Citizen Tom

Since we have an election coming up in November, I thought it would a good time to quote one of the first “modern” political pundits.

Every one admits how praiseworthy it is in a prince to keep faith, and to live with integrity and not with craft. Nevertheless our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft, and in the end have overcome those who have relied on their word. You must know there are two ways of contesting,(*) the one by the law, the other by force; the first method is proper to men, the second to beasts; but because the first is frequently not sufficient, it is necessary to have recourse to the second. Therefore it is necessary for a prince to understand how to avail himself of the beast and the man.  –  The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli

Satan makes the most hideous beliefs palatable and seemingly reasonable.  So it is that Machiavelli could give rulers scholarly advice in The Prince.  Therein Machiavelli carefully explained how the end justifies the means.  One can only guess how many rulers say they do not believe Machiavelli and lie.  All we know for certain is that far too many take advice such as Machiavelli would offer into their heart and soul.

Do we the People want leaders who lie to us?  Do we want leaders willing to use any means to achieve their ends?  Those are questions each of us must decide for ourselves.

How can we tell when our leaders lie to us?  When our leaders ask us to believe the end justifies the means, we know our leaders tell us an untruth.   Nonetheless,  it is not necessarily easy to tell when we are being ask to believe the end justifies the means.  Here, for example, we have a rabbi explaining how to solve the problem.

Bernard Berkeley from Glenview, IL:

Dear Rabbi,

Machievelli believed, “The end justifies the means.” What does the Torah offer as a counter-argument?

Dear Bernard Berkeley,

In life, nothing is as simple as a mere five word statement. Let us analyze the statement. Supposing you could save the life of an innocent child (”the end”) and you could do it by lying (”the means”) about his whereabouts to the murderer. In such a case Judaism would definitely say that the end justifies the means. However, supposing I could convince someone of the truth of the Torah (”the end”) by lying (”the means”) about what Torah is, then the Torah would say that it is not justified. Because here the means are a direct contradiction to the end, which is truth. We believe that one should examine each case separately, and indeed Judaism has legal guidelines to teach us how to act in cases of end versus means.

We fall into the trap of choosing inappropriate means when we have a selfish motive.  We are commanded to love others as we love ourselves.  Unfortunately, we are more often concerned about our own feelings.  So we can choose unwisely.   Instead of choosing for the good of all, we each tend to vote for the men and women we believe will further our own selfish interests.

According to the Bible, when the Jews allowed evil men to lead them, the Lord turned his face from them.  Then the Israelites saw for themselves the ineptitude and foolishness that comes from selfishness.  The prophet, Isaiah, provided his own observations in chapter 3 of the Book of Isaiah.  This chapter begins as follows:

Isaiah 3:1-4 (King James Version)

For, behold, the Lord, the LORD of hosts, doth take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the stay and the staff, the whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of water.

The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge, and the prophet, and the prudent, and the ancient,

The captain of fifty, and the honourable man, and the counsellor, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent orator.

And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.

Below I have listed the offices and the major party candidates we will have the opportunity to consider in Gainesville, Virginia, this coming November.

Governor

• Creigh Deeds (D)
• Bob McDonnel (R)

Lieutenant Governor

• Jody Wagner (D)
• Bill Bolling (R)

Attorney General

• Stephen Shannon (D)
• Ken Cuccinelli (R)

House of Delegates, 13th District

• John Bell (D)
• Bob Marshall (R)

In posts to come, we will look at each of these candidate’s platforms.  Then we will ask the following question:

Is the candidate asking us to believe the end justifies the means?

The Prince

Author: Nicolo Machiavelli

I got the following in an email from one of my brothers.  When I read it, I cracked up.

Judge for yourself.  How well do you think this little yarn illustrates how foolish we can actually be?

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Detroit.  In order to increase sales, she decides to allow her loyal customers – most of whom are unemployed alcoholics – to drink now but pay later.  In a ledger, she keeps track of the drinks consumed (thereby granting the customers loans).  Word gets around about Heidi’s drink-now-pay-later marketing strategy and as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi’s bar and soon she has the largest sale volume for any bar in Detroit.  By providing her customers freedom from immediate payment demands, Heidi gets no resistance when she substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed beverages.  Her sales volume increases massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes these customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Heidi’s borrowing limit.  He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the alcoholics as collateral.  At the bank’s corporate headquarters, expert traders transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS.  These securities are then traded on security markets worldwide.

Naive investors don’t really understand that the securities being sold to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed alcoholics.  Nevertheless, their prices continuously climb, and the securities become the top-selling items for some of the nation’s leading brokerage houses, who collect enormous fees on their sales, pay extravagant bonuses to their sales force, who in turn purchase exotic sports cars and multimillion dollar condominiums.

One day, although the bond prices are still climbing, a risk manager at the bank (subsequently fired due to his negativity), decides that the time has come to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi’s bar.  Heidi demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed, they cannot pay back their drinking debts.  Therefore, Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations and so claims bankruptcy.  DRINKBONDS and ALKIBONDS drop in price by 90%.  PUKEBONDS perform better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80%.  The decreased bond asset value destroys the bank’s liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans.

The suppliers of Heidi’s bar, having granted her generous payment extensions and having invested in the securities, are faced with writing off her debt and losing over 80% on her bonds.  Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, and her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays off 50 workers.  The bank and brokerage houses are saved by the Government, following dramatic round-the-clock negotiations by leaders from both political parties.  The funds required for this bailout are obtained by a tax levied on employed middle-class non-drinkers.

Finally, an explanation we can understand …

The Cartoons

It appears that President Barack Obama’s speech writers are going to have to spend more time with a thesaurus.  As Snapped Shot has observed here, Obama is overusing the expression “deeply concerned.”

Just in case some of those enthralled by the Exalted One misunderstand the meaning of this expression, here is the definition.

DEFINITION: Deeply concerned is what one experiences when one steps into deep doo-doo.  Deeply concerned is a euphemism which one uses to avoid the crude  admission that one is in deep doo-doo.

Actual examples as used by the Exalted One:

Obviously we are deeply concerned about the employment rate. What we are still seeing is too many jobs lost – too many families who are worried about whether they are going to be next.  (from here)

massive unemployment = deep doo-doo

In the Middle East, there is deep concern about Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability not simply because of one country wanting nuclear weapons, but the fact that if Iran obtained nuclear weapons, it is an almost — it is almost certain that other countries in the region would then decide to pursue their own programs.  (from here)

nuclear weapons + terrorist henchmen = deep doo-doo

Unfortunately, if overused, the expression deeply concerned will lose its efficacy.  So we can expect the Exalted One to develop a list of synonyms.  Thus Obama will tell us he is deeply troubled (by doo-doo), deeply disquieted (by doo-doo), deeply disturbed (by doo-doo), deeply alarmed (by doo-doo)…..

The Cartoons

Illustrating how President Barack Obama will soothe our deep concerns.

President Obama can continue to be “deeply concerned,” or

He can adopt some of the policies from the previous administration.

UPDATE: For fun, I decided to see what other Virginia blogs had on this topic.  See  Other Views down below.

When I was little, I ran around the house with a towel draped over my back.  With a simple towel tied to my neck, I pretended to be Superman.  No obstacles existed I could not overcome.  No villain could stand before ME and be victorious.

So it is that years latter I thoroughly enjoyed Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson.   As an adult, it was easy to recognize and be amused by the absurdity of a little boy’s fantasies.

We never outgrow our fantasies.  Just as we never cease to dream, we never cease to wish for our desires to become real.  So it is we elect leaders who promise us the sun, the moon, and the stars.  We believe them because we want to believe them, not because they can make our desires real.

Consider the latest escapades of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  Yesterday, the Washington times reported Pelosi admits waterboard briefing.  Amazingly, she also accused the CIA of lying to Congress.  Today the Washington Post reports the CIA Chief Rebuts Pelosi’s Charges.   This is the current CIA Chief, Leon Panetta, an appointee of President Barack Obama.  Pelosi’s charge is so absurd Panetta had no choice except to deny the charge of lying.

What possessed Pelosi to make such a charge?  Wondering, I listened to the press briefing where she made it.

Pelosi begins with self laudatory comments.  She talks about “her job” and her accomplishments.  Does Pelosi live in a dream world?  She obviously wants us to view everything about her through a prism that mirrors only her successes.  Any evidence contrary to the view of her perfection must be the creation of vile enemies.

Imperfection, however, is the normal human condition.  We all are inadequate.  Even Pelosi admits limitations.  Within the text of the prepared statement that prefaced this now infamous press conference, she says the following:

Like all Members of Congress who are briefed on classified information, I have signed oaths pledging not to disclose any of that information. This is an oath I have taken very seriously, and I have always abided by it.

Without saying so, Pelosi implies she was hobbled by her oath.  Because she could not tell anyone about waterboarding, she could not stop waterboarding from happening.  Later, she offers her solution.

Congress and the Administration must review the National Security Act of 1947 to determine if a larger number of Members of Congress should receive classified briefings so that information can be utilized for proper oversight and legislative activity without violating oaths of secrecy.

Given how notorious Washington D.C. is for leaks, one wonders at the advisability of briefing more members Congress on the CIA’s secrets.  But what is revealing is that Pelosi felt she was unable to do her job, exercise Congressional oversight.

Compare the size of the CIA with the rest of the U. S. Government.  Is secrecy the real obstacle?  Our Federal Government cannot set priorities so it can control its spending.  Consider this chart from Wikipedia (here).

In 2010, Federal spending is projected to be $3.6 trillion, and the deficit will exceed $900 billion.  These are numbers we have trouble imagining.  Nonetheless, as of 2008, the Federal Government employed 4.206 million people (here).  Does Pelosi or anyone in Congress have any idea what most of these people are doing?

As strange as it must sound to some, we do not in fact depend upon supermen or superwomen to lead us.  There are no such people.   So we each must look first to God and then to our immediate supervisor for whatever guidance we can get.  Those at the top of the human hierarchy are isolated from us.   Certainly, very few government employees are known to Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama, and the percentage of citizens known to them is even tinier.

What the Nancy Pelosi’s and the Barack Obama’s know is how to get themselves elected.  They know how to buy airtime, print bumper stickers and make pretty speeches.  They know, like the blow fish, how to puff themselves up and make themselves look impressive and powerful.  What they don’t know is how to do is provide real leadership.

Real leaders accept their own limitations.  They don’t pretend they can solve all the world’s problems.  They insist their followers must take personal responsibility for themselves.  Instead of amassing and centralizing power, leaders delegate authority and decisions down the chain.  Unfortunately, our leaders in Washington D. C. seem only interested in puffing themselves up.   One wonders how long will this fantasy will continue.  Hopefully, it will end before the money runs out.

Other Views

The Virginian tells us why he likes Dick Cheney (here).

From On High quotes the CIA Chief (here).

Fishersville Mike wonders if Pelosi is about to lose her crown (here).

Alexa Shrugged observes that Democrats don’t like getting a taste of their own medicine (here).

SWAC Girl calls on Pelosi to resign (here).

84Rules has no doubt about who is lying (here).

Question:  Don’t the Democrat blogs have anything to say about Speaker Pelosi and the CIA ?

Because it has this prejudice that Republicans and only Republicans should select its candidates, the Republican Party has a preference for conventions.  However, not all who call themselves Republican feel the need to exclude those who are not Republicans, and so these folks do not like conventions.  Sometimes they find the strangest reasons to be against conventions.

Not Too Conservative Too Conservative is always good for a laugh.  Check this one out.