Thoughts on "Recent" Developments

The news is disconcerting.

A man walks into a school and kills a couple dozen people, mostly small children, before taking his own life.

I don't know his name. I haven't seen his face. I don't care to be enlightened to either. He's not someone I care to know about or remember. I'm not sitting in judgement of him. That's not my chair. I just don't want to know him.

Why did this specific incident happen? I don't know.

There will be those who use this event to push their agenda of gun control. There will be those that say this was caused by song lyrics or movies or video games. And still those that think its because there's not enough prayer in school. There's never a deficiency of ignorance in America.

I think the problem lies in our culture. Not the entertainment choices of our culture but in the role we have pushed masculinity into. "Gentlemen" have become the exception, not the rule.

In most cases these acts of senseless violence have been carried out by young men. Often times these young men are outcasts or bullied. The gun represents power that they wield. It would be the same with a knife, a baseball bat or a fertilizer bomb. The motivator is power. The ability to be strong or intimidating because that's what young men are taught they should be.

We don't (as a culture) teach young men about the masculinity of caring for a child, holding a door, demonstrating common courtesy, loving one woman for her whole life, protecting the weak and dozens of other traits that our grandfathers just did because "it's what men do."

Robert E. Lee, no stranger to violence, put it this way:

"The forbearing use of power does not only form a touchstone, but the manner in which an individual enjoys certain advantages over others is a test of a true gentleman.
The power which the strong have over the weak, the employer over the employed, the educated over the unlettered, the experienced over the confiding, even the clever over the silly — the forbearing or inoffensive use of all this power or authority, or a total abstinence from it when the case admits it, will show the gentleman in a plain light.
The gentleman does not needlessly and unnecessarily remind an offender of a wrong he may have committed against him. He cannot only forgive, he can forget; and he strives for that nobleness of self and mildness of character which impart sufficient strength to let the past be but the past. A true man of honor feels humbled himself when he cannot help humbling others."

That's the difference in a man like Lee and one of these shooters. The difference between protecting and harming. The difference between taking and giving.

The man Lee was describing would never shoot up a school, wouldn't kill his wife, wouldn't bomb a post office, wouldn't fly an civilian airplane into an office building. He uses power justly. He forgives. He moves on.

These are the men we need today. Where are these men?

Style vs Substance

Modern politics have deteriorated at a rapid pace since the introduction of televised coverage. Today appearances are everything. You hear that presidential candidates are more likely to win if they are taller, better looking, a better speaker, blah, blah, blah. It's gotten to the point that you can get probable election projections from TMZ.

To highlight the absurdity of this truth, I wanted to share some folks we'd have missed out on if TV predated the republic.

John Adams. First VP, second President, ambassador extraordinaire, heavily influenced the Declaration of Independence. Short and fat, newspapers of his day called him "His Rotundity". Would have never been elected in this climate.

Thomas Jefferson. First Secretary of State, second VP, ambassador extraordinaire, author of the Declaration of Independence, gifted architect, ok, due to limited space, let's just say that he was the smartest man ever born on this continent. While he stood 6 inches taller than the average man of his day, he was a weak speaker and even refused to speak before Congress, opting to mail his State of the Union addresses to them. He would have never been considered for a party's nomination today.

James Madison. Almost as smart as Jeff...ok, let's not get carried away but the guy WAS brilliant. Father of the Constitution and the only sitting president to ever physically engage an enemy in battle - he fired a cannon at British forces attacking DC. He was 5'4" and about 100 pounds. You do the math.

Alexander H. Stephens. Congressman and governor of Georgia. VP of the CSA, successful attorney and benefactor to numerous college students. He was 5'9" and about 100 pounds. He looked like death eating a soda cracker and reportedly had a shrill, high-pitched voice that could not be heard over a crowd. Not exactly JFK.

Even Abe Lincoln himself once retorted "If I had two faces do you really think I'd be wearing this one?"

I could go on and on. The point is, before we sensationalized politics, people were judged on substance, on issues, on things that mattered. Now people are judged on height, weight, age, "gravitas", skin color, religion, alleged birthplace, whatever.

Who have we missed out on that could have helped our present condition?

How can we expect politicians to take politics seriously when votes are doled out with such superficial standards and at what point do we begin to take candidates seriously based on policy?

The Endorsement 2012

Election year. Nothing quite says "someone please shoot me now" quite like trying to live a normal life during federal level election campaigns.

But, they are a necessary evil so I do participate. Too many men and women have spilled their lives out from Boston Common to Berchtesgaden for me to not cross the road to my polling precinct and cast my vote. I have too much respect for what has been given to me to disregard it.

And yet I see this election as particularly evil.

Barack Obama, who I do not see as a liar - he did what he said he'd do. Anyone surprised by his vision for the size and scope of Washington must have slept through the entirety of 2008. Let's face it. This man is just not a good president. There have been some good moments but he really just is not improving this nation.

Mitt Romney. Massachusetts governor. Successful businessman. Rabid socialist. Running mate from Wisconsin. What part of this appeals to a Georgian? I need something more than "not Obama". Besides, voting for the man behind the Massachusetts healthcare law because you hate Obamacare is like voting for Marx over Lenin because you hate communism.

But there's no other option. Well, not if you listen to Fox, CNN or MSNBC. But if you look on your own, there is in fact more than one person in addition to the media golden boys. You'll see them on your ballot should you choose to not dishonor a multitude of martyrs that gave you that right.

And that brings me to the point of this entry. It is time to announce that All the Biscuits in Georgia which consists of...well...me, has officially endorsed Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party for President of the United States.

This is not to say that AtBiG is in complete agreement with the candidate (incidentally, anyone in complete agreement with me needs to be committed). Rather, it is to say that he is the best available candidate. His policies best reflect the spirit of the Constitution and the original intent of the Union.

And then there is of course the worries that I am, by proxy, voting for Obama. That would be assuming that I ever considered voting for Romney. I'm not voting against Obama (or, for that matter, Romney). I'm voting for Johnson.

But to further settle your fears. What is a worse outcome? 1) Obama wins and a Republican Congress obstructs his every attempt to advance socialism because he's a) a Democrat and b) Obama OR 2) Romney wins and a Republican Congress willingly assists him in advancing socialism because he's a Republican. Think it can't happen? Ever hear of the Patriot Act? So, in reality, we are better off with Obama than we are with Romney and we'd be even better off with Johnson than Obama.

Checks and balances. You have to look at the whole picture.

In the end, this endorsement means nothing, except for me. I am not attempting to sway one single vote (although I did point someone in the direction of Jill Stein the other day). You have to weigh your own options and vote your own conscience. Regardless, please vote. Then the robo calls will cease...at least until next time.