John Spencer Yantiss - Politics

<< John Spencer Yantiss

Topics

Opinions

Endorsements do influence the outcome of elections.

The U.S. should act unilaterally against terrorist targets inside Pakistan if their government is unwilling to do so.

Legislation should not be passed requiring Congressional approval for an attack on Iran.

Columbus Day should be celebrated as an official holiday. When a nation's own citizens debunk, demean, and otherwise dismiss the celebrating of its heritage, that nation's death knell has begun to sound. Western cynicism about itself is an exact parallel of the character found in all cultures on the decline. Further, the very cultures that threaten Western society, from without and within, greatly respect SELF-respect, and view the self-flagellation so pervasive in Western society as weakness, to be despised, and certainly not respected. If one wonders why many in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America hate the United States and Europe, it is because of the very thing: Nations and cultures lacking pride and self-esteem are looked upon as weak, base, and to be despised--and overthrown. If you doubt this, do some real, meaningful, INDEPENDENT research, both historical, and current, not relying on the very academia and media which project the hated self-loathing. NO one likes or respects a group which rejects its own heritage, and is ever putting itself down.

Racism has played a role in opposition to Barack Obama. From the traditional usage of the term, no, but from what is euphamistically called "reverse racism" (that is, racism on the part of those usually accusing others of it, to wit, blacks and most liberals), yes. One day, in the not too distant future, "the boy that cried wolf" principle will come into play, in a big way, and all of those who make their living by in fact crying wolf--oh, I mean racism--will find themselves out of work.

Democrats will win the most seats in the 2010 Congressional elections. Since I am a Reputlican--for MOST issues and candidates--I hate to have to say it, but likely the Democrats will win the most seats. Historically, after a change of party in the presidency, for at least two 4-yr cylcles the party of the incumbent chief executive is the overwhelming beneficiary. Unless Obabma's Rooseveltesque policies and actions truly once again make clear that the government can do NOTHING efficiently, except sometimes defending the country, all those dreamy-eyed liberals will think they are still on a honeymoon.

Venezuela should not nationalize its oil industry. For all you pseudo-socialists/communists (dans le mode de Marx), relax, if you live long enough you will get your wish. Socialism and "communisim" (as it is misrepresented and misunderstood in modern cultures and geopolitics) are really nothing more, nor less, than euphemisms for monarchy. If you doubt it, simply compare the Soviet Union (or "Communist" China) to Czarism: 1) Chairman - Czar 2) Politburo - Czar's relatives 3) Communist Party - Aristocracy 4) Serfs - workers (serfs) The cardinal principle of monarchy, socialism, "communism," or any dictatorship, is that meaningful, substantive ownership of property is restricted to the governing class. Though the "grand experiment," to wit, the United States, succeeded for a respectable period of time, it is only a matter of time before the very luxuries of freedom and wealth that were the result of a true democratic republic, produce a high enough level of decadence to result in the excesses and decay of that society. Marx, who pontificated from the material safety of London, and never even saw Russia or any of the future "communist" countries, made the term "communism" (merely a stronger form of socialism) famous, and often popular. The reality is that pure, true communism is in fact pure democracy, neither of which are workable. Only representative (republican) government can ever give the masses a modicum of personal liberty and self-governance. So, those of you who believe that Venezuela should nationalize its oil industry--in other words, socialize it, give the ruling class legal control of it--be patient, your wish will come true, sooner or later. For myself, I hope and pray that it is much later, though the trends in this country are not encouraging. Perhaps you will get your wish all too soon. O, I cannot wait to see the flood of rants and ravings!

Sarah Palin should pursue political office again. As I have said more than once here on wIs, were Ms. Palin a liberal Democrat, her many accomplishments would be heralded from the rooftops, and even her likes and dislikes would be lauded by the pundits. As far as needed leadership in this country, she absolutely should pursue public/political office again; as far as her's and her family's personal life, she should not, and that is a sad commentary on 21st century American society. George Wallace did not receive the level and extent of derision and negative press that Palin has. THAT speaks tellingly to the character, or lack there of, of Democrats and other liberals in the U. S.

Media outlets should not use the word 'torture' when covering Bush-era detainee policies. To all of my fans out there, sorry to disappoint you, but I am not going to detail my reasoning for you. I have yet to receive a comment from one who disagrees with me, and even knows HOW to debate an issue, much less wishes to do so. Any comments I receive, merely restating the implied answer in this "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" question, I shall simply arhive without finishing, and not respond. If you still feel compelled to send some ravings my way, got for it.

Elections should not be held on the weekend.

Infidelity should be grounds for a politician's removal from office. Notwithstanding the wholesale moral decline in mainstream media of all kinds, and a like-minded, wildly vocal majority (though not a staggering one) of urban denizens, those of us who continue to strive for, hope for, and speak out for a moral standard that reflects what used to be known as civilised, even refined society will be vindicated in the long run. Moral decay has always been the precursor to social, political, and national collapse. If you doubt this, do a little serious reading of history--and I do not mean the emasculated fairy-tale books now being used in academia. O, I can hear--and see--the rants and ravings already. To those who cling to the ultimate fallacy that "everything is relative," I ask, "absolutley?" To those who advocate anything-goes-morality (which is in reality amorality, which is itself oxymoronic), I welcome you to the ruins of all preceding cultures and nations. WELCOME! You have seen your future. You may indeed drag our society down to oblivion, but you will not do so without a fight. Rant on!

Mark Sanford should resign as governor of South Carolina. Contrary to most Sanford critics, I do not base my opinion on the PC. It is fashionable to dismiss immorality, and yet lives are shattered by it. Most of the ills of our society--actually, what is fast becoming global society, despite cultural differences--are a direct result of immorality of one sort or another; yet we reject an immovable, absolute moral standard, claiming everything to be "relative"--which is a physical, emotional, and spiritual impossibility--and then wonder why there are such cataclysmic evils as confront us in the 21st century. One who is corrupt, unprincipled in his private life, is far more likely to be so in public affairs. I know that this basis for opinion will generate all sorts of humbugs and virulent comments, but, so be it.

The Obama Administration should issue a statement of support to the Iranian election uprising. I have had to change my stance on this. After prolonged consideration I must assert that we, particularly in the West, have turned our backs on our own principles, which is one reason why radical Muslims, terrorists, and all other hard-line regimes and groups have the power they do today--they STAND by their principles, and we do not. I have let myself to be lulled into allowing my own principles to bow to the current trend in appeasement. I believe that we are now seeing the Patrick Henry version--the only one worth having--of passion arise amongst the Iranian people: "Give me liberty, or give me death." The Iranian people are voicing their own sentiments, their own wishes, and their own position on how they want their nation governed. WE are going to say, either directly or indirectly, "Ah, well, let us not be hasty?" If that had been the prevailing opinion in 1776, the "noble experiment" would never have taken place, and we would not even be discussing this.

Protests over the Iranian election will lead to a revolution. Absolutely! Whether it will be immediate and swift, as when the Mullahs themselves were ceded power by a misplaced resentment of modernity by a vocal minority (of course, not including women), or over time, and slowly, as in post-Tiananmen Square China, remains to be seen. The former, I hope.

The international community should not recognize the Iranian election results. Not at this precise moment! Ayatollah Kameni has even called for an investigation. Though I doubt that this is a sincere effort to look inot likely fraud, at this point we should no more recognise the initial "election results," than we should endorse the demonstrations.

Guantanamo Bay detainees should not be moved to U.S. prisons.

North Korea should be on the U.S. government's "State Sponsors of Terrorism" list.

I do not support President Obama's message to the Muslim world. It is the Muslim world that should be "reaching out" to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, et alia. We, meaning the vast majority of Americans, and all non-Muslims, are the ones who have been under attack, by direct armaments, and by demonstrations with violence and threats of attack, any and everywhere on the globe to which terrorists have access. The virulent hatred displayed by Muslims around the world, when anyone publically speaks the truth about the history of Islam, or its founder, is only indicative of the permanent jihad COMMANDED by Muhammed in the Koran. This violently anti-anything-other-than-Islam mindset, backed up by action, is supported by those whom America supports, both economically and militarily, and Obama and his supporters feel that WE should be reaching out to THEM? To those who still like to invoke "The Crusades," as if they were still going on (also ignoring the true history of "The Crusades," not a homogeneous series of events, by any means), and wish to blame the West in general, and Ameirca in particular, for desiring to maintain its own culture, principles, and values, I ask, is not the right to do so at least as valid for non-Muslims as Muslims? Of course, that question is moot for all those who are willingly steeped in self-hatred--a phenomenon historically common to nations and cultures who have been successful for more than two hundred years. Also of course, for those who do not truly, independently study history, all is moot. For that reason we are destined to repeat it, over and over again. Let me hasten to make clear that America, and the rest of the non-Muslim world, should be eminently open to any peaceful, conciliatory, and substantive overtures extended by official governments of Muslim states. The difficulty arises in the fact that the only leader to ever publically tender such suggested proposals was assassinated by some of his own countrymen. Anwar Sadat was never given the chance to demonstrate what might be possible if Arabs and other Muslims were to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. For those who feel compelled to respond to my view, PLEASE read my comments in their entirety, not selectively.

Bill O'Reilly should not bear responsibility for the murder of Dr. Tiller.

The U.S. invasion and occupation has had a positive effect on Iraq.

Bobby Jindal has the best chance at becoming the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 2012. Right now. In another year, who knows--no one.

Incandescent light bulbs should not be banned.

Sonia Sotomayor is not a good choice to replace Justice Souter. In her remarks and actions in Ricci v. DeStefano, where she "was chastised by fellow Clinton-appointee Jose Cabranes for going to extraordinary lengths to dispense with claims of unfair treatment raised by firefighters," she has demonstrated that in her view caucasians, most particularly non-Hispanic, have no rights to Constitutionally mandated equal opportunity.

'Waterboarding' should not be characterized as torture. It is apodictic that the greatest tragedy of history is that the masses have never learned from it, primarily because they never knew it. Only in a nation in which its only experience with war, not more than a century past, has been shockingly, devastatingly unexpected, but nonetheless severely isolated, localised, can its citizens, in true pollyanna fashion, view necessarily tough--though clearly non-injurious, measures, including interrogation, as torture. This is the jaded, blase perception of what is right and wrong, vis-a-vis measures necessary for the safety of one's self and one's fellows, typical of a nation and culture for which security is taken for granted, and protection of hard-won freedom has become passe.

The Obama Administration will have a negative impact on the Middle East peace process.

Syria should be held accountable for the actions of Hezbollah.

Iran should be held accountable for Hezbollah's actions.

The cease-fire in Lebanon will not maintain peace in the region.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine should be considered a terrorist group.

Israel should not withdraw from the Golan Heights as part of a peace agreement with Syria.

Hamas is a terrorist organization.

It is not appropriate to label the situation in the Palestinian territories a crime of apartheid. Liberal media and politicians have done a splendid job of invoking one of Hitler's premier dicta: "If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed." The term, "Palestinian territories," defines a myth, a regioinal ethno-political chimaera. "Palestine" itself, as the modern name of a territory, was created by the British government, under their mandate, after WWI. There is no single people dwelling in the area called Palestine. For those who think that they believe that there should be a "Palestinian" state, to whom should it belong? The Muslims who either reside in Gaza or the "West Bank?" Or those who currently reside in Jordan or Syria, who believe that they would wish to reside in such a state? To the Semitic Christians who reside in any of the above areas, or Lebanon, which has, and historically has had, a huge Christian population? To the non-Hebrew semitic Jews, those who, either recently or sevearl centuries back, converted to Judaism? Exactly who is being kept separate from whom? And I am not requesting a barrage of virulent comments, supporting the standard rants and cries about Israeli "oppression" of Muslims who happen to live in one of the above areas. If someone cares to address the multiplicity of ethnic and religious groups, living for untold generations in the region now referred to as Palestine, I invite it.

Israel should not negotiate with Hezbollah. One of the most fatuous of socially destructive notions to gain widespread public purchase in the latter half of the 20th century is that the threatened targets of assissination should negotiate with the threatening assassin. Look up the etymology of the word. An individual or group which does not acknowledge the right of another individual or group to exist, cannot rationally be expected to engage in reasoned discussions with the one (or group) whose right is denied.

Timothy Geithner should not remain Secretary of the Treasury. I have changed my mind on this one; it is conceivable that a successor could be more pro-private enterprise, and unlikely that any other choice--at least for the first 1/4 of the 21st century--would be LESS.

Timothy Geithner is not a good choice for Barack Obama's Treasury Secretary.

President Obama should not release new photos depicting U.S. detainee abuse. Are you still beating your wife? Same ol', same ol'. To call rough interrogation of terrorists "abuse" is itself socially abusive. It is far beyond logic and reason that 21st century Western society has deteriorated to the point that those who would slaughter and TRULY torture (as in maiming (as in cutting off limbs; and breaking bones, and allowing them to grow back together crooked; starving; forcing to drink urine--as did the N. Vietnamese to POWs), according to ultra-liberals, should be coddled and treated gently. Even if the Geneva Conventions were applicable--and they are not applicable to terrorists, or pirates for that matter--they were never established to molly-coddle combatants. People who are screaming and ranting, calling the tough interrogation of Guantanamo detainees "torture" and "abuse," do not know the meaning of those words. Truth is, there ARE NO pictures of detainee abuse. There are pictures of tough interrogation. For those of you who care to know--as opposed to those who do not wish to know the truth--all four branches of our military have used all of the techniques, now being called "torture" and "abuse," in the training of our own service people, for decades. My stepfather was waterboarded, deprived of sleep, slapped, confined to a small cubicle (and much more constricting than the "abusive" confinements of those poor detainees), confined with insects, etc. EVERY ONE of those techniques--EVERY ONE--has been used to toughen, strengthen our service personnel, preparing them for as many harsh conditions as possible. Survival training is far harsher than that: withstanding temperature extremes, lack of food, sleep deprivation, and much, much more. It is truly sad that, in the name of morality, those who deny a basis for morality, want to demonise those who protected us for eight years, all for political and socialist reasons. As for Abu Ghraib, that was an entirely different situation and story, and certainly was abuse. That did not even have the redemptive motive of eliciting information vital to the security and protection of Americans.

It is not appropriate for a sign that reads, "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds" to appear on government property alongside religious displays. The quoted clause is a statement of belief, belief being the cenrtal component of religion--oxymoronic at best. Anyone who believes that he or she does not have a belief system, is engaging in the purest form of self-deception.

Benjamin Netanyahu should be the next Prime Minister of Israel.

Race had a positive impact on Barack Obama's election victory.

Arlen Specter's switch to the Democratic Party will have a positive effect on the GOP. Specter has always been a specter (pun intended) of malcontent within the GOP. His defection will be a boon to the Republican Party. He has always been a loose cannon, and at the most inopportune time voted with the Democrats anyway; let them have him.