Some of Paul's Thoughts and Beliefs

Okay, dunno why anyone would really care what -I- think, but some people out there do, so here's a collection of odd thoughts, beliefs, and (no doubt) ramblings. :)

So, I come closest to what's called a "right-approaching" libertarian -- a libertarian who comes to the fold by way of fiscal conservatism. However, I'm not a card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party since they go a bit too far in their extremism. A true pity, since they generally have good ideas and, were they a bit less wild, might actually have a chance of collecting a few votes in November. Unshakeable convictions are a fine thing, but compromise -- especially when you have a better chance of effecting changes from within the system -- is a better thing, IMHO.

Maybe I should form my own party. Anyone with me? :)

Specifically, on various issues:

• illegal immigration: close the border now! This should have been done YEARS ago. Once the border has been sealed, then we can talk about how to handle the illegal aliens we have here now. While deportation is the official right-wing solution, I'm aware that it is effectively impossible...some sort of compromise will have to be made at some point, whether we want to admit it or not.
• Barack Obama: in 2008 he seemed a legitimately decent sort, but his politics seemed too liberal for my tastes back then...and his actions since have borne this out. His answer to everything seems to be that the government MUST provide...and provide damned near everything. From ObamaCare to the takeover of GM and Chrysler -- and the violation and disregard of the federal government's own bankruptcy statutes thereby -- to the "card-check" bill to cap-and-trade, it has become clear that this president regards the private sector as The Enemy -- in fact, he even referred to it as the enemy in his first book. It has also become clear that he seems to think of his party constituencies, especially Big Labor, before the country as a whole.
• Economic Recovery: I don't claim to have all the answers, but I can pretty much guarantee that throwing $787 billion down a hole in Washington and calling it "stimulus spending" was not the best road to take. Did anyone bother telling Barack Obama that for every dollar you squeeze through the US government's strainers, you only get about 60 cents' return? Wouldn't it have been better to simply declare a moratorium on all federal income and payroll tax withholding for, say, six months?
• Energy policy:
  • ANWR: I'm for immediate drilling in ANWR. The media almost never mentions the facts about this, but luckily the U.S. Geological Survey does: the mean amount of recoverable oil there is about 16 billion barrels. That's way more than enough to make it worthwhile. The drilling area is only a 2,000-acre footprint in one corner of the 19-million acre ANWR, the northwest corner...that's less than one-hundredth of one percent of ANWR, AND it's right near the existing drilling facilities in Prudhoe Bay and the existing pipeline there that runs south. And studies have shown that local flora and fauna actually thrive in drilling and pipeline areas, because hunting and trapping are banned within a certain distance of the facilities.
    See? Now you know the rest of the story!
  • Long-term: using oil as a fuel is a colossal waste, and it will be years before the existing folly slows and stops. What will replace it? Electricity....but not primarily from wind- or solar-power, both of which are either too inefficient or too unreliable for large-scale industrial applications.
    Ultimately, we will be using fusion generators. We have already surpassed the break-even point with testbed tokamak fusion reactors, so now it's only a matter of time and money before the technology can be fully deployed. A consortium of US and European interests is currently at work on the newest testbed, the ITER project in Europe, and their efforts should be strongly encouraged. It will be a long and expensive road, but at the end? Effectively limitless electrical power, using hydrogen -- the most common element in the Universe -- as fuel. And there is no long-term radioactive waste!
• Gun control: I could favor a 7- or 14-day waiting period to allow strict, complete background checks, and a cap on sales to an individual per year to limit the buying of weapons (for gangs, etc.) by third parties.
• Abortion: should be a medical decision, not a political one, solely between an adult woman and her doctor. Yes, I side mostly with the Democrats on this one.
• Drugs: I favor decriminalization -- and taxation -- of marijuana; the proceeds (and decrease in judicial system load) to be used for going after the harder stuff and for medical efforts at rehab. I would draw the line there, though; no other drugs to be decriminalized.
• The Clintons: reptiles, but remarkably well-spoken ones. During his term, Bill lived and died by the photo-op and the sound-bite, which is no way to run a Presidency. He played the media like an orchestra conductor, arranging diversions and timely out-of-country journeys to escape unhealthy attention. My friends from Arkansas knew he was a snake, long before we all realized it -- to our sorrow. Anyone who would stiff the moving company after they moved their family from the Arkansas Governor's Mansion back to Hope deserves burial under a big rock (yea, my roommate knows the Graebel movers who got stiffed by Bill and Hillary).
  
• Newt Gingrich: extremely bright, and an SF fan, but his abrasive and outspoken manner means he can never be a viable candidate for national office. A pity, since I met him and saw his SF-themed speech at the 1992 Nebula Awards Banquet (most of the liberal SF writers, those preachers of tolerance, walked out during his speech)...and I thought the speech was terrific.
• Affirmative Action: a stopgap policy whose demise is now overdue. Equal Opportunity is the law, and should be, but quotas, set-asides, and preferential treatment harm both the recipients and those who it unfairly passes over. When looking at what's called "the race problem" in America, keep in mind that groups like the NAACP -- as well as the KKK -- would no longer be necessary if we ever "all just get along." So now you know why they're always engaging in "race-baiting."

Well, it's easy. Space is deep. Space is vast. It's so vast that mathematically, numerically, I'm certain there is life, and intelligent life, somewhere Out There. There may be life elsewhere in the Solar System, but not, I suspect, intelligent life.....
--But just as I'm sure the Sun will rise tomorrow, I'm sure there are others out there somewhere who look up at their skies (or perhaps they've conquered those skies, as mankind will someday do) and wonder if they're alone, too.

Okay, back to aliens. :) Remember, Space is Deep. Alien civilizations might occur, say, an average of a few hundred lightyears apart. I'd be astonished if there was one within, say, a 40 lightyear radius of our star system; the nearest is likely much farther away. That's a lot of territory to cover -- there are hundreds of stars within 40 lightyears of the Sun -- and it takes time to cross those vast gulfs, forty years even at lightspeed, much longer if more conventional speeds have to be used. It's not a contradiction to believe in extraterrestrial intelligence and not believe UFOs are dropping in every Wednesday; it's more a sense of "we know they're out there; eventually, we'll hear from them... or, one homes, we'll find them ourselves!"

As for UFO visitations and government cover-ups, puh-leeze! Our government can't even keep small secrets; there's no way they could keep a large secret like a UFO coverup. If we were being visited so frequently, why the heck haven't our alien visitors just landed on the White House lawn and said "hi there"? (Ahh, but you say "They're studying us first. They have a prime directive that forbids them from interfering." Sure. Uh-huh. Whatever you say....)

"Gee, Paul, does this mean you like nuclear bombs?" Nope, and I applaud the world's efforts to limit them and decrease their numbers. We're talking apples and oranges here: a thermonuclear fusion bomb is not a fusion power plant.

Photovoltaic solar power, while a great idea, remains too expensive for large-scale power generation: it would take a solar array dozens of square miles in area to equal the output of just one conventional nuclear power facility. That's dozens of square miles of ecological impact. No sun reaching the ground means no plants, no animals, etc. Plus, solar cells are expensive and environmentally damaging to make, and a large array would also require a huge infrastructure to build (concrete and steel supports, miles and miles of wire, and an army of people to keep the cells clean). Funny how this gets overlooked by nearly everyone who's into solar power.... For a GREAT description of the problems inherent in this, see James P. Hogan's excellent piece "Know Nukes," collected in a few of his collections and anthologies.

After the Moon, I say we should head for the Asteroid Belt. Yea, I know, we'll probably end up going to Mars instead......and I think that might be a mistake. While Mars does hold some answers to questions we have and would be a fine research destination, ultimately we'd reap more benefits by exploring -- and exploiting -- the Belt. Lots of raw material, stone and metals, a weightless environment to manipulate it in, the potential of moving it to a closer orbit for convenience, maybe even melt and reform asteroids into colonies and bases..... The possibilities are limitless.

--But, we'll probably go to Mars instead, because it sounds neeter. Well, I'm sure neet-sounding destinations are a great way to plan the future of your species, aren't you?

I could be considered a Deist (like, e.g., Ben Franklin before me) because I don't rule out the possibility that a Guiding Force set the universe in motion 15 or 20 billion years ago -- this is popularly called "The Great Watchmaker Theory," wherein Someone got things ticking and has since left for sunnier realms....

In any event, I refuse to "diss" anyone on the basis of their religion. All seem equally valid, and although religions have caused a heck of a lot of death and destruction on this world, they can also be great forces for positive change. (At more cynical moments I'll observe that at the very least, they can keep otherwise idle minds occupied. :)) I'll just observe that overall, in my personal experience, the most well-adapted people I know tend to be from more permissive faiths and belief-paths -- pagans, free-thinkers, agnostics, etc. -- while the followers of stricter faiths seem a bit more uptight and less adaptive. Food for thought.

Believe what you want. In the end, the same Sun warms us all, and the same stars beckon to us from high above.

• ...in sloppy pseudoscience and woolly thinking: far too many of my friends see shows like The X-files and think it's a documentary, that it's All Real. Or they believe -- really believe -- in astrology, alien-made faces on Mars, the lost continent of Atlantis, psychic friends, etc. No, I'm not kidding, they really believe in this crap.
  Folks, escapism can be fun, but don't let it take over your thinking, reasoning minds!
• ...in a willingness to accept information -- often incorrect -- at face-value, without checking for its accuracy or for biases in the source of the info. "A poll taken today confirmed...." Whose poll? How was it taken, by phone, mail or online? How were the questions phrased? What time of day were the contacts made? (That's important....) What area were people canvassed in? It's ridiculously easy to slant a poll any way you'd like. Always be wary of information presented by any side with an agenda to push.
• ...in the acceptance of information off the Internet as if it were sacred truth. Y'see, kids, back in the 20th Century we used to have these things called books, and you could tell from the book whether it was a good source of information or not. You'd see a trustworthy publisher embossed right there on its spine, or an established name in encyclopaedic circles, etc. Nowadays all we have is words on a computer screen. Who wrote them? Can you trust them? Sure, sometimes you can, but there are fewer clues as to whether the source is trustworthy, or biased, or just someone's opinions. Just as I said above, be cautious when quoting from sites that seem to have an agenda to promote.
• ...in the continuing effort by various groups -- including the media, the schools, some politicians, some churches, and even some confused but well-meaning parents -- to encourage you to believe that "mediocrity is okay"....that, in the interests of diversity or balance, a certain CD, book or piece of art is Really Good...when in fact, it's sub-par....that not succeeding in school is okay because, well, it's tough and very few kids can hack it in these tougher times. Balderdash! Less isn't more, and crap still isn't good.

Strive To Think. Strive To Achieve.

Seize the day and don't stop at anything less than doing your best, no matter what the Mavens of Mediocrity tell you. Does it seem like a certain music group isn't as good as someone else who's less popular? Maybe even a whole style of music? Does it seem like a certain book, touted by the agents of political correctness, isn't really that good? Guess what? You're not wrong! They aren't that good after all, and you can find better stuff if you look hard for it. Sometimes you have to do some digging to find diamonds in the rough, but it's worth it...and the journey can be a worthwhile adventure in itself.
Without good thinkers and gung-ho achievers, we are doomed to sink in an ocean of mediocrity, crap and swill.

TOP of Paul's home-page
My current fave vibes
Past, present and future books
Contents of my CD changer
My favorite books of all time
Current news and happenin's