Where extraordinary becomes eccentric

It’s not surprising the Libertarian party is trying to capitalize on the buzz created by a former Republican candidate, Ron Paul, who had closely associated himself with its ideas. As opposed to last elections where the their candidate got some 200,000 votes, this time they’re hoping to score big. The final nomination is not closed yet, but as you can see, every candidate has some real potential:

The Libertarians, now deciding who should be their presidential nominee, are usually a sideshow. Their last candidate, Michael Badnarik, took a third of a percentage point in 2004. The hopefuls this year include one who wants to move the United Nations headquarters to Somalia, one known mostly for a book about the spirituality of John Denver, a country singer, and a near-obsessive marijuana-legalisation advocate.

Not yet, but some are apparently thinking about it. That should really solve the energy problems!

At another point, Ms. Waters [Democratic Congresswoman from California] brazenly suggested that perhaps the American oil industry should be nationalized, acknowledging that it was an “extreme step” but one that might be necessary if outsize profits and exorbitant gasoline prices continued.

Calling for referendums on the matters of national security is among those things.

Earlier today I received a Facebook message from an unnamed individual who then tried to lure me to join a cause for ending the Star Wars, the cause for stopping the efforts to build an American radar station on our territory. The members of the cause are primarily non-Czechs who are stressing out the importance of adherence to democratic principles in the Czech Republic, in this case respecting the opinion of the majority. In its “manifest” filled with factual errors and demagogies, the group is also expressing solidarity to Mr Tamas who decided to hold a hunger strike in a shop window until the Czech government reverses its opinions on the radar base. Since this is highly unlikely, I wish Mr Tamas a joyful hospital stay in upcoming weeks.

From one point of view this initiative sort of makes sense. Really, if 70% of the population doesn’t agree on certain measures, they probably shouldn’t be taken. Unfortunately, those 70% (and more) of the Czech citizens are generally vulnerable to the loud omnipresent propaganda. This propaganda is spread by people who are brave enough to resist the facts and publicly congratulate Hezbollah for “its defeat of Israel”, all that on the website of Socialistic Solidarity, an extremist fraction proudly adopts Trotsky’s ideas.

Regrettably, a roughly same percentage of Czechs disagrees on the latest cost-cutting measure introduced in January in health care. If the marginal fee faced a public vote, it probably wouldn’t survive and would have to be abolished, despite its positive impacts on the budgets and productivity of doctors. The same fate would unsurprisingly await any changes to the tax system or sick pays (where the Czech Supreme Court has already spoken for the public and voted the changes unconstitutional). Certain things simply aren’t popular; nevertheless, they are necessary.

It would be an unprecedented move to have the people decide on national security. Contrary to the popular belief, the market isn’t always right, and in this area there is not a chance to correct mistakes of made in past. The opposition is again very strident, but the grounds for considering Iran, Syria or North Korea as potential threads are valid. In case of an attack, we would be crying for help. But we are not willing to make any efforts which would serve as a deterrence or prevention. Considering the help the U.S. have played in the past in formation and liberation of our country, it’s dolefully hypocritical that we’re refusing to have the radar base here.

Lately, even the fiercest opponents (except for the communists, naturally) on our political scene have reversed their stands and now, with hesitations, agree on having American military personnel and technologies on our territory, as long as they will later become a part of the anti-missile shield that should be built under the auspices of NATO (ergo the United States).

It’s shameful the ideas of the person who wants to remain anonymous is spreading (on behalf of the Non-Violence organization) get so much attention. While I respect everyone’s right to express his opinion, I fundamentally disagree with and despise Tamas’s ludicrous efforts that are aimed to delude the public into believing it’s omnipotent. The public should simply in no way have a binding say in the matters of national security.

Thomas Friedman would probably not get pied for his latest column for New York Times. On contrary, the generally liberal college students would welcome his latest ideas on the necessary change in the course in which the U.S. is headed. It has become a customary habit to blame the government for any situation, even if the government itself couldn’t have prevented it, like the current credit crunch or a “poor” state of the infrastructure.

First of all, it’s not the current government that is entirely responsible for the turmoil of the financial markets and the prices of gasoline. The monetary policy of the United States is a responsibility of the Fed, the institution that operates independently on any branch of state, and it was its impassiveness in raising interest rates that led to the sharp and bloody drop last August. It was not Bernanke’s impassiveness, but Greenspan’s in the years following the 9/11. From the Friedman’s side it’s a pure hypocrisy (or populism) when he in his books advocates the globalization and cites its numerous benefits for the American companies, whereas in NYT he decides to question it when the American banks get help from global players. (more…)