Lamentations on the American Character

Standard

The first time (a couple months ago) I heard a highly respected Conservative radio host speculate on the ‘inevitability’ of Hillary Clinton as the next president of the United States. I thought I had misunderstood or heard wrong, this was not only a Conservative but the most ubiquitous kind of Conservative, a Religious Conservative. Several weeks later I heard that vile sentiment repeated by another respected Religious Conservative talking head and then a few others.

(Just as a remotely related side note, there are very few Conservatives in public forums who will admit to being non-believers. They really believe that without the “religious” you cannot be a “Conservative”. In other words, there are a LOT of misguided Patriots out there.)

What are they doing, I asked myself? Are they giving up without a fight? Well now, religiosity aside, I understand! That was just a clever bait and Hillary has swallowed the lie and is running with it.

Conservatives want her to run because they are under the illusion that the American public will see her flaws and her inability to lead, I am afraid however that they underestimate the gullibility of the American voter.

To my mind, and probably to the minds of millions of others who love and believe in the United States ‘as it used to be,’ it is almost inconceivable that Democratic voters would even allow a worn-out nag like Hillary to get to the post-primary starting gate of the 2016 election race, much less elect her president. But, in retrospect, it was also inconceivable to me that Obama would win a second term after doing so much damage to America during his first term.

I certainly have a knack for over-estimating the intelligence and patriotism of the American voter.

On the other side of the equation, who do the Conservatives have who might beat Hillary?

(note that I do not use the word “Republicans” any longer; it is the Republican party in name only now; the official renaming of the party to the “Religious Conservative Party” may not happen any time soon but it is already a reality.)

Rand Paul is, for the moment, the public front-runner (at least according to some media polls). His Libertarian positions make him a strong contender to many thousands who are fed up with the heavily socialist positions of the Obama administration (and a potential Clinton administration). His problem is he is seen by many as a poor judge of the very messy International situation. He is gradually changing but I think, unless he poses some strong and aggressive National Defense positions, he will continue to be seen as an isolationist. To me, the thought of a strong super power, standing virtually alone in this world gone mad is an attractive ‘comic-book possibility’ but I can too easily envision the end result: America as a fortress of Democracy surrounded by, and eventually overwhelmed by a huge Islam o-Nazi Caliphate.

Not a pretty picture or a happy ending. Who want’s to live in a fortress anyway!

The United States needs a leader who will actually commit all of our power to defeating radical Islam. Do it with sanctions, do it with missiles, do it any way that works but do it NOW before those barbarians get any stronger. Obama will not do it, Clinton will not do it and it is unlikely that many of the Conservative pretenders to the presidency have the guts to do it.

I believe that that leader is out there!

It seems to me that the one person who could do it is Lt Col Alan West, he has however, decided not to run for the presidency, at least not yet. I’m hoping someone can change his mind and hoping against hope that a man like him, a man who understands the Islam o-Nazi mind set and it’s threat to a civilized world, can actually win the presidency.

I fear, however, that is a pipe-dream. I fear that I am once again over-estimating the intelligence and patriotism of the American voter.

Advertisements

The Case Against Social Conservatism

Standard

crossroads

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
— Albert Einstein

Once again, the Republicans in the House of Representatives have allowed Social Conservatives to shoved aside the issues that are important to normal voting Americans in favor of a Social Conservative moral message. They have created another abortion bill; this one would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Will they never learn?

Alright so Kermit Gosnell was a real piece of human excrement, we have laws that will take care of him, we don’t need grandstanders like Trent Franks (R-Az) to turn it into a ‘federal case’ for his personal satisfaction or for political gain.

Normal Americans (and yes! The implication is that Social Conservatives do not behave like normal people, they have taken the role of moral arbiters) don’t want Washington ‘evangelists’ controlling, or even attempting to control their lives — especially their intimate personal lives. Who they sleep with, who they marry, if and when they decide to have a baby or terminate a pregnancy: these are questions that can not be and should not be answered by the Federal government. These are personal situations that DON’T require Federal government (or any government’s) oversight. A person’s behavior, as long as it is not illegal, should always be protected by the government NOT controlled by the government.

Social Conservatives always preach about limited government and individual freedom and then do what they can to inject the government into our personal lives and limit our freedom until it conforms to THEIR values. They helped the Republican party “shoot itself in the foot” in 2012 by doing that and they seem determined to do it to us again in 2014 and 2016. What a price we paid!

Republicans (who ALMOST ALL call themselves Conservatives now-a-days) went down to defeat in the last presidential election at least partially because the Republican electorate saw religious loons like Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman threatening to take the lead in the Republican race, so they rushed to Mitt “Milktoast” Romney’s side and, in the end, were defeated not just by the Democrats but by potential Republican voters who felt that they couldn’t trust or even endure four years of ‘Mr. Nice Guy,’ so they stayed at home on election day.

Lets not do that again! If Social Conservatives really care about limited government and personal freedom they should start acting like it. Our next Republican platform should contain NO moral manifestos. No one needs to know how Social Conservatives feel about their personal behaviors and certainly no one has any reason to care. We have hundreds of thousands of pages of LAW ‘on the books’ that has been meticulously worded, thoroughly vetted, tried and tested. We certainly don’t need religious preference and modern interpretations of ancient manuscripts (which, when it comes down to it is all the Social Conservatives have to offer) added to our civil laws.

To be clear, I am not criticizing what “believers” believe (unless they are terrorists) or how they apply those beliefs to their PERSONAL lives; what I am criticizing is their childish and boorish behaviors when it comes to what others believe or don’t believe. Election to public office is not an invitation to run everyone else’s lives, it is a mandate to responsibly run a branch or office of government to the benefit of ALL Americans.

REFERENCE:

Washington Post Blogs: The House abortion bill likely won’t make it into law. But it still matters.

Uncompromising Conservatism: FAIL!

Standard

In this final fiscal cliff drama, the hard-line Conservatives are being extremely self-righteous about not compromising their beliefs on taxes and spending — and they, in a perfect world, are absolutely right. In a perfect world, which is far from today’s situation, they WOULD BE right but in the real world . . . today’s world . . . they are continuing to act like fools.

Lets go back about 2-1/2 months to that contentious period before the elections. Once again, the hard-line Conservatives were standing up and insisting that no one but a card-carrying, Limbaugh and Hannity approved Conservative should be the next president and that that Romney guy just didn’t measure up. Yeah, he was kind of Conservative but not an uncompromising hard-liner. So, before the election, the hard-line Conservatives did not campaign for Romney and on election day they stayed home by the hundreds of thousands — their attitude was, it was either someone they chose or nothing: i.e. if we can’t have our way, re-electing Barack Obama and allowing him to continue his destruction of the country is OK with us.

Fast forward back to today, Republicans in Congress are fighting for the best deal they can get for the majority of taxpayers and Barack Obama is playing hard ball (from Hawaii) on the other team, using all his resources and telling all his half truths — half-truths readily echoed by the Liberal media. Bottom line: It’s either “over the cliff” or settle for what they (the Republicans) can get Obama to agree to.

If those hard-line Conservatives were not such self-righteous idiots and did the right thing back in the run-up to the November elections, they very well could be dealing with a Republican president instead of a Socialist-leaning Democrat. Their tax proposals would, no doubt, be well received and the size of government would begin to be reduced on Jan, 20, 2013 as promised by Mitt Romney.

What would be worse for the country? Mitt Romney who is a Republican but not a “certified” Conservative or Barack Obama who is . . . well, what he always has been? I asked that question to a hard-line Conservative radio host and he claimed that Romney would “not necessarily” be better for the country. Not necessarily? What is he smoking?

What this radio host and all of his hard-line Conservative buddies are missing is the fact that Conservative principles are not “The Gospel” to anyone but other hard-line Conservatives (and that’s far, far less than 1/2 the country); another fact they seem to overlook is that our government and, indeed, the entire country always has and always will run on compromise. Most Republicans, most Democrats and, indeed, most Americans not only realize that but are forced to live with that fact every day.

For my part, I’m sick of the hard-line Conservative’s holier than thou attitude. I may occasionally still read their articles, listen to their radio shows and watch them on TV and even waste my time arguing with them, but I believe their rhetoric even less than I did before.

Sick of the Conservative B.S.

Standard

In the November 12th edition of The American Thinker Magazine, a hard-line Conservative publication, the very first line in the article titled It Is Not Too Early for Conservatives… reads:

“The Republican Party lost the 2012 election while conservatives watched from the sidelines.”

Essentially, that is a clear admission that Conservatives in the Republican party made the choice to give the country four more years of the socialist-leaning Liberal, Barack Obama, rather than vote for a candidate that they felt was not “Conservative enough”. Like spoiled grade schoolers, they took their “ball” and went home rather than allow their team to win.

Although Conservatives are now suggesting that the Republican Party is not really “their team” they should perhaps take their heads out of the sand and get a firm grip on the fact that a moderate Republican President would have been a whole lot better for America than the Liberal Democratic President is — or will be for the next four years. Now, however, it may be too late for Conservatives to start thinking about America’s future, rather than their own.

That’s it!

That’s all there is to say: You should blame the hard-line Conservatives, and especially the “Social Conservatives” (which is just a politically correct way of saying “Christian Conservatives”) for what is about to happen to you and all of us in 2013 and beyond! With a moderate Republican in the presidency it would still have been a “hard knock life” for sure but there would still have been a ray of hope for a bright future.