The fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves

I’m sure it will be a matter of days before we start reading reports the Electoral College was overrun by Russian spies.

I believe people should be accountable for their actions.  Whether they are good and bad or are right or wrong. For me, the last person who was perfect died on a cross.  I’m looking for old age.

If two people argue both people are to blame.  At work, if a manager needs to fire an employee or the employee quits, the manager also failed.  It means the manager not put the employee in a position to succeed. The same is true if a player on a team struggles.  The coaches share the responsibility.  You get the picture.

I have little tolerance for people who make excuses, blame others, or subscribe to the vast conspiracy against them.  In short, I have little tolerance Liberals.  The Liberal philosophy taken in its purity is fine – I just do not believe in it but I understand the premise.

I do not understand the way Liberals think.

Their behavior since November 8 is Exhibit A.  At first, it was contesting the vote count.  That’s why Hillary Clinton lost.  The voting machines were hacked.  That didn’t work so it was the Russians who stole the election for President-elect Donald Trump.

When that fell on deaf ears, the reason she lost was because Trump inspired the white angry man vote.  Why is it noble when 95 percent of black voters vote for President Obama but racist when 59 percent of white voters vote for Trump?

Then we had to listen to the Faithless Elector bull for the past two weeks.  Let’s see how the Liberals explain Clinton losing five electors and Trump losing two.  Was it a vast Right Wing conspiracy again?

I cannot say I am surprised.  The term “faithless” seems more appropriate for Liberals.

What will it take for Liberals to finally admit they lost?  They can get their participation trophy at the door but they lost.  And the loss is well-deserved as demonstrated by their behavior since the election.  We hear nothing but excuses, blame, and rationalizations.  They point to everything and everyone but themselves.

At what point do they finally look in the mirror and admit the majority of the country does not want the status quo?

After eight years of policies that weaken America abroad, weaken the economy domestically, and dampen the American spirit it is time to make America great again.  Perhaps that sentiment is more than a slogan.  Perhaps it captures the mood of Americans and shows that someone in authority actually understands the plight of the common person brought on by terrible policies.

What more evidence do the Liberals need when the majority of the states and counties voted for Trump?  Clinton won the popular vote by 2.6 million votes that should not be ignored by those in Washington.  However, when you look at the state-by-state results Clinton won New York and California by a combined 6,002,850 votes.

What Liberals need to understand is the other 48 states are also part of the country.  After being ignored for too many years, the people rose up and sent a message.

If Liberals hope to get a seat at the adult table in the next election cycle, they need to get rid of the elitists and be re-acquainted with real Americans.

It starts with acknowledging the obvious.  The reason we will inaugurate Donald Trump president is he offered a solution and Liberals offered more of the same.  Perhaps it was not because he inspired the worst in us.  Perhaps it is because he inspired us.


About Armando Diana

A freelance writer for more than 30 years I covered the political scene in New Jersey which can prepare anyone for national politics. I have no fancy political degrees and I'm definitely not a lawyer - I am a common person who is fed up with politics. I want leaders focused on doing what is right for the country, not for them.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves

  1. I take umbrage with your article. You have confused accountability with consequences. To be fair, this confusion started a few decades ago. It is much like accepting blame for one’s actions but suffering no consequences as a result of those actions. I believe that is the point you are trying to grasp. Not all actions have consequences but many do. If one touches a hat stove with one’s fingers the skin is likely to suffer damage from the heat. Thus the consequences of touching a hot stove with one’s fingers means that one burns the skin and must suffer the pain that comes from such contact. But if one’s actions have no direct and immediate consequences then there is no feed back mechanism where one is readily informed about the poor choice in actions made. Note that Hillary took full accountability for having a private email server to convey classified information in an unsecured manner. Yet what were the consequences of her actions? So far, not much except the loss of a political campaign.

    Then there is the confusion about what a “liberal” is. I would believe you are referring to a “progressive” liberal. An individual can exhibit a “liberal” mindset that is based on a concern for the individual in society. Children should not suffer the consequences of the poor decisions made by their parents is a liberal point of view. In a sense, such thought is enabled by economic development and growth since it is a luxury of feelings and emotions. In a highly competitive setting where survival of the individual is often determined by a fitness for living and overcoming adversity, then who can argue that we should not give charity a greater ability to “do the right thing”? Of course charity is something of a luxury when individuals in groups are living on the edge.

    No, your argument is with the progressive, that religious adherent to a particular political ideal. That is what communism is about, the adherence to a political ideal with a religious zeal and fanaticism. A progressive wants to change society for the better, to improve it, to create a new whole cloth from the remnants of the bolt of society and culture. A liberal really only wants to make a difference in the lives of others. There is a vast chasm of difference between the two. The progressive perceives flaws and errors and mistakes in the social structure. Surely others can see these problems and if only a progressive can point them out others will be able to see those things that need to be changed. Indeed, the world or society is perfectible. A progressive believes religiously in the end of history when all human kind will be perfected and guided by the spirit of progressivism. It is a belief in utopia a la John Milton in Paradise Lost. It is the belief in that spirit of communism that will lead the workers out of a dictatorship and become governed by that spirit of communism as Karl Marx tried to convince us.

    You argument is whit those who believe themselves to be part of that “elite group” who know the answers and must convince the rest of us to follow in their beliefs and accept them as the temporary dictators until we see the light and embrace the true belief. That is the ultimate logical outcome of a progressive belief system. Of course not one of them will even consider such an argument but that is the logical expression. Everyone shall know his place and act according to his place. The progressive is a closet fascist and that is what you find distasteful. The progressive ideology is a lie. The road to serfdom is lined with good intentions.

    • Thank you for your response. I think we are splitting hairs but saying the same thing. I disagree with your point on consequences. Every action has a consequence – it may not be the consequence some feel is deserved but it’s a consequence nonetheless. For example, most anti-Clinton people believe her consequence should be jail. That is a reasonable expectation but just because she does not go to jail does not mean she did not face a consequence for her e-mail server debacle.

      When it comes to Liberal versus Conservative I dealt with that ism this post. I understand the competing philosophies well and use the term Liberals and Progressives interchangeably. I do that mostly because the Democrat party has been overrun by the Progressives element that dominate their agenda. In fact, I think both parties need an upheaval – that or they should move to four parties: Democrat. Republican, Progressive, and Conservative. Regardless of the title most people enter politics with good intentions but get corrupted by the power and money. Once in office, it no longer is a matter of serving their constituents but it becomes about getting re-elected. It is a way of life for them and that needs to change.

      • My point about consequences versus accountability is the difference between action and inaction. How many times have we seen individuals cowed into “accepting responsibility” for some decision, policy, or other action and yet there were no other consequences other than a temporary loss of face? When an individual commits a serious crime and is brought to the bar of justice he is being held accountable at that point. But the consequences become what justice (punishment, retribution, corrective action, etc) are meted out. Saying mea culpa may be saying I’m accountable, but paying a fine or serving time (our way of punishing or attempting to correct bad behavior is based on the loss of freedom) becomes the consequence for the misbehavior. Any system of rules always involves those two actions: holding individuals responsible for their behavior, and invoking the appropriate reward for that behavior. We encourage positive behavior through positive rewards and try to curb and correct bad behavior through negative rewards or even punishment.

        Our political systems evolved as small groups or tribes where the carrying capacity of social interaction peaks at 160 individuals. The rules of expected behavior are orally transmitted and generally a viable part of the culture. But once the number reaches about 160 individuals, give or take, the tribe splits into two groups. One may see this process in the histories all over the world and it still continues in a few countries where the population tends to be sparse. But as the population density increases we find a need to turn to “documented” rules that are handed down to society. A council of elders whose collective memories contain all variations of rule and order or in modern times written codes of conduct called public laws complete with professional judges and advocates to so advise society. Today we either look back to Rousseau and the rights of the individual amidst the crowd or we look forward to the progressives whose focus is the rights of the state in the midst of the crowd. We fail to see that society is that process of the individual finding a place in a multitude of group memberships. The first group we join is by default, the family. We literally have no choice in the matter. But through out our lives we try to pick and choose the groups we wish to be members of and operate within.

        Perhaps the largest group we ever join, formally or informally, is that of a political group or party. It is also one of the groups over which we have little influence. It may well be that our political parties have reached or gone beyond their carrying capacity. And it may well be that like China and India, as a country our population density has surpassed its carrying capacity for governance. China and India have reached the tipping point of chaos in political matters and could descend into disorder and geographical break up. But that is another story. A billion or more people is a very large group to govern without very strong centralized power.

        Back to the problem of corruption. Yes, this problem has worried many a thinker and philosopher over the centuries. In any group the leader or leaders usually represent the closest alignment to the goals, the values, the visions of the group membership in general. That is why they are leaders. I have read a great many words on leadership and everyone always leaves out this one glaring fact. When a change in leadership occurs, the new leader who is wise aligns himself with the central vision and after being accepted then slowly influences those goals, values, morals, dreams, visions, etc of the group. But the group can only be moved so far with out some manner of compulsion. As we saw with the election of Trump, he embodied the leadership role more than Hillary. He spoke for more of the electorate (voting fraud not withstanding). And once in office we may try to hold him “accountable” but the only consequence we can enforce will be in four years when we decide to either vote him a second term or elect the opposition. If he chooses to not stand for re-election then we will render our judgment on his successor. The question may be, “Why do the corrupt stay in office?” Simple, they may still represent the goals, values, and visions of the majority. The individual voter who supports corruption is just as guilty as the one who commits the corruption. Ironically the individual voter gets little if any of the rewards of corruption.

        Finally, on the number of political parties in America, we officially have two major parties and a couple of very small groups. Yet, like most of the European states, we elect and govern by use of coalitions of political parties. No one calls himself a member of the neocon party and there is no official Neocon Party. Yet we find adherents to that group in both the Democrat and Republican Parties. As we head closed to four hundred million people in this geographical area we will see the two major partied break apart and the smaller groups make great gains in membership. Then we shall reach the hallowed grounds of European parliamentary heaven. I think I might be dead before I see this rapture.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s