endorsement, and those who choose to make such a display of constitutional idiocy.

Our ancestors gave their lives to protect our right for a secret ballot; we owe our posterity that example of electoral intelligence.

James Wilson & Freedom of the Press

“…in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice…and secure the blessings of liberty…

The founders and framers of the United States Constitution created a document that addressed their specific concerns, beliefs, and fears in the formation of what was called the grand experiment – democratic self-rule. The freedom of speech and of the press were amongst their greatest concerns, for they had seen and experienced first hand the effects of those rights being trampled upon or abridged in such a way as to render them completely impotent. The right of a free people to express themselves and to have their views disseminated amongst each other in their letters and in their public press was considered so precious that those rights  were specifically written to encompass all known manners of speech and the media of the day without exception. There is no other recognition of ‘the press’ anywhere else within the Constitution, save the specific language in the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom or speech, or of the press….

Our founding fathers were not setting out a type of carte blanche precedent for what they understood as ‘the press’; their respect for the inherent responsibilities of both free speech and a free press were neatly encapsulated within a letter written by James Wilson of Pennsylvania, one of the few men who were seated and voted on both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention that established and enacted the United States Constitution, to William Findley, dated December 1^st, 1787:

“…what is meant by the liberty of the press is that there should be no antecedent restraint upon it; but that every author is responsible when he attacks the security or welfare of the government or the safety, character and property of the individual.”

The founding fathers might be perplexed, confused and perhaps mildly disgusted at the nature of what is today considered acceptable journalistic content and presentation.

To wit:

A recent nationally televised Republican presidential primary debate began with the moderator inquiring a candidate about the claims of marital distress made by that candidate’s ex-wife in an interview recorded for another network. The defense made by the moderator was that the quotes attributed to the ex-wife were’ out there’ being discussed and that the topic had ‘gone viral on the internet”

Is this the state of ‘the press’ in a discussion that may involve the future president of the United States? It has become acceptable professional form to quote something that has been posted on the internet. The internet has no filters, no fact-checking credentials. ‘The press’ used to accept its responsibility in securing multiple confirming sources for their published stories, but now the mere fact that it has appeared in print on a website somewhere that has not been properly vetted is the new standard for ‘the press’.

This is absurd.

There is an old adage that states that if you repeat something often enough, and if it winds up in print, the average consumer will accept it as fact. The American electorate should not stoop to the level of an average consumer. As the freest people the world has ever known, the American people should accept the corresponding responsibility and demand that any information disseminated during an election campaign be treated to the multiple source fact check process. The network television media has to apply to the government for their broadcast licenses’: should not the factual presentation of information be a requirement to attain and maintain that license?

The line has also blurred between that of newscaster and commentator. There seems to be none of the former and far too many of the latter. Commentators feel free to inject their personal views in presenting news information and then hide behind the claim that they are ‘commentators’, even those who present their views on networks with the word ‘news’ in their identifying titles.

This is not a diatribe against the internet, or a tirade against the weakness of the press, but rather a call to the patriotic heart that beats within all Americans. The internet is not an entity of facts; it should not be restricted or regulated because of that fact. It should be considered nothing more than an electronic soapbox and as such any information should be fact checked by the individual consumer. The internet is free speech; government regulation of any type is a dangerous trek towards a tyrannical state.

The twenty-four hour cable news cycle has mandated that product is more essential to profit than accuracy. The American people must self regulate their diet on any single outlet of news and information. A free people should be able to flex their constitutional muscle at will, but as James Wilson reminds us – “every author is responsible when he attacks the security or welfare of the government or the safety, character and property of the individual”.

The founders and the framers might not have foreseen the internet and cable news, but they understood the responsibility that comes with the rights to free speech and a free unregulated press.

The American people must remain vigilant to these responsibilities, or as certain as history has shown us, they can be removed easily by such an apathetic populace.

Primary Season 2012 - A Commentary

(ed. Note: as noted previously, the Madison Conservative will opt for a personal commentary as issues or events warrant. This week is just such an instance)

The very nature of political elections dictates that one must present his opponent as not the person for the job; either by his inexperience in governance, or by his incompetence in doing so while in office, hence the need for change.

Our history is a treasure trove of accusations between opponents from allegations of homicide to levels of debauchery that would mandate an apology of biblical proportions to Sodom and Gomorrah.

Candidates for elective office now seem so well versed in making such finely nuanced accusations or proposals these days that they feel so comfortable that moments after making certain absurdist declarations they opt to distance themselves from what they just said, on the record, if front of millions. (Remember a sitting president, under oath,  asking for what his inquisitors definition of “is” was)

For the most part, the American electorate takes such nonsense in stride in their evaluation of the candidate’s qualifications, and votes their determinations on sound personal judgments. If they find that their assessments were in error, they will make the necessary course corrections in the next election.

In this primary season, what is evolving, however, is a troubling trend and one that must be addressed by the American electorate.

To wit:

The scurrilous and imbecilic accusations are beginning to turn towards the ridiculous and unfounded assertion that somehow America is becoming a lost nation, that her spirit is lagging and in need of being ‘returned’ to its ‘rightful’ owners. Various and sundry candidates of all political persuasion are blathering on with this nonsense, concluding with the claims that their opponents are the reason America is suffering and that only their salves and ointments can bind up and heal the nations wounds.

Putting aside the arrogance of such claims, which should be easily dismissed as the ramblings of idiots, these pervasive claims are an insult to more than two hundred and thirty five years of freedom and sacrifice unequaled in the annals of human history.

America may be many things, but perhaps a Madison Conservatives’ refresher ‘voter guide’ is in order as the elective dog and pony show winds its way throughout the country, ending with the only true poll that matters, the constitutionally mandated one  this coming November.

American is in a period of transition from an employment perspective; there is no doubt about that. This nation went through the same type of process during the industrial revolution. Americans adapt, improvise, and overcome. This fact has been proven again and again. When the internet boom began in the early 1990’s, few realized that such a technological revolution would so quickly doom many brick and mortar establishments, yet almost everyone today  easily uses the internet to purchase goods and services with but the click of a mouse. Many companies that helped usher in the age of the consumer internet boom are now but memories on the dust heap of employment history, yet there has been no declarations that the internet cost millions of jobs to honest and decent people employed in the brick and mortar world. - (remember CompuServe and Prodigy, the initial rivals to America Online? Would America opt out of having such entities as e-Bay and Amazon.com at their disposal?)

We are a capitalist society; he who builds the better mouse trap wins.

America is employment resilient; perhaps to make that point clear to the body politic, the next wave of unemployment statistics should include those in elective office who helped create the current economic stresses.

Americas’ standing in the world is also an issue that is rising to the forefront in this year’s campaign. This should be properly debated and discussed amongst the body politic and the electorate, but to propose that America’s role in the world is fading? When disaster and strife befall another nation, who is it that the world looks to for rapid response and security if needed? The recent act of the United States Navy in rescuing Iranian nationals from pirates is a perfect example. America is the nation that gets it done; we understand that the blessings of liberty come with a price and we have continually chosen to pay those costs.  Foreign policy should absolutely be an issue for there are many intelligent alternatives on how to conduct a nations foreign policy, but to add into that debate that somehow America is fading is both preposterous and libelous.

As the candidates vie for votes, remember to take many of their claims of Americas’ malaise with a twenty five pound bag of salt; we have endured and prospered through tough times, we will do so now, and continue to do so in the future.

We must as a nation remember that collectively we are Americans, and that such a statement still means more than we can know.

We the people; let freedom ring!

The Primary Season Lie

(ed. Note : the political parties at the heart of this discussion have purposely been given lower case denotations; they have abdicated their right to proper punctuational  designation)

There can be few acts more nefarious to American democracy than those perpetrated by a select few upon the American electorate under the guise of protecting the freedom of the press and the sacred right to vote.

Honest political debate and people of good will having opposing views upon how to lead America into the future are nothing more than the signs of a vibrant and healthy democracy flourishing  under the ideals set forth by the founders and the framers of the United States Constitution. The current assault on our freedom is being executed on the American people by the full spectrum of the body politic and their ignorant media flacks who blather on about issues for which they are ill equipped to discuss with any modicum of intelligence.

This is not a tirade on the mass media outlets, but rather a warning for vigilance on the part of the American people to protect and preserve their birthright of freedom.

The current mythology being presented by many of our elected officials and media pundits is that this is the ‘primary’ season, where the major political entities meander and wander through an arcane and intellectually dishonest practice of determining their respective nominees for the presidency of the United States.

The entire process is a charade and an insult to democratic principles for which untold millions have sacrificed their lives to protect.

To wit:

It may come as a surprise too both democrats and republicans alike, but they are NOT government. They are private enterprises who have lied their way into the halls of power by an electorate who have been too busy earning their daily wage ( to be first confiscated arbitrarily by the taxman) , raising their families and pursuing the American dream to notice the theft of their democracy.

The republican and democratic parties have created the entire primary series of shenanigans out of whole cloth. They are free to select their slate of nominees in any method they choose, but they must avoid the subterfuge of presenting the process as being open and honest. Many states, under the guidance of the respective parties, have registration restrictions to vote in a primary; republicans cannot vote in democratic primaries and vice versa. In a ridiculous attempt to present a more ‘open’ and free process, some states allow for open primaries, allowing any registered voter to vote in either or both primary. The ability for political mischief in the name of political sport is a disgrace to those who fell at Gettysburg, the beaches of Normandy, and anywhere Americans gave their lives in defense of liberty.

The mass media who present these side shows as integral to democracy are either intellectual light weights or outright stupid; in either case, they are harming American self-rule in more ways than one.

The American people should, en masse, ignore all the caucuses, primaries and any variation to demonstrate their solidarity against the assault on their freedom.

Our ancestors, ourselves and our posterity deserve no less.

American self-rule is not sport. It is the realization of the history of man to live in freedom.

The nonsense of primaries, caucuses and straw polls must be kept in the pantheon of the ridiculous and not allowed to further infect the body politic.

The only election that should be allowed media coverage in the context of national significance is the quadrennial one delineated in the Constitution.