Probably the last real conservative on the national stage was Dwight Eisenhower. In his farewell address he did not use either liberal or conservative. See http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/dwightdeisenhowerfarewell.html.
The most famous assertion he made was his warning about the “military-industrial complex”:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Just like Washington’s “Farewell Address”, so-called “conservatives” completely ignore the advice of two of the most prominent, believable, and thoughtful conservatives.
I hope you can take the time to read Eisenhower’s farewell address. If you do, you may agree that Eisenhower was among the last of the true conservatives. In Minnesota they were rejected by the Republican Party as RINOs (Republican in name only).
Although John B. Anderson was a bit quixotic and supported some radical candidates, like Ralph Nader, I consider him more a true Republican than almost any other prominent Republican. i think Rep. Bill Frenzel and Governor Arne Carlson represent true conservatives. Arne Carlson still blogs at http://govarnecarlson.blogspot.com.
Showing posts with label Bill Frenzel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Frenzel. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
Thursday, June 05, 2014
I am a Democratic Party leader?
Way back in 2008 I donated ten or twenty bucks to the Obama campaign. Ever since then I receive pleas for money and for filling out a “survey” from the Democratic National Party.
“OFFICIAL PARTY BUSINESS - OPEN IMMEDIATELY”
The letter, this time “from” Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, includes:
Melvyn, you are one of a select group of party leaders…
I am a Democratic Party leader? The last time I was an official party leader was in the 70s when I was a Republican precinct financial chair. Then came Reagan. I’ve been wandering in the political desert ever since with a couple of forays to support one or another independent candidate.
Now Reagan looks like a liberal and my only choice is pretty much to vote Democratic. The Democrats are several steps closer to reality and practical governance than the Republicans. Where are the likes of John Anderson, Arne Carlson, and Bill Frenzel?
I scribbled on a plea for the 2012 Presidential campaign that Obama should depend on his big donors rather than small donors he courted so well in 2008. I haven’t sent any money since.
Still the pleas come.
The return envelope is labeled:
SURVEY RESPONSE ENCLOSED – PLEASE RUSH
As with all political surveys, the questions and answer selections are biased toward the bias of the party printing the survey. They are meant to affirm the party’s beliefs rather than shape them.
Well, I will vote in November. That is a lot more than I can say about many who call themselves Democrats.
“OFFICIAL PARTY BUSINESS - OPEN IMMEDIATELY”
The letter, this time “from” Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, includes:
Melvyn, you are one of a select group of party leaders…
I am a Democratic Party leader? The last time I was an official party leader was in the 70s when I was a Republican precinct financial chair. Then came Reagan. I’ve been wandering in the political desert ever since with a couple of forays to support one or another independent candidate.
Now Reagan looks like a liberal and my only choice is pretty much to vote Democratic. The Democrats are several steps closer to reality and practical governance than the Republicans. Where are the likes of John Anderson, Arne Carlson, and Bill Frenzel?
I scribbled on a plea for the 2012 Presidential campaign that Obama should depend on his big donors rather than small donors he courted so well in 2008. I haven’t sent any money since.
Still the pleas come.
The return envelope is labeled:
SURVEY RESPONSE ENCLOSED – PLEASE RUSH
As with all political surveys, the questions and answer selections are biased toward the bias of the party printing the survey. They are meant to affirm the party’s beliefs rather than shape them.
Well, I will vote in November. That is a lot more than I can say about many who call themselves Democrats.
Friday, March 14, 2014
Are you still writing for the Reader?
I am often asked this by long-time acquaintances. Because I’ve been writing the “Party of One” almost regularly since early October 2013, I’m tempted to ask in return, “When did you stop reading the Reader?” But I don’t.
I appreciate those acquaintances that tell me that they like a column, but please tell me which one. I am thinking about three columns at the same time – the one that is already in print, the one I have submitted for the next issue, and the next one that I have sketched out. I may have forgotten the column published two weeks ago.
How do I decide what to write about? My stock answer is “Writing what I damn well please since 1999.” I have this on my “business” card. What damn well pleases me can be on almost anything: current politics, news stories, computers and other gadgets, every day mundane observations, or just whimsy.
Sometimes the ideas almost flow from my fingertips. Last week’s “Free market in telecommunications?” was one. I think I wrote it in two sittings. Sometimes I have to do quite a bit of research. “How folks change rivers” was one. Sometimes I have to pull ideas out of my head; ideas can be like teeth, loose but not coming out. This column is one of those.
Writing about politics is rather easy. Sometimes the political class has some good ideas; sometimes it has some really, really bad ideas. Unfortunately, the bad ideas get more coverage than the good ideas. Good ideas do get coverage, but too often good ideas get attacked more often than explained because the good ideas don’t fit somebody’s idea of a “perfect world”.
Once upon a time, I was active in the Minnesota Republican Party. Then there was Ronald Reagan. Fortunately, there were still the likes of Rep. Bill Frenzel and to-be Gov. Arne Carlson, politicians who were more concerned with resolving problems than promoting an ideology. I have yet to see a Congressional newsletter like Bill Frenzel’s. He wrote critically about what Congress did, not what he did. Almost without exception, Congressional newsletters and websites are photo-ops showing how “hard” the representative is “working” for his or her “hard-working” constituents.
Promoting ideology now seems to be the only politics that is acceptable, no matter the party.
This situation does make it easier to write a column. As the adage states, ”It’s easier to criticize than offer solutions.”
I do try to offer solutions now and then, but few people seem to take them seriously. I should have a bit of humility though, if they were such great solutions shouldn’t my blog get more attention from American readers and less from Russian reverse spammers and shouldn’t my writings spread wider than a weekly newspaper in a small city?
One aspect of our lives that is easier to criticize than offer solutions is technology; whether it is all the glitches in the rollout of the government health insurance or it is all the problems we have trying to have our computers and other gadgets perform consistently.
I use my computer and gadgets for a large variety of tasks – from writing this column to preparing taxes. Certain software also allows me to have the same data on my computer as well as on my gadgets. For example, I can use email on my laptop, my iPad, and my iPhone. A copy of every received and sent email will be on all three.
Almost every program I use does far more than the programs I wrote for the Macintosh over 25 years ago. I consider my programs of then almost as toys. Because modern programs are far more complex than mine of yesteryear, that complexity leads to a longer problem list than my nine-page problem list when I folded my company.
Sometimes I write a bit of wordplay. “You can write haiku” was one of these. Writing that column was almost a word torrent. One thing led to another. The only hard part was making sure I had the 5-7-5 syllable form. I think I missed on one or two.
Since then I came up with a Japanese haiku from my very small Japanese vocabulary.
Wakarimasen!
Zero, ichi, ni, san, shi!
Wakarimasu!
I don’t understand!
Zero, uh-one, two, three, four!
I do understand.
Both versions are a stretch. Technically the “masu” at the end is two syllables, but most Westerners only hear “mas”. I had to use “uh-one” to follow the same number pattern.
Every so often an acquaintance asks me to write about some topic; generally he or she is asking me to report on the topic. Sorry, I don’t do reporting. I’ll leave that to those who want to interview lots of people and sift through the various views.
The closest that I came to that was “Does ‘environmentally friendly’ copper mining exist?” I found more sources about this topic than I would ever read. Some of the sources gave reasons that it does; some gave reasons that it doesn’t. Every “pro” source I found was countered by a source, neutral or “anti”, that showed otherwise.
Will I keep writing for the Reader? You betcha! I have a long list of notes in my computer and on scraps of paper that can provide material for several years to come.
Now I ask, are you still reading the Reader?
I appreciate those acquaintances that tell me that they like a column, but please tell me which one. I am thinking about three columns at the same time – the one that is already in print, the one I have submitted for the next issue, and the next one that I have sketched out. I may have forgotten the column published two weeks ago.
How do I decide what to write about? My stock answer is “Writing what I damn well please since 1999.” I have this on my “business” card. What damn well pleases me can be on almost anything: current politics, news stories, computers and other gadgets, every day mundane observations, or just whimsy.
Sometimes the ideas almost flow from my fingertips. Last week’s “Free market in telecommunications?” was one. I think I wrote it in two sittings. Sometimes I have to do quite a bit of research. “How folks change rivers” was one. Sometimes I have to pull ideas out of my head; ideas can be like teeth, loose but not coming out. This column is one of those.
Writing about politics is rather easy. Sometimes the political class has some good ideas; sometimes it has some really, really bad ideas. Unfortunately, the bad ideas get more coverage than the good ideas. Good ideas do get coverage, but too often good ideas get attacked more often than explained because the good ideas don’t fit somebody’s idea of a “perfect world”.
Once upon a time, I was active in the Minnesota Republican Party. Then there was Ronald Reagan. Fortunately, there were still the likes of Rep. Bill Frenzel and to-be Gov. Arne Carlson, politicians who were more concerned with resolving problems than promoting an ideology. I have yet to see a Congressional newsletter like Bill Frenzel’s. He wrote critically about what Congress did, not what he did. Almost without exception, Congressional newsletters and websites are photo-ops showing how “hard” the representative is “working” for his or her “hard-working” constituents.
Promoting ideology now seems to be the only politics that is acceptable, no matter the party.
This situation does make it easier to write a column. As the adage states, ”It’s easier to criticize than offer solutions.”
I do try to offer solutions now and then, but few people seem to take them seriously. I should have a bit of humility though, if they were such great solutions shouldn’t my blog get more attention from American readers and less from Russian reverse spammers and shouldn’t my writings spread wider than a weekly newspaper in a small city?
One aspect of our lives that is easier to criticize than offer solutions is technology; whether it is all the glitches in the rollout of the government health insurance or it is all the problems we have trying to have our computers and other gadgets perform consistently.
I use my computer and gadgets for a large variety of tasks – from writing this column to preparing taxes. Certain software also allows me to have the same data on my computer as well as on my gadgets. For example, I can use email on my laptop, my iPad, and my iPhone. A copy of every received and sent email will be on all three.
Almost every program I use does far more than the programs I wrote for the Macintosh over 25 years ago. I consider my programs of then almost as toys. Because modern programs are far more complex than mine of yesteryear, that complexity leads to a longer problem list than my nine-page problem list when I folded my company.
Sometimes I write a bit of wordplay. “You can write haiku” was one of these. Writing that column was almost a word torrent. One thing led to another. The only hard part was making sure I had the 5-7-5 syllable form. I think I missed on one or two.
Since then I came up with a Japanese haiku from my very small Japanese vocabulary.
Wakarimasen!
Zero, ichi, ni, san, shi!
Wakarimasu!
I don’t understand!
Zero, uh-one, two, three, four!
I do understand.
Both versions are a stretch. Technically the “masu” at the end is two syllables, but most Westerners only hear “mas”. I had to use “uh-one” to follow the same number pattern.
Every so often an acquaintance asks me to write about some topic; generally he or she is asking me to report on the topic. Sorry, I don’t do reporting. I’ll leave that to those who want to interview lots of people and sift through the various views.
The closest that I came to that was “Does ‘environmentally friendly’ copper mining exist?” I found more sources about this topic than I would ever read. Some of the sources gave reasons that it does; some gave reasons that it doesn’t. Every “pro” source I found was countered by a source, neutral or “anti”, that showed otherwise.
Will I keep writing for the Reader? You betcha! I have a long list of notes in my computer and on scraps of paper that can provide material for several years to come.
Now I ask, are you still reading the Reader?
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Have Republican defections gotten a big boost?
Former Florida Republican Governor Charlie Christ has come out in support of Barack Obama. See
"Here's why I'm backing Obama", Tampa Bay Times, 2012-08-26.
Once upon a time I was active in the Republican Party, and then it nominated Ronald Reagan over John Anderson. I did keep voting for Bill Frenzel, Rep., 3rd District, MN, until he retired. And I voted for Arne Carlson for governor when he replaced the Republican candidate who behaved inappropriately in a swimming pool with teen-age girls.
And the Republicans have gotten even worse. If they really looked at Ronald Reagan's ability to compromise, they would consider him a "Marxist".
I keep hoping the current Republicans will self-destruct and be replaced by a common-sense party based on facts rather than ideology. Meanwhile, I feel compelled to vote for Democrats even though they try to cater to too many narrow interests.
"Here's why I'm backing Obama", Tampa Bay Times, 2012-08-26.
Once upon a time I was active in the Republican Party, and then it nominated Ronald Reagan over John Anderson. I did keep voting for Bill Frenzel, Rep., 3rd District, MN, until he retired. And I voted for Arne Carlson for governor when he replaced the Republican candidate who behaved inappropriately in a swimming pool with teen-age girls.
And the Republicans have gotten even worse. If they really looked at Ronald Reagan's ability to compromise, they would consider him a "Marxist".
I keep hoping the current Republicans will self-destruct and be replaced by a common-sense party based on facts rather than ideology. Meanwhile, I feel compelled to vote for Democrats even though they try to cater to too many narrow interests.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Polling the self-selected
The political world is filled with polls that are targeted toward audiences that agree with the questions. These polls are generally sent only to those who are predisposed to "positive" answers to the questions. The Democratic National Committee does it. The Republican National Committee does it. News media with a particular slant do it. Political offshoots of all kinds do it.
I generally avoid polls of all kinds, no matter what the source. I don't even like the follow-up calls from businesses with whom I plan to buy again and again.
My Congressional Representative, Chip Cravaack, is one of the worst offenders in the biased presentation of polls. His latest is about "What Would You Cut", a list of three items he would like to cut from the budget - replacing TSA employees with private contractors, dispose of excess baggage scanners, and "Terminate a National Science Foundation program aimed at shaping public opinion on climate change". On the last he writes, "A review of prior grants made by the program shows a repeated pattern of funding activities intended to sway public opinion on a controversial topic about which the facts remain in heated dispute." The controversy is coming from those who ignore the facts and have a lot of money to lose if there is to be a serious mitigation of climate change.
This particular poll is at http://cravaack.house.gov/press-releases/cravaack-what-would-youcut/ as of 2012-05-15. Cravaack's staff will probably reuse this URL for a subsequent poll.
Rather than submit my answers, I sent the following webmail to Rep. Cravaack:
"With regard to your "What would you cut" email and many others, please have a chat with Bill Frenzel on how to communicate with constituents.
Rep. Frenzel wrote facts about what Congress was doing, not what he wanted constituents to agree with.
Each one of your "What would you cut" items makes it very clear what you want constituents to answer.
There are many much larger costs for things that are not really needed but have large constituencies supporting them.
I hope I don't have to tell you what these are; that would tell you what my biases are."
Bill Frenzel was the Representative from the suburbs of Minneapolis. He would be considered a RINO by today's Republicans. He wrote quite interesting newsletters about Congress that hardly ever touted what he was doing.
I generally avoid polls of all kinds, no matter what the source. I don't even like the follow-up calls from businesses with whom I plan to buy again and again.
My Congressional Representative, Chip Cravaack, is one of the worst offenders in the biased presentation of polls. His latest is about "What Would You Cut", a list of three items he would like to cut from the budget - replacing TSA employees with private contractors, dispose of excess baggage scanners, and "Terminate a National Science Foundation program aimed at shaping public opinion on climate change". On the last he writes, "A review of prior grants made by the program shows a repeated pattern of funding activities intended to sway public opinion on a controversial topic about which the facts remain in heated dispute." The controversy is coming from those who ignore the facts and have a lot of money to lose if there is to be a serious mitigation of climate change.
This particular poll is at http://cravaack.house.gov/press-releases/cravaack-what-would-youcut/ as of 2012-05-15. Cravaack's staff will probably reuse this URL for a subsequent poll.
Rather than submit my answers, I sent the following webmail to Rep. Cravaack:
"With regard to your "What would you cut" email and many others, please have a chat with Bill Frenzel on how to communicate with constituents.
Rep. Frenzel wrote facts about what Congress was doing, not what he wanted constituents to agree with.
Each one of your "What would you cut" items makes it very clear what you want constituents to answer.
There are many much larger costs for things that are not really needed but have large constituencies supporting them.
I hope I don't have to tell you what these are; that would tell you what my biases are."
Bill Frenzel was the Representative from the suburbs of Minneapolis. He would be considered a RINO by today's Republicans. He wrote quite interesting newsletters about Congress that hardly ever touted what he was doing.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Give me those old-time politicians
Write a short letter or email to a contemporary politician and get back a lengthy position paper that may or may not address the issue that you brought up. Read a contemporary politician's newsletter and you find that the I's have it. Both Republicans and Democrats do this.
OK, I'll back off a bit. Most local politicians in Duluth respond briefly and to the point.
OK, maybe I've been spoiled by two Republican former members of Congress.
I generally agreed with Bill Frenzel, former Representative from the 3rd District of Minnesota, which covered many of the western suburbs of Minneapolis. He wrote model newsletters that related objectively what Congress was doing, not what he sponsored or voted on. He was elected again and again, partly with my vote and maybe a small contribution.
I generally disagreed with Rudy Boschwitz, former Senator from Minnesota. Among his mantras that I didn't like was "across the board cuts". Yeah, cut the kids' milk budget and Dad's beer budget an equal percentage. Why not leave the milk budget the same and let Dad do without beer? Anyhow, Rudy served in the days before the internet and communication with him was by letter. He answered by returning the letter with a short to-the-point comment on it and a smily face. I hope I can find at least one of these somewhere in my files.
OK, I'll back off a bit. Most local politicians in Duluth respond briefly and to the point.
OK, maybe I've been spoiled by two Republican former members of Congress.
I generally agreed with Bill Frenzel, former Representative from the 3rd District of Minnesota, which covered many of the western suburbs of Minneapolis. He wrote model newsletters that related objectively what Congress was doing, not what he sponsored or voted on. He was elected again and again, partly with my vote and maybe a small contribution.
I generally disagreed with Rudy Boschwitz, former Senator from Minnesota. Among his mantras that I didn't like was "across the board cuts". Yeah, cut the kids' milk budget and Dad's beer budget an equal percentage. Why not leave the milk budget the same and let Dad do without beer? Anyhow, Rudy served in the days before the internet and communication with him was by letter. He answered by returning the letter with a short to-the-point comment on it and a smily face. I hope I can find at least one of these somewhere in my files.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
"The people" want town meetings?
"Duluth gets its wish…a meeting with [Rep.] Cravaack" - headline in today's Duluth News Tribune
Wait a minute! I'm in Duluth and I didn't really want a meeting with Rep. Chip Cravaack. OK! OK! I might have gone to yesterday's "Town Meeting" at the Duluth Airport if I hadn't had other things I wanted to do and other places I wanted to be. But even then, would I have gotten one of the 200 seats or would I have been one of the 12 speakers selected? In retrospect, why bother?
I don't understand this mania for having "Town Meetings" with constituents when such a small minority would be interested and be able to attend. Duluth has over 80,000 residents and only 200 attended the meeting yesterday. Granted, it was arranged on short notice after many complaints of Cravaack meeting with business groups but not the general citizenry. See Rep. Cravaack is in touch with his constituents?
http://magree.blogspot.com/2011/08/rep-cravaack-is-in-touch-with-his.html Even then, what would it been like if over 1,000 had showed up? How much true conversation will be going on between each attendee and the Representative.
Given all the communication means available to reach a politician, many better ways exist to express a view. The postal service is still working for those who want to write letters. Phone calls are cheap for those who want to leave a message or speak to a staffer. And every politician can be reached on the internet, either by email or by a web form.
What is missing? In a town meeting, those who do get to speak get an instant audience and may even get their question printed in the newspaper. They also get the politician to address their question in front of many other people.
I think the best way for a politician to communicate is through a newsletter to every household. The best of these I've seen is from Bill Frenzel, R., 3rd District, Minnesota in the 70s and 80s. He didn't tout what he voted for or what groups he had appeared before; he told what Congress was doing, sometimes in a straight-forward manner, sometimes in a bit of befuddlement as in "What were they thinking?" Bill Frenzel is one of a kind threatened with extinction, an independently-minded Republican.
OK, Mel, you really wanted to be one of the speakers, right? What would you have said that was so important?
Did Abraham Lincoln tax and spend to build the transcontinental railroad? Or did he tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? Good paying jobs were created and fortunes were made in the new economic environment.
Did Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman tax and spend for the G.I Bill of Rights? Or did they tax and borrow to invest in increasing opportunities for veterans who got higher paying jobs and paid more taxes.
Did Dwight Eisenhower tax and spend for the interstate highway system? Or did he tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? Good paying jobs were created and fortunes were made in the new economic environment.
Did John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon tax and spend to put man on the moon? Or did they tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? New technologies were created, good paying jobs were created, and fortunes were made.
Now it seems we have a hard-nosed political culture that wants to cut taxes, eliminate regulations, and let Ponzi schemes destroy the investments of President Lincoln, Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, President Eisenhower, and Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon.
Wait a minute! I'm in Duluth and I didn't really want a meeting with Rep. Chip Cravaack. OK! OK! I might have gone to yesterday's "Town Meeting" at the Duluth Airport if I hadn't had other things I wanted to do and other places I wanted to be. But even then, would I have gotten one of the 200 seats or would I have been one of the 12 speakers selected? In retrospect, why bother?
I don't understand this mania for having "Town Meetings" with constituents when such a small minority would be interested and be able to attend. Duluth has over 80,000 residents and only 200 attended the meeting yesterday. Granted, it was arranged on short notice after many complaints of Cravaack meeting with business groups but not the general citizenry. See Rep. Cravaack is in touch with his constituents?
http://magree.blogspot.com/2011/08/rep-cravaack-is-in-touch-with-his.html Even then, what would it been like if over 1,000 had showed up? How much true conversation will be going on between each attendee and the Representative.
Given all the communication means available to reach a politician, many better ways exist to express a view. The postal service is still working for those who want to write letters. Phone calls are cheap for those who want to leave a message or speak to a staffer. And every politician can be reached on the internet, either by email or by a web form.
What is missing? In a town meeting, those who do get to speak get an instant audience and may even get their question printed in the newspaper. They also get the politician to address their question in front of many other people.
I think the best way for a politician to communicate is through a newsletter to every household. The best of these I've seen is from Bill Frenzel, R., 3rd District, Minnesota in the 70s and 80s. He didn't tout what he voted for or what groups he had appeared before; he told what Congress was doing, sometimes in a straight-forward manner, sometimes in a bit of befuddlement as in "What were they thinking?" Bill Frenzel is one of a kind threatened with extinction, an independently-minded Republican.
OK, Mel, you really wanted to be one of the speakers, right? What would you have said that was so important?
Did Abraham Lincoln tax and spend to build the transcontinental railroad? Or did he tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? Good paying jobs were created and fortunes were made in the new economic environment.
Did Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman tax and spend for the G.I Bill of Rights? Or did they tax and borrow to invest in increasing opportunities for veterans who got higher paying jobs and paid more taxes.
Did Dwight Eisenhower tax and spend for the interstate highway system? Or did he tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? Good paying jobs were created and fortunes were made in the new economic environment.
Did John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon tax and spend to put man on the moon? Or did they tax and borrow to invest in transforming the country? New technologies were created, good paying jobs were created, and fortunes were made.
Now it seems we have a hard-nosed political culture that wants to cut taxes, eliminate regulations, and let Ponzi schemes destroy the investments of President Lincoln, Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, President Eisenhower, and Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)