Really!?!?!?

I have stumbled upon a large number of Trump supporters in people I would call my role models. These are the people that I look up to when life needs questions answered. These are the people that I trust and respect.

So....

I must ask a question.

Do you trust Donald Trump?

I do not.

Now I know your first reaction is, "What politician can be trusted?" And although this is true I ask you, would you trust him if he were not running for office? Would you trust him 10 years ago? Would you trust him if you were talking to him by a cozy fire in his Florida mansion or New York penthouse?

I could find a few in this field and one that already left the field that I would answer yes to these questions. I can not say that I would ever trust Trump as a person.

But really you are just one vote,

Can AMERICA trust him enough to beat the Democratic nominee?

That answer is definitely no.

Rethink the field. Go back over the options and come up with a better answer than Donald Trump.

But maybe I'm wrong... Maybe he isn't doing this just to prove he can. Read a transcript of his speech last night:

"Forgetting about security, forgetting about ISIS, which by the way, we're going to knock the hell out of ISIS.  We're going to knock the hell out of them. And it's going to be done the right way." 

(As long as it's done the right way Mr. Trump, I am cool with it)

"We are going to make our country so strong. We are going to start winning again. We don't win anymore as a country. We don't win on trade. We don't win with the military. We can't beat ISIS. We don't win with anything.  We are going to start winning again. And we're going to win so much, you are going to be so happy. We are going to make America so great again. Maybe greater than ever before."  

(This sounds straight from a Will Ferrell movie) 

Or maybe he is saying what you would like to hear. Much like an 8th grader giving a persuasive speech for his class, Trump could care less about what he is saying.

He is only worried about getting himself an A.

Lonely

I am writing this from 20,000 feet or so above the earth on a flight from Las Vegas back home to Louisville.  I love flying.  The world seems much different from this distance.  The land is divided into what seems like perfect squares and the cities seem like lit up decorations that are resting on an old collector's mantle.  As we view something or someone from further and further away the imperfections diminish until finally they disappear all together.  I am sure someone smarter than me has a word for such a fascinating phenomenon.  But as much as I love seeing our world from this seemingly perfect perspective it is most often not the point of view that really matters.

In order to really enjoy this life I have found we must interact with it, imperfections and all.  The other reason I love flying is because I get the chance to meet someone new.  How often do we sit next to a complete stranger for a four hour trip?  It presents a great opportunity to interact with our world in one of the most satisfying (and imperfect) ways, conversation.  I think much of the present days' problems could be at least understood if we, as individuals, had more conversation.  But I see more and more people secluding themselves from this valuable gift that God has given us.

This flight is not full.  In fact, it is less than half full.  I was the first one on the plane and took my usual spot in the second row window seat.  The next people on the plane was a family of six from Lexington.  The dad and the mom sat right in front of me.  We quickly struck up a conversation about their stay in Sin City.  The people continued to stream on to the flight.  A woman sat in the aisle seat in my row.  She politely asked if the seat was taken and I, less politely said, "by you!"  Shortly after she sat down, a friend or acquaintance of the lady in my row said, "oh there you are.  I guess I will sit next to you."  She shifted her carry-on and began to climb over for the middle seat.  I didn't mind having a full row even though it was an empty flight, it just meant more conversation, but I believe most plane passengers would not second that thought.  Sure enough before the lady could even sit down the flight attendant came running down the aisle and intercepted the lady.  "There is plenty of room on the flight.  No reason to jam in one row."  The lady that was getting ready to sit down looked up in confusion and without a word shuffled to the back of the plane.  I was left thinking about that as we took off into the sky.

I don't blame the flight attendant.  She probably was thinking she was making me more comfortable.  But I wanted to say to her, "maybe there is a reason to jam into one row. Maybe the lady wanted to have a conversation with her friend or acquaintance."  It left me to wonder what all this isolation and loneliness, whether it comes from our crazy societal norms or our self imposed doubts or our fears, is actually doing to the world.

After all, as I gaze down at the seemingly perfect world below, I realize I can not make that world better from up here.  I must interact with it in order to see it change.  I am going to start now and strike up a conversation instead of typing this stupid vomit!  Till next time...

Edited 4/24:
I have to give you an update on the flight, and in order to do that, I have to go back to the beginning, when we were still at the gate in Vegas.  I lied.  I was not the first person on the plane.  There were two others that were already on the flight.  They were older ladies, and had preboarded.  I was in the aisle opposite them one row back.  They seemed to be in great spirits.  The younger of the two women joked with the flight attendant.  She told him he didn't know how to "fist pump" and began to teach him her technique that she learned on The Voice.  Everyone in the front of the plane had a good laugh.  As we took off, the older lady comforted a child of the family of six who was scared.  She said, "don't worry, flying is the safest way to travel."  They were good people and probably learned the value of conversation early in their lives.

Fast forward to 3 hours into the flight.  It was 11:30PM Louisville time and I was getting groggy.  As I was about to close my eyes I see the younger lady jump up and grab the flight attendant.  She explained to him that she believed her mother had stopped breathing.  He immediately got on the intercom and asked for anyone with medical credentials to come to the front of the plane.  There was no one.  He put the older lady on the floor and began to use the defibrillator and the instructions that came with it.  It was too late.  The lady passed away on that flight.  The daughter, 70 years young, whom taught the flight attendant how to properly fist pump, was upset.  She was comforted by a complete stranger that sat behind her, but she didn't need much comfort.  I could tell she had a strong faith and she just kept saying, "she passed a lot closer to God than most.  I will see her again."

That scene got me thinking again about how different the world we view from the plane is than the world inside the plane.  We can't see the death and tragedy from 20,000 feet up, but we can't see the comfort from a stranger and the faith of strong lady either.  I got to remember to keep my eyes inside the plane.

It was an interesting flight nonetheless...

Veil of Ignorance

John Rawls, in his book A Theory of Justice, makes a great argument for the the "veil of ignorance" litmus test for public policy.  Here is how someone smarter than I defines it:

"The veil of ignorance is a very elegant proposal to determine what social structures are just, put forward by John Rawls. The veil of ignorance principle says that a rule, or society, is just if it is a rule, or society, that would be agreed upon by everyone even if they were in a state of ignorance about their position within society is. For example, a law that gave half the people all the money wouldn’t be agreed upon because people wouldn’t know whether they would be among the half that got the money, and so the law is revealed to be unjust."

This is simple enough.  It has been used many times by the left to substantiate "safety nets".  I do not want to talk about these safety nets here, but I do want you to know that part of the ideology on the left comes from Rawls' veil of ignorance.

Arguments can be made that behind this veil of ignorance we would want equality, equal opportunity, wealth distribution, low taxes, high taxes,  a justice system, or a myriad of other public policies.

One argument can not be made behind the veil of ignorance.  Behind this veil of ignorance we would never want to give our biological mothers the opportunity to kill us before we even had a shot to be born at all.

Abortion makes no sense, even behind a veil of ignorance.

On liberty...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

I think most agree with this today, mainly because I see it used for different purposes in different posts on a weekly basis.  But we are so very quick to give up our liberties in order to be safe from certain things that could harm us. Whether it be terrorists, corporations, or even our own actions, we all let fear rule our ideas by allowing government to limit our privacy, limit our options and limit our own actions.

The Patriot Act allows my own government to spy on its citizens. My government has no right to gather information on me. My government has no right to tap my phones and monitor my bandwidth. If I trade my personal privacy for some short-term safety, I deserve neither one.

My crony capitalist government has no right to limit my choices. It has no right to promote legal monopolies. It has no right to stifle trade. It has no right to try and protect me from my free transactions. If I trade my economic options for short-term safety from predatory corporations I do not deserve options nor safety.

My "nanny state" government has gone too far. My government has no right to decide who I can marry. It has no right to decide if I make too much nor if I make too little. It has no right to decide who deserves the spoils of my hard work nor my families hard work. If I give up the rights to my own actions to momentarily protect me from my own decisions I deserve neither rights nor safety.

The funny thing is that the platforms for both parties uphold liberty in some forms but spit on it in others.

Republicans believe we should be free to make our own decisions and to use our own property in our own way. The conservative screams for the essential freedoms except when it comes to terrorism and marriage.   They will gladly give up essential freedoms for short-term safety in these situations. They deserve neither one.

Democrats believe that we have the right to marry who we want and that we have the right live privately. The liberal screams for our freedoms except when it comes to mean capitalists and economic disparity. They will gladly give up essential freedoms for short-term safety in these situations. They deserve neither one.

These are just a few examples and nothing in great detail.  There are many more examples of this hypocrisy.  I just wonder if we will ever fully realize the damage we are causing by allowing our liberty to be defined with each new election cycle?  Liberty is all or nothing, there is no balance to be found.

Here is my vomit for the week.

Introduction

I am tired of inundating my Facebook "friends" with my weekly rants and I know many of them are just as tired.  So I am going to leave Facebook to the goofy posts and put my "weekly vomit" on here.

First let me introduce myself.  I am 27 and a native of Floyd County, IN.  I am not afraid to have an opinion and I am most certainly not opposed to admit when my opinion is wrong.  I value discussion when it leads to a better understanding.  I also value logic above all else.  We are all different and we all come with different perspectives of the world around us.  Like Plato, Rousseau, Kant and others I believe there are undeniable truths that all can appreciate regardless of perspective.  We must reach these truths through logic.  We must step outside ourselves and step behind a "veil of ignorance."  (Although I agree with Rawls' method, I disagree with his conclusion; there may be a post on this eventually).

As you can probably tell, I enjoy political philosophy.  I also enjoy economics and marketing.  I have a Management degree from Indiana University Southeast, but I have done a lot of reading on my own.  My favorite blogs are Cafe Hayek, The Big Questions, Public Reason, etc.

If you have stumbled across this blog, welcome.  Like I said, I love discussion/debate but I despise partisanship.  I want to strive for a future where American individuals create their own platform and decide which candidate is best for them using criteria based off of that platform.  I hate that right now we have system that works just the opposite.  Our candidates' party comes up with the platform and then we argue between two candidates whose terms will more than likely be remarkably similar.  It creates disagreement where disagreement does not exist.  I look forward to a day when we can debate ideas and solutions not the politicians' worthiness for office.