So guess what??!

Well I'm going to trash the primero uno idea of writing about politics because simply put.. Politics suck. I'm 18 in two days and I get to vote next November... whoa. Whatever. I can think of better ways to spend my time than talking about politics. Well over the last year I've done a freaking lot of stuff. Wow. I don't even know where to start. Craigslist> automotive school> minecraft> work? Oh yeah! That's what's up. I'm not going into specifics. The grilled cheese is still amazing (life is good).  God is good. I've made a freakload of mistakes in this earth but I'm covered fully with the unearthly. Thankfully...

Thawing that just doesn't seem to last...

     Talks between North and South Korea have never worked. The north continues to defy the world with incredibly restricted human rights, and the cut off society. While one sixth of the world economy lies with South Korea, the North lives in impoverished squalor, stuck twenty years in the past behind sandbags and barbed wire.
     The meeting was scheduled, and hopes were high of thawing the ice between the countries quickly. Unfortunately it seems that the North can’t get over itself and join the rest of the world. Even fifty years after the Korean War, the North can’t come to admit that they need help. Negotiations are at a standstill with little chance of rising again in the near future. Before that will happen, North Korea must admit to the most recent attacks on a South Korean Cheonon warship. Until then there is no reconciliation between the states.
      Repairing trust is a huge issue for the two states. Fifty years of tension doesn’t just go away overnight. What they both are trying to accomplish with the talks is hopefully a alliance or at least tearing the wall down that has kept most North Koreans captive for the entirety of their lives. These talks are a huge step for them both in regaining each other’s trust back.

Leadership

     When I think of a good leader, I think of like Abraham Lincoln or George Washington. I think of them as great leaders because they saw our country through some of our toughest and darkest times. They were decisive, wise and to shirk responsibility or blame shift was a slight on their honor. This is the kind of president we need as a nation. This is the kind of leaders we need as people. They weren’t power mongers, but humble, and gave what they could for the benefit of the country. Today there is a lack of good leaders in the world. Not enough humble, not enough decisive, not enough wise people to fill the ranks of the needed leadership positions that are crying to be filled. A vast majority of leaders today see their positions as nothing more than a popularity contest, or how much money you might have, or how many vacations you take in a year.
     When I think of a good leader I think of Ronald Regan or Golda Meir. Their leadership forestalled great conflict, and brought nations out of the rubble. They changed the destiny of the most controversial country in the world and forestalled tragedy there. Inflation was lowered, and family income was raised. Why was this? Because a good leader must do what is moral, and right. They must do what is best for the many, not just himself. A good leader must be wise.

Separation of powers

     In the beginning our countries foundations, morals, and a theistic view on life got us to a place of true freedom. Freedoms, and personal liberties should be seen as gifts, not rights (even though they are rights), to be shared with others. The government was designed to be the purveyor of personal liberties, by staying out of the lives of the people. It was designed with a system of checks and balances to keep one branch from growing too large. This system is known to us as the separation of powers.
     When the founders established the system, they were dancing at the point of the sword. England, and France were breathing down their necks, and every other European country wanted a piece of the states. Knowing this, we can see how it was so easy for them to just create an initial system that was ok, but not great. The Articles of confederation were the first independent government, and it failed badly. It gave the government too little power, having no financial base, and lack of foreign policy. The founders had had enough of oppressive Brittan, and therefore made the articles thinking that a weak government was better than an oppressive one. They found this to be somewhat wrong. The government couldn’t protect or defend, which made them quite vulnerable.
     The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787. It was later ratified for 10 states in 1791. Article one, two, and three cover the three branches of government, and there powers. The executive branch has the power of veto, appointment of judges and other officials, make treaties, ensure all laws are carried out, commander in chief of the military, pardon power. The legislative branch has the power to write, debate, and pass bills, which are then passed on to the executive branch for approval. Finally, the judicial branch is to interpret the nation’s laws. They decide if a government issue is valid on legal terms, and they have the power to judge a decision made by the other branches.
     The government isn’t the nation, the people are. The founders recognized this from seeing examples of ancient Greece and Rome in times past. They saw how Great Brittan had oppressed the civilization under the strong arm of government, and how oppressive the Church of England’s rule had become. They had firsthand experiences with the tyrannies of the society of that day. The government was big. It had no one or nothing to keep it accountable. A force without accountability is an oppressive force. This is the reason the founders put such effort putting checks and balances, and separation of powers in place.
     The powers in the United States have been losing accountability since the civil war. Government always grows after a natural disaster, or war. After World War 1, and 2 we start seeing mass production of government programs, and the general growth of a government to where it is today. The general principal behind the parties are fundamentally different. The Republican Party is based on achieving a smaller government by cutting government programs, while cutting taxes at the same time. The Democratic mindset is to create government programs to do everything, and raise taxes. This is only the general principal behind the parties, not what people actually do most of the time. Both have their drawbacks. Separated powers and checks and balances will prolong the capitalist era, but inevitably (Greece and Rome) we will have a falling out for our actions.

John Locke's Government

     There are five basic principles of the US constitution. There is popular sovereignty, in which the power of the government comes from the people; limited government, which is pretty much self explanatory; separation of powers, all the power isn’t vested in one branch; checks and balances, each branch checks the power of the other two branches; federalism, the government only gets enough power to maintain order.
     All these principles were and are important to our success as a nation. Without them the government would have grown too big a long time ago. Our founders were very smart. They learned from their mistakes, and made a way to keep the governments powers limited.
     John Locke states that in a social contract, the governed has the right to pick the government, and that the government relies totally on the people. The people give up their personal rights to the government (in the way of taxes, and laws), and the government in return provides safety, and equal rights. So John Locke’s government would be based on equal rights.
     In my opinion government should be very small. They should stick to keeping people safe and overseeing disputes. Other organizations must step in if there is a problem instead of the government, unless it has to do with safety or personal rights infringements.