|
Post Election Thoughts Now that I've had an extra couple of days to process the results of Election 2008, there are a few extra things to be said beyond my insightful thoughts that I shared in my previous column. Unite! I'd love to credit the person that coined this phrase, but I cannot remember who said it: Politicians do not unite Americans, elections do. All Americans were united on November 4, 2008, to recognize that, despite our philosophical differences, we would honor the results of the election, and I intend to do that. Clever new merchandise is on sale anticipating the end of Barack Obama's term. While I think this humorous, it misses the point in one respect (we don't know that Obama will be a one-termer) and is wrong in another. One of the goods that is available is a sweatshirt that says something to the effect of: "Barack Obama, Not My President." I disagree. Barack Obama is my president because I recognize and respect elections. Now as for the business of uniting under Barack Obama, I have no intention to unite with him, and I can explain.
I am a Conservative. I believe in limited government, a strong defense, and fiscal responsibility. I vote for reducing taxes for everyone. I vote for pro-life/anti-abortion candidates. I vote for free market advocates. I vote for domestic energy expansion, including but not limited to ANWR, coastal drilling and shale oil exploration. I vote for candidates who will appoint judges to the bench who will interpret the U.S. Constitution to the letter and according to the intent of the founding fathers. I vote against socialism in all forms, including but not limited to health care, retirement funding, and welfare. I vote against school levies and I vote for school voucher/tax credits. I vote for the strongest military possible. I vote for traditional religious freedom. I vote for English as the primary language. I vote for traditional family values. I vote for strict immigration restrictions. I vote for the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and The Federalist Papers. George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Rush, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan are my heroes. I disassociate with those who are racist, those who are divisive with regard to American exceptionalism, and those who do not respect America, American history and the Founding Fathers and their documents. Those are my positions. If Barack Obama wants to unite with me on them, he is free to do so. Conservatism, Really Part of me is now glad that I don't have to defend a politician that says he's a Conservative but really isn't. The "Maverick" line used in recent McCain/Palin adds grated on me. I don't want "Maverick," I want Conservative. And McCain is no Conservative. I love George W. Bush. He's been a good president, but he's let me down in a few areas. Despite this I've defended him, and it has been exhausting to do so because he is conservative on some issues, but he is not a Conservative. Truthfully, I wasn't looking forward at all to defending John McCain's non-Conservative policies. John McCain rubbed me the wrong way on immigration policy, on campaign finance reform and on tax policy. His participation in the Gang of Fourteen was downright angering. I contemplated sitting out the election until I saw who the alternative was, and even then I knew I'd have to hold my nose to vote. I speak for millions of Americans in saying that Sarah Palin, and only Sarah Palin, got me excited to cast my vote. It's time we see what unabashed Liberalism is and put it on parade. While the Liberals are governing for all to see, we Conservatives can contrast our philosophy and message with theirs and come back stronger. And speaking of George W. Bush, we never had to wake up in the morning and worry about what executive order he'd signed overnight. We never had to worry about him compromising national security in conversations or deals with foreign governments. We never had to worry about how he might have subverted the U.S. Constitution behind closed doors. Even Liberals, despite their hysterical hatred for the man, have to acknowledge that they didn't fear for their long-term safety under George W. Bush. I'm hearing cries from the Liberals of Guantanamo Bay, etc., however, he followed the U.S. Constitution in protecting Americans, despite what Liberal judges claimed. Now that we have a man in the White House who has expressed disappointment with the U.S. Constitution, I fear for our future. Exposing The Allegedly Compassionate The election of Barack Obama has exposed the "caring" among us who believe that the United States Federal Government is an agent of change for the LORD, that somehow government welfare is the will of God. I'm not sure how we've arrived at this point, but it is simply erroneous. Clearly there is a difference between an individual giving his time and money to those less fortunate both domestically and abroad and the government taxing the same individual's wealth and disbursing the taxes as the government sees fit. Further, the "caring" individuals who voted Obama are highly sensitive and throw out the "judge not, lest ye be judged" line very loosely when their vote is questioned. The irony here is that it is these politically Liberal Christians that are doing the judging: they presume to think that the federal government knows how to better use our money than we do. These folks would never come to my doorstep and request that I give 39.6% of my top marginal rate, nor would they demand to my face that I give 20% of the capital gains profit that I make in my savings account (for my emergency use in the event of an illness) or in my IRA when it is accessed, but they freely vote for candidates who will do just that and who have the ability to imprison me for doing anything but comply with these overreaching demands. The Founding Fathers believed that liberty was of paramount importance. The individual, they believed, was best equipped to determine how to live their lives and use their wealth. A government, be it a king or even an elected body, cannot determine what is best for an individual. Wealth, not welfare, is the solution to poverty. Wealth is generated when liberty is fostered. In nations that dictate career paths and job quotas, wealth is scarcely created and incentive is diminished (see Europe). Where welfare is predominant, those who are allegedly helped by the handouts are eventually trapped in their own poverty. Giving to the non-productive eliminates any incentive for them to eventually become productive. This not only ensures that the welfare rolls will continually expand, but it also robs the individuals of their dignity. Sadly, the economic policies and philosophy of Barack Obama, and his cohorts in congress such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, seek to expand the welfare state and increase the dependence of a growing number of citizens on the federal government. This will be a difficult cycle to break for a variety of reasons. As I alluded to in my previous column, once a majority of the electorate doesn't have to contribute to the treasury, they will be empowered to elect the politician that promises the most goodies. This will come at the expense of the minority that continues to contribute to the public treasury. Can you understand how the incentive for upward mobility would diminish under these circumstances? Further, the public school system has been churning out students that do not think critically about issues. American students are not taught about American exceptionalism, they're taught that the Pilgrims were a group of people (I am not making this up) who like to ride on boats, little time is spent discussing the Founding Fathers (and that time is spent talking about how they were wealthy slave owners), and on and on and on. Public eduction has moved away from American History and toward Social Studies, and this is not a good thing. How can we expect the electorate to vote in such a way as to choose the best leader for the greatest nation on earth instead of choosing the suit that promises the most stuff to the most people when we have a public educational system that favors the latter over the former? The Culture Of Life The issue of abortion is often at the heart of elections. Sadly, many Christians voted for the candidate in this election who not only is pro-abortion, but seeks to guard it by not even granting personhood to babies who survive a failed abortion procedure. In case you didn't know about this prior to the election, let me explain. One of the available abortion procedures involves medically inducing a violent labor that results in the baby dying in the birthing process. This procedure is not always successful, to the tune of 1 in 5 babies actually surviving the ordeal. Now because the mother intended to abort the baby, it was still not considered a person, and this living baby was left to die either on a hospital table, alone in a grieving room, in a laundry closet, etc. To prevent his barbaric act from occurring, legislation was introduced into the Illinois Senate a number of years ago that would have granted personhood to these babies which would then require that they receive medical attention to sustain their life. Barack Obama took the lead in voting against this procedure. This was the man that voted "present" over 100 times to avoid being pinned down, but he actually took a stand on this issue. His reasoning was that granting personhood to a baby surviving a botched abortion is a slippery slope that could eventually lead to harming Roe vs. Wade. Believe what you want about the feasibility of overturning Roe vs. Wade, or the garbage about outlawing abortion leading to unsafe abortions for women... set all of that aside for a minute and consider this statement: Barack Obama does not want to recognize a living baby, a viable baby outside of the womb, as a person. Concluding this column, my charge to you is to buck up and back up your vote. If you voted for McCain, er, Palin, work hard to promote Conservatism. Educate where you can, support Conservative candidates, and teach your children. If you voted for Obama, suck it up and don't whine when your position is challenged. Know why you voted for him and defend your position. If it turns out that you had no idea that he was a pro-infanticide, anti-American exceptionalism, racist socialist, shame on you. Look into the issues and vote intelligently the next time around. rg 11/7/2008 Read the response this column generated in: The Anger, Hate and Rage of a Liberal |
|
Archive | Home
|
