No Left Turn On Red

*Note:  In this blog, I am referring to roundabouts meaning the circular traffic junctions, not the method used by politicians to compose arguments.*

There is absolutely no need for a red left-turn arrow.  We've all seen them.  You're waiting to make a left turn, and the green arrow turns to yellow, and then instead of giving you the "Left turn yield on green," it goes right to a red arrow.  So you sit and wait as there is no oncoming traffic for the next 3 minutes.  You seriously consider turning, but you know, deep down, that the second you do, a police officer will whip out and pull you over.

What started this train of thought, and why I'm writing about it in a political blog, is that I was bemoaning the red turn arrow to a coworker, and eventually we got on the topic of roundabouts.  He hates roundabouts, while I love them.  He said that roundabouts are communist/socialist because everybody else has to sacrifice so that one car can make a left turn.  I said that roundabouts where individualist because you were left to your own ability to make your turn.  Stoplights are more socialist than roundabouts.  You have to sit at a stoplight waiting for everybody else to go, while you wait for the government to change your light back to green.

OK, so Uncle Sam isn't sitting there with a switch to change the stoplights, but someone in the government had to figure out how to regulate that intersection, and install the device to change the lights.  At the micro-level, the government regulates our travel everyday with stoplights.  How do they get away with it?  Under the guise of public safety.  Now, I'm not trying to say there shouldn't be any rules of the road.  If that were the case, we'd have to go back to walking everywhere.

The problem with 4-way stops is that most people who happen upon a 4-way stop are too dumb to figure out what to do after they've stopped.  This gets exponentially more complicated with an increase in the number of lanes being forced to stop.  Since I paid attention in driver's ed, and since I don't drive a Prius (or another variety of small car), I know when to go, and if it's not my turn, well, my SUV clears the way pretty fast.  Naturally, the 4-way stop is the preferred system of the government.  They want to force everyone to be equal, so everybody should have to stop at the intersection before proceeding on with their journey.  Although if they had it completely their way, only white males would have to stop at a 4-way stop and the rest of the population would have a special bypass lane.

When the 4-way stop fails, the next step is to put in some very simple stoplights.  Theoretically, everyone is still equal, because on a long enough timeline, everyone will have an equal experience with catching a green light, or a red light.  But then you have people who think yellow is the same as green, so the government really can't allow that to happen, so then the stoplights become more complicated.  Soon they'll have lights on there that tell you when you can blow your nose.  The same is true of the auto industry.  They make cars that will tell you when you're falling asleep, when you're drifting out of your lane, and cars that will even stop for you.

Think of that.  A car that will stop when it senses an obstacle in your path.  Your first thought might be, "Well that sounds awesome."  But really think about it.  What if you're in a parking lot and somebody is trying to rob you?  You hop in your car, and they're right in front of you.  Normally you'd drive right through them, but now you can't, because your car won't let you.  It's that very simple difference, between safety and control.  It could be as simple as a red turn arrow that doesn't allow you to make a turn you deem to be safe, or it could be a car that takes your driving control out of your hands and leaves you a sitting duck for thugs.  Of course it's all marketed as the newest, coolest technology that will help make the world a safer place, but is a world controlled by the government a safer place?

I believe that a world run by individuals is the safest place, individuals who look out for their own interests first.  That's why I like to see a roundabout, because it feels like a small victory for the individual.  A roundabout, to me, is the government acknowledging that the best way to control that intersection is to leave it in the hands of the individuals.  No green lights allowing some to drive, no red lights forbidding others to drive, and most importantly, no red left turn signals.

© Nate Phillipps 2010

Sodomizing America

One of the main principles this country was founded upon is freedom of speech.  Since then, the government has tried to find a way to silence all opposition.  In order to silence us, the government does not need to take our voices or our ideas; all they need to do is remove our system of communication.  If we have nowhere to communicate, we essentially have nothing to say.

President Obama is working on creating an 'internet kill switch' that he can use whenever he deems the internet to be a threat to national security.  Quoted as saying, "I will tolerate debate on war policy but I won't tolerate division," one can see where Obama stands on free speech.  As long as your speech matches Obama's speech, you are tolerated.  If you differ from Obama, then you are no longer tolerable.

The beauty of America is that no matter what your belief, you are allowed to state your belief, and pursue your belief (as long as you aren't harming anyone else).  What better example of freedom of speech is there than the internet?  I can communicate my ideas with people all over the country, and all over the world.  If Obama gets his kill switch, he will be able to stop the flow of communication, the flow of ideas.  Sure, we can live without the internet, but the internet has surpassed the Postal Service as the number one delivery method of messages.  An internet kill switch is the equivalent of shutting down the Post Office, or burning all the letters deposited in the mail box.

Obama isn't the only government official who wants to control the internet.  The FCC has started the process to classify the internet as a public utility, which would grant the government a monopoly on internet services, internet packages, and internet control.  The first sites to go will be sites like this one.  Eventually, any site that doesn't agree with the party line will be shut down.  The internet is the new printing press, and the government will do anything in its power to shut it down.

Another founding principle of America was the freedom from excessive taxes.  After spending an unprecedented amount of money on failed businesses and failed countries, Obama needed a way to quickly raise some money  What better way than taxes?  Of course, he doesn't want to come right out and say he's raising taxes.  Instead, Obama has tried to make us believe that he's raising taxes for our own good.  Cash for clunkers was a program that used your tax money and my tax money to buy vehicles for people who subscribed to the party line.  Have a gas guzzler that's responsible for global warming?  Trade it in and the taxpayers will buy you a nice 'green' car.

Or, how about health care?  Shouldn't everyone have health care?  Isn't free health care the American dream?  Who cares if it isn't, if you need it, the taxpayers will foot the bill.  We won't even see one benefit from the health care bill before we go broke from trying to afford it.  And as if the guilt trip from everyone's health isn't enough, we're also at war.  You don't want to be seen as unpatriotic do you?  Then you shouldn't question the government when they ask for more money.  When they demand more money.  When they forcefully take more money.

Owning the automotive industry, the banks, the health care industry, Wall Street and destroying the American spirit isn't enough for the government. It's just the beginning. Cap and trade, the internet, the oil industry, health and food, education are all sitting squarely in the government's sight. After that, they will more than likely go after mobile phones, newspapers, and books.

But it's not enough to stop there.  The government wants complete and total control.  Of the economic recovery of our country, President Obama said, "Recovery also requires countries not having an undue advantage."  Obama wants us to surrender our American values.  Our country was founded primarily on our belief that we have unalienable rights that nobody can take from us.  We believe that our country is the best country in the world.  We acknowledge we have problems, but we know that even with our problems, we are several times over a better country than any other on the planet.

Now Obama is trying to make us feel guilty for our success.  He wants everybody to be equal in terms of wealth, happiness, and status.  The equality America promises is the equality of being able to pursue what makes you happy.  There is no guarantee about being happy, or being successful.  There only the guarantee that you will be able to try.  Instead of letting people rely on their abilities, Obama wants to force everybody to perform at the level of the least able.  We have seen this before in the No Child Left Behind Act.  Look what it's done for our school system.  The government will not stop until we are all peons, serfs, servants and slaves.

They will be burning our freedom in piles.  In that sense there will be no difference between books, computers, cell phones, the American flag, and the Constitution; all will be ash in the streets of Washington.

© Nate Phillipps 2010