Opinions expressed on the Whig Blog, in the Forums and in comments are those of the individual authors and do not necessarilly represent positions of the Modern Whig Party. The ability to post opinion pieces and comments is not restricted to Whig members (although blog entries are by invitation.) These items are not pre-screened but are subject to our Terms of Use. Please Contact Us if you have concerns about the content.

Speak Up!

New in the Whig Blog

Political Spectrum: It's more than "Left & Right."

When I have discussions about where the Modern Whig Party is on the political spectrum, questions such as, "Are you guys liberal or conservative?" are very common. Other questions may dig beyond the surface, and include a social or fiscal adjective, e.g "socially liberal, fiscally conservative." The truth is, in my opinion, summary classifications such as polarization of political position are completely apocryphal.

Are The VA’s Priorities Correctly Set?

I recently spoke with a Veteran’s Service Officer who works for a Nationally Recognized Veterans Organization.  This individual told me that lately, he has been seeing several letters each week to Veterans who already have rated disabilities which more or less conform to the following example:

“Dear Mr. /Ms. Veteran.  We have conducted a review of your service-connected disabilities and have noticed some improvement.  Therefore we propose to change your rating from 50% to 10% for your Degenerative Disk Disease.”

Impeachment and lawsuits: Party tools of emotional extortion-T.J. O'Hara

RANCHO SANTA FE, Ca., August 4, 2014 – In a Nation that favors sound bites over solutions, it should not come as a surprise that the term “political integrity” has become little more than an oxymoron. Ethics be damned: If the Parties can use something to “stimulate the base,” you may rest assured they will pursue it. It is irrelevant whether it makes sense or is morally reprehensible as long as it can be used to extract money and votes. The recent discussion of impeachment and lawsuits are cases in point.

http://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/impeachment-and-lawsuits-party-to...

 

Practical solutions to fix V.A. medical services inefficiency-Lieutenant Colonel Douglas Harvey, MS, AKARNG (Retired)

Now that Congress is throwing sixteen-plus billion dollars at the V.A. crisis in the hopes that it will go away, I think it is time to discuss options for how it is spent. More healthcare providers are a common response.  What type and at what level is less often mentioned.  One functional area which needs improvement is the appointments process. As a semi-outsider trying to get in, it seems like there are a limited number of available appointments. While adding providers and increasing the numbers of appointments available will improve the situation somewhat, it seems to me more is required.

Why our approach to immigration ‘borders’ on the absurd- T.J. O'Hara

RANCHO SANTA FE, Ca., July 14, 2014 – Our political “customs” are in evidence as we see the immigration issue unfold. Recently, over 39,000 families and 52,000 unaccompanied children have been detained for entering our southern border illegally. This latest surge adds to the 11-13 million individuals who are estimated to already reside in our country illegally. Yet, our elected officials are calling for emergency measures as if the problem represented a new phenomenon.

In the Forums

Candidate Questionnaire

Does anyone have a good Q and A you send to candidates? I have a local lady that I would like to send one to.

Thanks

Immigration Thoughts

Hello everyone,

Hi from Tennessee

I guess this is kind of like a political confession of sorts where we all describe out background, then receive our "hugs" in the replies?  

Hello from Humble Texas!

I've actually been following the whigs online and on facebook since their facebook account was first brought online.  I'm a long time advocate and proud member of the modern whig party!  Just finally getting around to joining the forums :)

Hello from Alaska

Okay... well I just wrote a somewhat lengthy post which for some reason does not appear to have been posted.  So I will try again, with a shorter version.

Recent comments

  • Same Sex Relationships   4 days 5 hours ago

    I am a fairly new kid on the block. As such, I am getting to know the Modern Whig Party as a neophyte. Social issues have always been, quite often, overly emotional, which is why I am attracted to this party. This party seems to take an intellectual approach to politics and society in general. It is obvious to most that the issues of sexual orientation and abortion usually takes center stage and overshadows rational discussions on issues that should be of common interest to everyone, regardless of where they stand on the social issues. Also, political parties and their members use those issues for vote harvesting, and do not seem to care how it divides Americans. My hope is that the Modern Whig Party will continue in the efforts to bring all Americans together and end the madness of divisiveness that is letting our differences lead to division. We our wounded by our divisions and is sapping us of our strength.

  • Political Spectrum: It's more than "Left & Right."   1 week 2 days ago

    I actually prefer this method (or the Pournelle Diagram, different plotting points, nearly the same results) but it still leaves you with a problem. You see, lots of people who consider themselves moderates can disagree on just about everything. When I hear people say “I will only support moderates” my mind processes it as either “ I have no principles I am willing to adhere to” or “because I know I am a moderate, only people who agree with me are moderate.” And there lay the problem, pick any six issues, then find someone who splits those 6 issues  pretty much down the middle. Three of those issue this person holds generally conservative positions, three of the issues they generally hold Social Progressive views. This seems to be the classic definition of a “Moderate”. I can find someone who has split those 6 issues in exactly the opposite way. Is this person a moderate.

    Or the other version of a moderate, the middle of a roader, on say, the deficit. “Continued deficit spending is not a good thing, if we keep spending like this in X years we will have reached the point where it is projected we will only have enough Tax revenue to service the debt and will not have any left for the rest of the Budget! This is silly, as a Moderate I propose a plan where it will take us 2X years to reach that point….See how great being a moderate is! (Actually, in the real world, that is the difference between The Social Progressive Position and the Heartless Conservative Position, Moderates seem to only whine a while then take the X years option with the social progressives, because they think that will make them friends and earn them even greater accolades of Moderation.) Pick any issue and that is the way it is.

     

    Yeahhh never mind, we are screwed, Reality is gonna solve the problem for us…and it will be painful.  

  • Church & State Separation   2 weeks 1 day ago

    I agree with you that religious organizations should not be exempt from taxes. Too many are involved with politics to a greater or lesser extent and defining what degree of involvement merits taxation is too arbitrary and time and energy consuming. I dont know what the rationale was for exempting them in the first place except that at that time churches werent as much like profitable organizations as they are today.

  • Church & State Separation   2 weeks 1 day ago

    What is the Whig stance on whether religious organizations should be exempt from taxes ? And does that change depending on how politically active that religious organization is ?

     

  • Second Amendment   2 weeks 6 days ago

    Wow, don’t know how I missed posting on this one. I think that there needs to be a bare minimum level of protection for the right to bear arms, especially within the confines of their one’s own home. I also think that the Supreme Court has gotten it right in the last few cases dealing with the issue. That being said, I think that each state has a right, through their elected representatives, to establish laws which reflect the will of their citizens regarding the carrying of weapons in public. New York, Illinois, California and a few other states have established or allowed municipalities to enact very restrictive gun laws, and with the exception I stated above (your own home), that is the business of the citizens in those states. Of course you won’t ever catch me there. But that is just me. As far as requirements and training, I live in one of the most Liberal states regarding concealed carry issue (there is a joke in there) and you have to have training to conceal carry. Where I am a little baffled by is open carry. I understand the concept, that you may open carry a weapon without a permit (as opposed to licensed concealed carry). How this extends to walking around in the grocery store, Dunkin Donuts or a public park with a long arm is beyond me. Yeah, it is within the limits of the law, but really? What is your point? Don’t be a butthead. Notice I am not talking about out in a rural area. I am talking about in a built up urban area, why is that necessary. Open carry your pistol. Geeze, you expect a bear to mall you at Krogers? (Note, and again, local circumstances, I can see it if bears commonly show up at the Krogers in your neighborhood, hell I want someone to have a long arm if Bears frequent the place) Also, someone mentioned M-1 Abrams, and Artillery. I have heard similar arguments about Miniguns. When the Government turns on the population, you are very likely not to face the Military. What you are more likely to face is some (not all) civilian Law Enforcement and some hastily organized poorly trained quickly armed political supporters of the Government. The Military and the Police will split about three ways. Roughly 1 third will support the Government, 1 third will actively oppose and 1 third will ignore and wait it out (for a variety of reasons, and I doubt one will be fear) This is actually borne out by history, this was actually pretty close to the breakdown of the American Colonists, including those with Military Experience, during the Revolutionary war. Other examples exist. I would point out that of the Usurping Government is Liberal/Leftist, the one third of the military that would actively oppose, would generally consist of those on the sharp end of the stick, and the ones that would support the Government would be Service and support. Anybody who has been in the Army or the Marines in the last twenty years will understand the whys of that. So, besides the cost factor (1 Million dollars for an M-1 Abrams, and if you have a million to spare, you can probably get an M-1 Abrams or close equivalent. Ammunition, well that is another thing, also about cost) in other words, the high end stuff you keep bringing in to the question, High Tech weapons, guided missiles, Heavy weapons, are not an issue because of cost. And the support (maintenance, spare parts, consumables) pretty much make that a mute issue and a straw man argument. Just the way I see it.

  • Education   3 weeks 1 day ago

    I agree with a lot of the party platform for education. Two things that I would either disagree or want more information on are the merit based pay. I am not against merit based pay but I think there needs to be some standard, other than standardized testing to determine pay. If one test determines ones pay, the pressure to cheat is too great. I would be open to ideas on how we can determine merit for merit pay. The second idea I have read in the posts are the public money for private schools. I am not for public money for private business/schools. What would be the rationale for using public money for a private school?

  • Health Care   3 weeks 4 days ago

    Love to read your content on regular basis. These are full of valuable information. It excites me to gain more understanding about the subject.

    Dr Oz Forskolin

  • Second Amendment   3 weeks 4 days ago

    "We do not believe in the current forms of gun control, which will likely do little to curb gun violence."

    Our platform on the Second Amendment is ridiculous.  Curbing gun violence has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.  The violence was around at the time of the Amendment and there is nothing in it about how to solve the problem of gun violence.  I'm sure the writers were fully aware of the inherent risk that came along with the Amendment.  Please stop inserting issues into a Constructional Amendment that do not belong there.  That statement in "Where We Stand" smells a lot like East Coast ignorance.  Our platform on the Second Amendment should simply paraphrase it.   And that goes with other platforms whereas there is clear text within the Constitution.  Our problems cannot be solved with obsolete Six Sigma mentality like the "formation of Firearm Responsibility Groups."  These groups will not curb gun violence.  All they will do is teach somebody not to point the muzzle in the wrong direction.  Thus, reducing even criminals from accidentally shooting themselves.

     

  • Health Care   4 weeks 17 hours ago

    Hello writer. Excellent post. You have acquired one more fan. Please carry on the good work and I will look forward to see more posts.

    Dr Oz Forskolin

  • Second Amendment   4 weeks 1 day ago

    Thank you mkoll. All please remember, all Whig policies are crafted by the many ( you!) ; they are all works in progress. Whigs WIP it up!

    Whig out.

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer