I guess it makes sense...

I suppose it makes sense that people are always looking for an improvement in their circumstances.  My question is why this desire blinds them to any deeper reality.

I am reading a book right now called Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe (by Robert Gellately).  I have thoroughly enjoyed this book so far, as it blends two histories that heretofore had been separated in my mind - I had learned about the rise of communism in a class I had on 20th century Russian history, and I had obviously studied a bit on the rise of Hitler, and a lot on WWII.  This book shows how the different players in this period of history influenced each other.

The first paragraph of chapter 13 jumped out at me.

"The July 1932 elections showed Hitler with by far the largest following of any politician in the country.  He was the message, a social phenomenon, the fuhrer who enthralled millions by telling them what they already knew or wanted to hear.  He could draw crowds of twenty-five thousand or more almost anywhere, even as he steadfastly refused to make any specific promises of what he would do to cure Germany's many problems."

Humor me here and let's do a little rephrasing --

"The November 2008 elections showed Sen. Obama with by far the largest following of any politician in the country.  He was the message, a social phenomenon, the politician who transcended politics, enthralling millions by telling them what they already knew or wanted to hear.  He could draw crowds of twenty-five thousand or more almost anywhere, even as he steadfastly refused to make any specific promises of what he would do to cure America's many problems."

My point in doing this is not to compare Obama to Hitler - I'll leave that for the more extreme political commentators.  It is instead to ask the question of "why".  Why does history show us that men are blinded by their desire for something more, something better?

Hitler promised to fix the problems in Germany; to cause the rest of the world to respect Germany again (incidentally, Stalin did the same in Russia).  Even though Germany faced much more daunting problems at the time, American is being told that Europe, the Middle East, and the Far East don't respect us or even hate us.  We are all also hearing about "the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression".*  Sen. Obama promises to fix all of this.

I hope that my use of Hitler as an example has not upset anyone or caused anyone to disregard what I am trying to say here - that was not my intention.  The quoted paragraph simply jumped out at me as one that mirrored current events.  As someone who does take the time to follow politics and look into the past of those who ask for my vote, this seeming phenomenon of people being blinded by their desire for something better worries me.  Just like many were wary of Hitler in 1932 because of his radical ideas and policies, there are a lot of educated voters who strongly question Sen. Obama's credentials as he approaches the office of President.  The question is, are there enough educated voters in America this year to overcome it?

I suppose I'll find out tomorrow.

*Note: given that Americans were expected to spend $5.77 billion on Halloween this year, I'm finding it hard to believe that we're facing anything close to the Great Depression.

Tonight's debate

I don't have much to say about tonight's presidential debate, since in reality nothing that went on tonight was going to change my opinion.  One thing that did happen, however, was Sen. Obama confirmed a growing impression I had about his character.

Sen. Obama is arrogant and rude.  He demonstrated this tonight.  He is a Jr (very Jr) United States Senator.  He has only very recently entered the national (much less global) political scene.  Even so, he referred to his opponent as "John" almost the entire night.  He also referred to the current President as "George Bush".  I hope that people noticed that, even facing this blatant disrespect, Sen. McCain kept his composure and continually referred to "Barry" as "Sen. Obama".  

Sen. McCain was also not the one doing all of the interruptions tonight, nor was he saying "that's not true", over and over into the microphone in the middle of Obama's statements.  Obama also clearly felt that what he had to say was of sufficient importance to interrupt the moderator, and on several occasions gave the moderator "permission" to continue with the next question.

I already knew I disagreed strongly with Sen. Obama's policies.  Now I know I think he's far too young and self-indulged to be a leader of any country - much less the most powerful nation in the world.

So thanks for clearing that up for me tonight, Senator Obama.

I haven't been this happy since...

...since the election season started! Joe Biden for VP on the Obama ticket?! So much for hope and change. Things started looking up after the forum at Saddleback, and now I'm just so happy I can hardly contain myself!

Good job Obama - Biden's the best choice you could have made for this country!

impressions...

Jenn and I attended a community Good Friday service today, and I came to a conclusion -



Christians are crazy.



Seriously, if I weren't already a Christian, I would have thought Christians were totally nuts, sitting in a service singing songs, praying, and listening to a talk which could all seem quite "cultish". Now don't get me wrong - I believe totally and completely that I am created by a God who loved me enough to have a plan to save me from my sins (and I don't think I'm crazy because of that belief), but I think it's easier for me to hold that belief because I was introduced to it at a young age, and now have experienced the true love and the change that comes from knowing Jesus. In this post, I'm not even going to mention all of the evidence for both God's existence and Jesus' life and ministry that I've learned throughout my life - maybe another post on another day...

The point is, If I walked into a church for the first time at the age of 22 with my engineering degree and my overly cynical outlook on life, I'd think Christians were nuts.

I believe completely in God and Jesus' death on the cross, but have always looked at some of the other religions in the world and wondered at how silly or wrong or confused they might seem. But recently I've been struck with how silly Christianity must seem to the rest of the world. I suppose all I can do is do my best to let the world see how Jesus changed my life, and know that the Spirit of God is behind me, hopefully patching up the gigantic failures I leave in my path.

But for now, I'm looking forward to celebrating Easter on Sunday with all my crazy friends.

New Eye Balls

So on January 23 I had laser vision correction surgery performed by Dr. H. Douglas Cooper at Pacific Laser Eye Center. What a fantastic experience. So easy, so fast, and I can see better now than I have ever been able to in my life. Within one day I could see 20/20, and at my two week post-op appointment, I had 20/15 in my right eye, 20/20 (or a little better) in my left eye. There was almost no discomfort at all resulting from the procedure, and the only disruption to my life was taking one day off of work (not supposed to use the computer for a few days) and sleeping with goofy goggles on so I wouldn't rub my eye or poke it with a stick in the middle of the night.

It was the easiest, most amazing procedure ever - It took about 7 or 8 minutes once I got into the surgery room. You lay back, they cover one eye, and put some numbing drops in the other eye. The only uncomfortable part of the entire procedure is when they draw a suction on the front of your eye so they can cut a flap. That part just feels like someone is pushing hard on your eye, so it kind of aches and your vision fades, but then it comes right back and it's all ok. They flip back the little flap they cut, tell you to look at a green light above you, and you start hearing a popping sound as the laser fires. The laser they use can cut notches in a human hair it's so fine, and there's a tracking laser that fires at 4000 HZ, so even if you move your eye around, it follows it and will not affect your results, just lengthen the procedure time.

You smell burning cornea for a few seconds, then it's done. They fold the flap back, realign it, press lightly on it to seat it, and they cover that eye and move on to the next. When I stood up after surgery, I could already see clearly - it was blurry, and yet still in focus, if that makes sense. Like there was water in my eyes after swimming. By the time I got home, I could see pretty well - much better than with my old glasses, and the next morning I was fine.

I highly recommend the procedure to anyone who's a good candidate. I'm so happy with my new eye balls, and I sure am glad it was possible.

The state of politics...

Well, I may have burned everyone out on politics with my ridiculously long post back before super duper Tuesday, but here's one more -

Obviously the political scene has changed quite a bit since then - now, instead of people talking of a brokered convention on the Republican side, they're discussing a brokered convention between Hillary and Obama (and even that possibility is fading fast as people seem to leap from the sinking ship of Hillary's campaign for a admittedly fantastic and charismatic speaker, even if he never gets around to saying anything specific...)

With Mitt Romney's endorsement, John McCain is guaranteed to be the Republican nominee, and I'm having to just get used to that idea. I will certainly vote for him, but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy casting that vote!

So here's my last comments on McCain and Romney before I throw my support behind McCain out of necessity.

For those of you who haven't heard Romney's speech at CPAC (the one in which he announced the suspension of his campaign), I highly recommend finding a transcript and reading it in its entirety. It is one of the best speeches I have ever heard a politician give, and there wasn't a word or phrase in there that I disagreed with. That speech showed a fantastic understanding of the economy (both national and global), national security, and basic conservative principles such as the right to life, and limited government. It was hard to hear him step out of the race after giving a speech like that. I think he did do, however, the right thing in stepping out - too bad Huckabee won't follow his example.

(Quick note on Huckabee - by staying in, he's really hurting himself. It's fairly clear he can't win, even though he's doing quite well, but instead of dropping out when he's "on top" of the game, winning states no one expects him to, he's staying in until there's no doubt in anyone's mind that he can't win. Big mistake. He should drop out now so people can dream and speculate about what might have been...)

Now - my final concerns about McCain: McCain's entire campaign is based on national security (the war on terror), and he admits that the economy is "not his strong point". So here is my question - what is the difference between his stance and President Bush's stance? Bush has focused all of his presidency on the war on terror, while the economy has suffered (while not nearly as much as people say, it has seen harder times). So if the world really dislikes President Bush as much as they say, why will they vote to put someone with the exact same major policies in the office right after he leaves? This is part of the reason I'm really quite surprised at how easy this win was for McCain. But I'm very worried that it is only a matter of time (in fact, I heard it mentioned in an Obama speech already) until democrats turn around and start pointing this out to the world - do we really want four more years of "Bush Doctrine"?

Too bad it's too late to get a nominee with a solid grasp on both national security and the economy.

Final parting words - notice in Romney's CPAC speech how close this race was before you look at delegates:

Popular vote for Romney: 4 million
Popular vote for McCain: 4.7 million
States won by Romney: 11
States won by McCain: 13

The issue is of course which states McCain won - winner take all states with huge delegate counts. The flip side is that McCain tended to win states that Republicans have no chance of winning in a general election this November. States like California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Washington and other New England states. Not one of those states went to Republicans in the last general election.

Can McCain pull it together and start appealing to grassroots conservatives that didn't vote for him first time around? I sure hope so. I feel like I need to start a savings account to start prepaying my taxes and the increase ridiculously over the next 5 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/us/politics/08romney-transcript.html

valentine's day

Valentine's day is a lot more fun if your spouse doesn't expect you to do anything. (See Jenn's blog for an explanation of why she didn't expect anything - she thinks that it's a holiday created by marketing schemes of evil corporations).

If your wife knows she's getting flowers and dinner every February the 14th, she's just wondering how many and where... So, for Valentine's day, I sent Jenn some flowers, and then we had a nice quiet meal here at home. I grilled sirloin, made twice baked potatoes, and artichokes. I enjoyed it, and she said she did too.

If you must know, the purpose for this post is so I can maybe win free stuff over at wifeadvice.com. It's worth a try, right?

A post with further political commentary and an update on my new eye balls (and the process of getting them) will come sooner or later.

Happy Valentine's Day.

Waxing Political

Well obviously this blogging thing hasn't really taken off here in my world, but every now and then I'm inspired to share my thoughts with the world on matters both important and unimportant. Let's be honest, most of you knew I'd ultimately use this blog to spout off on my little soap box whenever I felt the need.

Well, here you have it - I'm waxing political this evening... Read on if you care!

(You can blame the following on my siblings if you know them, since they've raised political questions on their blogs...)

I don't want to push one candidate or bash one candidate, I just want to comment on what I see in each of the candidates about which I feel like commenting. I'm not going to discuss Hillary, because I quite honestly believe she could be the worst president that America could get. She's not worth my time. However, I also believe that Ron Paul could be a disaster for our country, but I'm still going to comment on him because his ideas intrigue me. So, in no particular order, here goes...

We'll start with Barack Obama, who won Iowa. I'm quite honestly glad that we finally have a viable candidate for President who finally breaks away from a long history of racism in our country. I strongly believe that America has been in a place to accept this for quite some time, but until now we simply haven't had a candidate for people to take seriously (no, I don't count Allen Keys). However, I think that Obama is still one of the least qualified candidates running to be the 44th president. As a single term US senator, he hardly can claim the "experience" gained from being in Washington. His education was at Columbia University (Very liberal school) and he got his degree in "international relations", which might explain the complete ineptitude he has displayed to date over issues of foreign policy, such as stating he would hold talks with dictators of Iran, Cuba, and North Korea and then swinging to the opposite extreme and discussing possible invasions of Pakistan. In regards to this issue, Jennifer Dyck (director of public relations for the CIA) had this to say:

"...So not only did he exhibit a serious deficiency in judgment the first time round. It seems he still has not learned his lesson. The key here is Obama’s judgment and that is something that will be scrutinized in the upcoming months. If his Pakistan policy is any indicator, he has one of two problems…he either lacks the experience to have good judgment or he just lacks judgment in the national security arena."

Oboma constantly discusses "change" that he will bring, (remind you of all of the democratic candidates for Congress last election?), but just like in the past, nobody seems to know what "change" will really consist of - his popularity is surging because people are tired of the current state of Washington, but unless he actually starts outlining some real policies (other than universal health care), I'm not getting my hopes up.

Finally, he claims to be a Christian, but any "Christian" who supports abortion like Oboma doesn't see eye to eye with me on morality which should be strongly influenced by his faith.

...don't get me started on his tax ideas - liberals and their taxes...

Next comes tonight's winner in New Hampshire, John McCain. McCain has caught a lot of attention lately as a straight talking Republican "Maverick" with strong support for our troops. I'll be very surprised if McCain actually gets the nomination, but if it comes down to that, I'll hold my nose and vote for him - I just won't like it. Let me explain...

McCain has painted himself as a "Maverick", but if you really look at his positions, he's just siding with democrats. McCain's campaign finance reform and, most recently, McCain/Kennedy's immigration reform bills have clearly departed from the republican line of thinking. Any senator who has not only voted but stepped up and pushed these bills is going to have to work hard to gain my trust as a legitimate conservative candidate. Also, I don't think McCain has any room to be criticizing other candidates for changing their positions, since he's clearly changed his positions on immigration in just the past few months...

Some who have worked with McCain have come out and said that he has a rather impressive temper - an allegation which I believe should be taken into account, since the American Presidency and a hot temper probably don't mesh well together. McCain also has his age against him - at 72, he'd be the oldest president since Reagan, if I'm not mistaken. Though I may not have a problem with that, today's younger generations would look at him next to Obama and I don't think there would be much of a contest!


Mike Huckabee has made waves coming from behind and winning a significant victory in Iowa with very little money and pretty dismal campaign organization. As a Christian, I should probably be really excited about this "Baptist Minister from the south" coming and beating all these big men from the political establishment, but, quite frankly, I'm not. In fact, I hope his momentum dies out very quickly (which it already may have, since he only got 11% of the vote in New Hampshire today). Again, if he becomes the republican nominee, I'll vote for him, but that doesn't mean I have high hopes for a Huckabee presidency.

I have serious concerns about his actual record. I understand that his tax increases may have been affected by court orders, etc. but as governor of AK for more than a decade, I feel like if he really wanted to decrease government spending, he could have made a little progress. His idea of a "fair tax", as nice as it may sound, is ridiculous - I strongly agree that America's tax system needs to be revamped, but there is enough question raised about the FairTax and its actual ability to keep the government "revenue neutral" while not hurting the economy, I can honestly say I don't believe it will ever pass congress. (with just a little research, you can find some interesting things about the fair tax - like that the government has to pay taxes. If the military buys a $1 million tank, they have to pay an extra $300,000 to themselves in taxes. This falsely boosts the revenue from the tax system...)

More significantly, he has a record of pardoning criminals. I don't know this for sure, but if his willingness to "forgive" violent criminals comes from his Christian faith, I believe he should read through the Old Testament again. I believe that in his position of authority, it is his job to protect those who elected him. Would he be willing to forgive terrorists if they attack this country, instead of pursuing them to protect the United States? Some of his statements on foreign policy might lead one to believe so... Another position which worries me is his desire for a federal ban on public smoking. Last time I checked, true conservatives stand for smaller government, not bigger government. Plus, maybe he should see how much of a hit his FairTax would take when you remove the significant revenue that the government receives from cigarette taxes right now...

Huckabee does have a strong, consistent, and unquestionable record as a pro-life politician. I can appreciate and praise that, but beyond that, I cannot support him. I honestly believe his campaign will end after South Carolina, where he should get a strong showing, since SC has the highest percentage of homeschoolers per ca pita. Does anyone honestly believe he'll stand a chance in states in the west? I'd rather not elect another Jimmy Carter, and I don't think I'm the only one.


Gaining massive support amongst college students (and white supremacists), Ron Paul has managed to raise a significant amount of money, and he managed to win a whopping 0 delegates in New Hampshire today. In my mind, Ron Paul is by no means a serious candidate, but some of his ideas catch my attention, and I completely understand why others my age have gathered behind him in support. We are tired of watching our hard earned money be taxed and then miss managed in countless ways and spent to fight wars everywhere from Eastern Europe to Africa, to the Middle East. Billions of dollars of aid are sent to countries which squander it, and countless billions are spent on military actions overseas.

Sure, I understand why we don't like it, but Ron Paul's nationalistic, "seclusionistic" ideas just don't pan out in the real world. It might be easier to at least dream about just pouring money into our economy and protecting the American people within our borders if it still took months to sail from Europe to America, but in today's world it just doesn't work.

As far as the questionable associations between him and neo-Nazi/white supremacist groups, today he came out and said he "took responsibility" for not paying close enough attention to what his name was attached to, and that some of the articles he never saw or edited. That might be a good argument if it was just one or two articles, but the association is pretty wide spread, and rather obvious. Do a Google search for Ron Paul and look at some of the hits...

Quite honestly, however, I'm glad someone is out there touting smaller government and controlled spending and the importance of strengthening our economy. At least there's someone...

But wait - maybe there is another candidate who cares about the economy! And Mitt Romney might have the experience to back it up! My favorite thing about Mitt is his business experience. I'd rather have a businessman than a politician in office any day. His experience buying businesses in trouble and turning them into profitable companies speaks volumes about his practical experience in the world of economics and tells me he could stand a chance of shaping up Washington's spending spree.

Being a good solid capitalist, however, makes Massachusetts' health care system seem rather odd, but Romney has said he's proud of it. Part of me wonders how much of that is just political, since you pretty much have to be in favor of health care in politics today, but still... Also, in a more general sense, I find myself wondering how a state as liberal as MA manged to elect a "conservative" to be their governor.

Regardless, he's a committed Mormon, and when you look at Mormon's commitment to family values and overall morality, I believe that we would see eye to eye on most moral issues, which is more than I can say for the rest of the republican candidates. (I know people say he's flip-flopped on abortion, but I view it more as a "flip", since he hasn't changed back. I'll accept converts! He has also made clear that he personally never supported abortion, but felt that as a political issue, he should leave it up to the state.) His (sizable) family, which includes 10 grandchildren, gives me the hope that he cares enough about America's future to want to do something about its present.

Even if Mitt seems more like a polished politician on the campaign trail, I like his experience and he's my first choice right now...

Finally - Rudy Giuliani. First off, his name is hard to spell, and that's always a hassle in the case of a president. Take that into serious consideration when you cast your ballot.

Seriously though - if Romney continues to lack the support necessary and if Giuliani's support picks up, I will have very little problem supporting him for president. I do not see him as a strong moral leader, and his positions on abortion certainly don't agree with mine, but he has promised that he would appoint strict constitutionalists to the courts, and that's really all we can ask. I'm honestly not even sure Bush did as much!

I would certainly feel much more comfortable having Rudy as a commander in chief of our military than Huckabee or Obama - Rudy places a very high priority on American security, and I'm grateful for that. He has demonstrated a strong ability to lead in New York and I have high hopes that he could turn out to be a good president of these United States. I know that as a Christian it may seem strange that I would support him (or Romney) over Huckabee, for example, but I'm voting for a president here, not a pastor - lots of presidents (like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton) have said they're Christians, and that hasn't gotten us very far now, has it?

I've left a lot of issues out, since to a great extent this is "stream of consciousness" as I try to make sense of all the thoughts in my head. One is federally sponsored embryonic stem cell research, which is very important, so let me explain. I think that this issue will largely solve itself - Bush vetoed bills that would have allowed it, and science has since shown that stem cells can be cultivated without the use of embryos. With that knowledge, I think that this will become less and less of an issue on the federal level, but I can't say that for sure.

Immigration is another one - frankly, I don't have high hopes that the government will ever get around to doing much to fix this issue. If there's one out there, I'll be most hopeful about Romney. Huckabee's record is pathetic, and Giuliani's and McCain's are questionable at best. Ron Paul's just a nut.

One final point - some have raised issues with Romney's "Negative Campaign". I don't watch TV, so I haven't seen his ads myself (plus they haven't played in CA anyways) but I'm not sure I agree that "negative" campaigning is such a bad thing. This isn't a beauty pageant or a popularity contest, it's an election. If someone thinks that an opponent is wrong about something, has a bad record, etc. then by all means tell me about it so I can look into it. Yes, the candidates still have to tell me about their ideas, but I don't have a problem with them taking the gloves off and throwing a few punches.

I'll leave you with these interesting stats (from before New Hampshire), showing the delegates won by each candidate so far. Keep this in mind when the media only focuses on the winner!

Barack Obama (16)
Bill Richardson (0)
Hillary Clinton (15)
John Edwards (14)

Fred Thompson (3)
John McCain (3)
Mike Huckabee (17)
Mitt Romney (12)
Ron Paul (2)
Rudy Giuliani (0)


...obviously McCain and Hillary got a little boost tonight, but Romney still came in a strong second, so I wouldn't be surprised if he at least ties with Huckabee after tonight. Hillary and Oboma stayed neck and neck as far as delegates go, but Edwards dropped way back...


I don't even know if any of this makes sense, but I'm going to go read in bed now with my wife. Sorry if it's all a jumbled mess - it's not like I'm an authority on politics anyways. Take it or leave it, but it's the best I've got for now!