Culture: Why Madonna and other Celebrities Ought to be Conservative

Screen Shot 2014-02-06 at 3.57.53 PM

So I’m passing through my bedroom  in the rushed, morning ritual of getting 3 kids to schools on different campuses, at slightly varying times – this keeps it exciting – and a story on the morning news catches my attention.  (I leave the TV on while I dart in and out of my room hoping to stay connected to the outside world).  The story highlights Madonna’s support of a boycott of the Winter Olympics in Russia in protest of the Communist regime’s imprisonment of the female rock band, “P*ssy Riot.”  In fairness to the context of the story, I am not sure if the band’s imprisonment was the result of the Russian government’s attempt to (a) squelch their “First Amendment” rights (recall the First Amendment in America’s Bill of Rights guarantees five freedoms, one of which is freedom of expression); or (b) punish their lawless behavior – specifically, staging a raunchy riot in a church, no doubt vandalizing someone else’s property.  We’ll leave the topic of rights having corresponding responsibilities, like respect, for another discussion.

The first order of business it seems would be to remind Madonna that the incident occurred in Russia not America!  The American regime is unique among all the nations in that it is founded on the belief of the equal, natural rights of individuals.  This is what is meant by “American Exceptionalism” – America is the exception to the rule.  In America, uniquely, (we believe) government exists to secure these equal, natural rights, our Declaration of Independence eloquently states.  Hence, the Russian band enjoys no “First Amendment” protection because freedom of expression – or any other kind of freedom – is not guaranteed in a Communist regime.  (For a list of Communist regimes – past/present – consult Wikipedia or the t-shirt collections of many celebrities).  The collective State is supreme in such regimes NOT the individual.  And they employ force – not consent – to govern.  I submit the band’s two-year prison sentence and Obamacare penalties, as evidence. (force = employing the power of the state/gov’t. to ensure compliance)

Which brings me to my point about the ideology/politics of celebrities.  These are the people who make their living and whose vocation IS self expression – “the First Amendment incarnate.”  They should be the standard-bearers of the American regime AND free enterprise, which simply put, is freedom of expression in the marketplace.  In other words, celebrities ought to be Conservative not Progressive (synonym for liberal but more positive sounding).  Conservatives believe in the preservation of the Constitutionally-defined role of government, embraced in the American founding; Progressives want to get past or “progress beyond” this pre-defined role of government, in favor of an ever-expanding government role.

Personal Note: Reflections on Actor Philip Seymour Hoffman and Addiction

My kids and me:  Anne (12), Ty (9 for a few more days), and Jack (14)

My kids and me: Anne (12), Ty (9 for a few more days), and Jack (14)

I made the call today.  As I was leaving my Pilates class I overheard one of my classmates asking our instructor how much weight she had lost, to which she responded 15 pounds.  I congratulated her and told her how jealous I was; then quickly left, jumped in my car, and dialed the number  for my “preferred” weight-loss program (the number was preprogrammed).  Nervously waiting as the phone rang I felt a sense of relief when a familiar voice answered.  I sheepishly asked her if the program took “repeat offenders” – the name I’d given myself as a feeble attempt to lessen my humiliation and embarrassment at being a “restart” TWICE!  Of course they take repeat offenders,  weight-loss being big business in a country where half the population is overweight!  (My commentary, not hers; she was very gracious and immediately put me at ease).  I scheduled my “work-up” for today – before I could change my mind.  So as of now I’m officially “on the wagon.”

Weight has always been an issue for me.  I went on my first diet when I was in 5th grade so I could wear “Luv-It” jeans – the original jeans with embellished pockets.  My weight was successfully maintained through Middle and High School, no doubt due to my “religious” commitment to healthily eating, avid water drinking, and frequent exercise.  Naturally I gained the “Freshman 15” (or 20) in college but was able to beat it back, despite being introduced to Diet Coke and late-night studying.  The status quo prevailed until I had children in my early and mid thirties.  Since then I have been a solid 40 pounds overweight except for a brief respite in 2009 when I initially enrolled in this particular weight-loss program at the occasion of my 40th birthday.  I lost 36 pounds but it was back in less than a year.

What I’m trying to say is this:  but for the grace of God I’m addicted to food and not heroin or alcohol!  I’ve actually had the thought that if I was an alcoholic I’d be a miserable drunk because I couldn’t stay off the bottle.  One taste is not good enough.  So I understand why they say “once an alcoholic always an alcoholic!”  Once an overeater . . . you get the picture.  But unfortunately I still have to eat, so moderation and portion control are a must.  It’s up to me to find a “framework” to achieve and maintain my goal – a healthy lifestyle of which proper weight is a byproduct.  This is the genius of America’s Founding Fathers.  They accurately assessed “flawed” human nature (self-destructive tendencies being one such flaw) and accounted for it in the republic they designed.   In a society based on self-rule, people will necessarily be given  a lot of power, particularly those popularly elected to govern over others.  But that power has to be limited and checked, in other words, carefully prescribed.   After much trial and error, the Founders devised our constitutional republic as the best form of government to maximize personal and public happiness.  The Constitution prescribes the optimal arrangement of political power to achieve a government of, by, and for the people.One of TLBCo.'s new designs for spring

One of TLBCo.’s new designs for spring

Personal Note: “Super Annie” to the Rescue!

DSC_0004

I must confess THIS is the photo I wanted to include in my previous post about the birthday parties that I’ve been throwing for the Constitution the last several years at my kids’ elementary school.  It’s a “double” cookie cake because this was the most cost-effective way to have cakes for both 4th grade classes.  The kids love it because it has lots of icing; I like it because I have them spell out “We the People” on the document, providing a nice lead-in to our discussion.  We talk about how in the American form of government, uniquely, sovereignty or power resides outside the government with the people.

Calling my daughter – Anne – “Super Annie” is an inside, family joke.  We all precede our name with “Super” when we think we’ve done something really outstanding.  I started the tradition by calling myself “Super Mom”, many times jokingly, when I do the things all moms are tasked with – many times simultaneously.  I even received “Super Mom” PJs one year as a Mother’s Day present!  In this particular case, Anne earned the distinction.  After lamenting the fact that I knew I had a photo of one of the Constitution Day cookie cakes but couldn’t find the photo to include with my post, she went straight to our desktop computer and produced it!  Better late than never?  Thanks, “Super Annie!”

Personal Note: A Quiet Constitution Day

DSC_0041-1Yesterday marked a departure in my annual Constitution Day festivities.  For the last 3 years I’ve gone to one of my kids’ elementary school classrooms and thrown a birthday party for the Constitution complete with cookie cake, candles, patriotic plates and napkins, party favors and a brief presentation about the honoree.  Kids know birthday parties so it’s fun way to highlight and celebrate the Constitution while piquing their interest in the subject.  I always leave feeling renewed and excited about the possibility and potential of helping our kids – “Liberty’s kids” – to learn to love these things.  And seeing their faces light up does a mom’s heart “good”.   All is not lost if we look for fun and innovative ways to celebrate our country’s unique and exceptional heritage.  I believe there’s a document that reminds us we have a duty to do these things but it’s birthday is in July!

By Design: Aiming at the Heart of Natural Law

Just government is an ultimate good and the aim of Constitution

Just government is an ultimate good and the aim of the constitutional ordering of separate and arranged powers

Identify target, take aim, fire!  Archery has as its effect the focusing and synchronizing of individual efforts into a common aim at a desired target of highest value.  Even when the mark (bullseye) is missed, the presence of the target produces the likelihood of better outcomes than those that exist in the absence of it.  Aristotle used the archer’s example to illustrate Natural Law.  His Hierarchy of Goods composes the rings of the target, culminating in the ultimate good.  The ordering of goods is as follows:

1.  The good is that at which all things aim

2.  The good is in each thing

3.  The things – and so, the good in each – are arranged in a hierarchy (known as the Creator’s natural order of things)

4.  The ultimate goods – highest ordered – are pursued for their own sake

The founders of America believed just government to be an ultimate good.  This is the aim of the Constitutional ordering of separate and arranged powers.  The Constitution prescribes the optimal arrangement of political power to achieve a government of, by, and for the people.