Obama: The Anti- Reagan
October 31, 2008 by Joe · Leave a Comment
A Time For Choosing
October 17, 2008 by Joe · Leave a Comment
I’ve posted this before, but once again this election season the Late great Ronald Reagan’s words forty four years ago are not only still relevant in today’s political climate but this 2008 election cycle as well.
The Future of the Conservative Movement
February 13, 2008 by Joe · 2 Comments
In a fundamental way, the conservative movement has to declare itself independent from the Republican Party.
Let me make very clear what I’m saying here. I am not saying there should be a third party – I think a third party is a dumb idea, will not get anywhere, and in the end will achieve nothing.
I actually believe that any reasonable conservative will, in the end, find that they have an absolute requirement to support the Republican nominee for president this fall.
And let me remind you, I say that in the context of personally believing that the McCain-Feingold Act is unconstitutional and a threat to our civil liberties.
And I say that in the context of believing that the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill was a disaster and was correctly stopped by the American people.
But I would rather, as a citizen, and I say this with Callista and I have two wonderful grandchildren. Maggie who is 8 and Robert who is 6. We think about their future. As a citizen, I would rather have a President McCain that we fight with 20% of the time, than a President Clinton or a President Obama that we fight with 90% of the time.
Let me, if I might, carry this a step further so that you understand where I am coming from. I believe the conservative movement has to think about reaching out to every American of every background. I think we have to decide that in 2010, we are going to recruit and support conservative candidates in Democratic districts, because the right answer to gerrymandering is to beat them in the primary.
The above is a snippet of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week. I took the liberty of bolding certain parts for added emphasis. It is an excellent speech and I urge everyone to either watch it or read the whole transcript.
The last few weeks up until Super Tuesday I had pretty much devoted the majority of posts on this blog to Arizona Senator John McCain and his moderate-to-liberal stances on many issues important to Conservatives. I live in Ohio and thus have not had the chance to vote in my State’s primary yet, but I was planning on voting for Fred Thompson until he had dropped out and then Mitt Romney until he had dropped out.
Now, as a registered Republican I am left with having to choose between the two GOP candidates whom I have rallied against the most, McCain and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. I could just sit at home and boycott the election, but I have a school levy on the ballot and other issues to vote on, so I won’t. What will I do come the general election time? it’s a Presidential election and that is when all the hot issues are usually on the ballots as there are the biggest voting turnouts at those times, and as an American I feel it is my duty to show up and vote on election day.
What about the Presidential election itself, despite the fact that Huckabee is still holding out hope of somehow siphoning off just enough delegates to be able to make it until the convention, it is all but official that John McCain is the Republican nominee. As I mentioned above I have made it pretty clear that as a Conservative, I am not a big fan of many of the moderate-to-liberal positions that McCain has taken on certain important issues. However, at the same time, I am definitely not a fan at all of the liberal-to-socialist stances on many issues that whomever will be the Democrat nominee holds.
The way I see it I am a Conservative, but not only that first and foremost I am an American. I, along with 75% of the American people believe that we have an obligation to defeat our enemies — the elites in the Democratic party believe they have an obligation to listen to the small but vocal lunatic fringe that wants to high tail it out of Iraq thus openly and forcibly result in America losing the war. I along with 85% of the American people believe we have an absolute obligation to defend America and her allies — the elites in the Democratic party have fought tooth and nail against funding our troops, our departments of security and our intelligence gathering efforts.
I’ve already made my decision and as Newt Gingrich said, “As a citizen, I would rather have a President McCain that we fight with 20% of the time, than a President Clinton or a President Obama that we fight with 90% of the time.”
I can understand the anger and frustrations among Conservatives over the fact that John McCain is going to be the nominee of the Grand Old Party, the party that is supposed to be the Conservative party — I’m angry over it too. I would be a liar if I said I did not flirt with both the idea of either not voting at all or writing in a third party candidate. The problem is anybody with any sense of rationalism can see that either one of those two options is in effect a de facto vote FOR either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
You could spin it any way you want to make yourself feel better about not supporting the “lesser of two evils“, but both refusing to vote for anybody and writing in “none of the above” or a third name is allowing the “greater of two evils” to take power. I don’t know how anybody can claim to be a “real” Conservative and so openly rather have a Democrat in office then a Republican — even if it is a Republican like McCain who does side more with the Democrat elites then the GOP’s Conservative base — just so it’s the Democrats doing the “ruining” of the country and not the “Republicans.”
Anybody who takes that stance is doing what we Conservatives claim the Democrats do all the time — being Elitist snobs who are letting vanity trump principles.
Would a “real” Conservative let a cut-and-run Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate in a time of war?
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative would not help to facilitate the Democrats in forcing America to lose the war and thus causing all the losses of our brave military personnel to have been in vain.
Would a “real” Conservative let a Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate who have a view that radical Islamic extremism is a “police” issue?
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative would know, just like Barry Goldwater knew, that — “If an enemy is bent on conquering you,, and proposes to turn all of his resources to that end, he is at war with you; and you — unless you contemplate surrender — are at war with him. Moreover — unless you contemplate treason — your objective, like his, will be victory. Not ‘peace,’ but victory.”
Would a “real” Conservative let a Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate, who have fought against the banning of partial birth abortions?
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative values the live of unborn children and would not let a Candidate in power who would fight to allow a barbaric procedure that induces labor and literally rips the unborn child to shreds — while there is a candidate in John McCain who has voted against and fought partial birth abortions.
Would a “real” Conservative let a Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate, who has called for higher taxes on the basis of “shared prosperity?”
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative would, even though he has legitimate reservations about him, support John McCain the only candidate running who has never voted for a tax increase.
Would a “real” Conservative let a Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate, who fight for mandated “socialized” health care?
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative would not throw their vote away allowing such a candidate in office, when there is a candidate whom while they don’t agree with on all issues, would not fight for “socialized” anything, let alone health care.
Would a “real” Conservative throw away their vote, and thus throw away their Conservative principles by allowing a Democrat into the White House with a Democrat controlled House and Senate, where together they can more easily push through extreme liberal plans that Conservatives know are not the best solutions to America’s problems — all because the Republican candidate is not a “perfect“ conservative?
The answer is no, a “real” Conservative would know that there is no such thing as the “perfect” candidate. A “real” Conservative would not be a cry baby with an “all or nothing” mentality. A “real” Conservative would know that even our standard bearer, Ronald Reagan was not perfect. Reagan ended up increasing the size of the federal government instead of decreasing it. Reagan ended up appointing Sandra Day O’Connor, who was anything but strict constructionist, to the Supreme Court. Reagan even ended up increasing income and payroll taxes. Reagan also ended up granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
If Ronald Reagan, an icon amongst Conservatives could be wrong on all those issues and still be adored and still have been way better then the alternative — a “real” Conservative would not take his ball and go home crying, they would, even though he may not be perfect or even a whole lot better, give John McCain a chance with the parts we do agree on him with rather then let the candidate in with whom we don’t agree with on anything.
So the question now is, what do “real” Conservatives do next?
The answer is we continue to fight for our Conservative principles. We continue to rally against the failed socialist ideas hidden under the false guise of “Progressivism” by the liberals. We fight as hard as we can to make sure that we don’t let those extreme liberal views into the White House, but even if they end up in their from now until — not just the election — but for all time, we raise our voices for Conservatism. We need to support John McCain, because it’s the right thing to do as “real” Conservatives and we also need to fight him tooth and nail if and when he tries to do things that we do not agree with because that too is the right thing to do as “real” Conservatives.
We need to stop being wrapped up in this notion that if the Executive branch of our government is not filled by staunch Conservative that all is lost. We must remember the great system of federalism built into our Constitution by our founding fathers and realize that there is a Legislative branch as well, that collectively wields even more power then the office of the President. We must remember that beyond Washington there are State and Local officials who are elected to represent us as well.
We need to take the anger that we are feeling because of the Presidential nominating process and channel it towards good use.
We need to follow my blogging friend Ablur’s advice, who says:
1. Stay informed of what is going on around you.
2. Share and interpret this information with everyone and anyone you can.
3. Write letters and hold your representatives feet to the fire, from the neighborhood watch to the President of the United States.The first one should be a breeze; you live and work where you are. You know those around you and what goes on where you live. You don’t need to stretch much to make a difference.
The second one will require you to actually act on what you believe and know. No matter your specialty, interpret and report to fellow conservatives what you see and hear. The liberal media isn’t going to help us stay informed. We will have to blog and spend time on forums to pass information along. We will have to spend a few minutes each day getting the word out and taking in what is going on elsewhere that may affect us. Use the knowledge and skill of fellow conservatives to keep you informed.
The third one will be our shining star, reminding the pandering power mongers who is really in charge. They won’t make a move against a unified body of conservatives bent on taking away the only thing that really matters to them, power. They will follow lock step as a bull firmly grasped by the ring in his nose, if we stay engaged.
If we don’t like the country-club Republican crop of candidates who wouldn’t know Conservatism if it bit them in the ass, then keep an eye out for the younger next generation of candidates and potential candidates at our state and local levels. Look out for the candidates who keep up the fight for individual liberty and personal responsibility, Look out for the candidates who keep up the fight against oversized government and pork barrel spending. Look out for the candidates that do fight to lower our taxes.
Support their election and re-election bids. Reward the good guys for keeping up the fight and put the bad guys on notice that we are coming after them. As Michelle Malkin said a while back:
Look at Barack Obama. Four years ago, he was in the Illiniois legislature. Now, he’s on the cusp of the presidency.
If you can’t stomach John McCain, channel your support and energies to Republicans who do represent your values and who have treated the conservative base as allies instead of enemies. There are a new generation of combat veterans running for office who haven’t made a career of trashing the base. Check out staunch economic, social, and national security conservative congressional candidates like Iraq/Afghanistan veteran Eric Egland in California’s fourth district. Check out the Vets for Freedom (vetsforfreedom.org) group for their endorsements.
Opposed to the amnesty bill? Republican Sens. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, and John Cornyn of Texas all fought the McCain-Kennedy-Graham-Martinez-Bush open-borders disaster. All of those Senators are up for re-election this year. Send them some money. Then send a few more bucks to the enforcement proponents on the House side as well.
Never stop raising your voice for Conservatism, If Congress, or whoever is in the Oval Office, brings up Amnesty stand up and fight it just like we did last summer. If Congress or whoever is in the Oval Office does anything that we do not agree with, stand up and fight it. Write letters to the editor of your local papers, write your elected officials, fax and call your elected officials, call your local talk shows, call the nationally syndicated shows.
When elected Republican officials who continuously do not do what they were elected to do, remind them of it and make them pay by voting in someone else.
We Conservatives know first and foremost that Conservatism is in essence, really just common sense. Check out the Platform of the American People, and fight for these issues. But most importantly, stand up and make your voices heard.
Check out my friends blog
January 23, 2008 by Joe · Leave a Comment
After pestering him insistently for a while now, Luke, my best friend since we were 4 years old has a blog at LukeOn.org. I helped him set it up. Check out his first post. We were alone all through elementary school and junior high in our admiration of Ronald Reagan and later George H.W. Bush.
He got fed up with the weather here in our hometown of Cleveland and moved to Arizona last year. He’s a big pro-Rudy guy, who I briefly got to switch to Fred until he started believing the MSM propaganda of Thompson being ‘lazy.’ Check him out and say hello, he’s got a great Ronald Reagan video up.
Some Quiz Fun
January 14, 2008 by Joe · 2 Comments
I found a neat quiz and really enjoyed the results, I’d thought I’d share it.
| Which Great US President Are You Most Like? created with QuizFarm.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| You scored as Ronald Reagan40th President, in office from 1981-1989 Born: 1911 Died: 2004
|
Human Events sticks up for Conservatism, and endorses the right man
January 11, 2008 by Joe · 4 Comments
Hot of the heels of Fred Thompson’s performance in the South Carolina debates, where he completely dominated, comes this story. Human Events, the weekly Conservative magazine — which just so happened to be Ronald Reagan’s favorite publication, has officially endorsed Fred Thompson.
Here is an excerpt of what Human Events had to say:
We make this endorsement on the basis of much research, having interviewed Sen. Thompson and some of his opponents, as well as examining what they have all said and done. We conclude that Thompson is a solid conservative whose judgment is grounded in our principles.
In his Senate years, Mr. Thompson compiled an American Conservative Union lifetime rating of 86.1, which is higher than both Sen. John McCain (82.3) and Rep. Ron Paul (82.3). The Club for Growth has praised Thompson as someone who has a strong commitment to limited government, free enterprise and federalist principles.
On the issues that matter most to conservatives, Sen. Thompson’s positions benefit from their clarity. He is solidly pro-life. He said that he was in favor overturning Roe v. Wade because it was “bad law and bad medical science.” As the National Right to Life Committee said in its endorsement of him Nov. 13, 2007, “The majority of this country is opposed to the vast majority of abortions, and Fred Thompson has shown in his consistent pro-life voting record in the U.S. Senate that he is part of the pro-life majority.”
Thompson’s record is solid on voting to preserve gun owners’ rights, cut taxes, reduce government spending and drill for oil in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He has voted consistently against gay marriage. Thompson is by no means perfect. He strongly supported the McCain-Feingold bill, did not support the impeachment of Bill Clinton on perjury and more than once voted with the trial lawyers against limitations on liability in defective product and medical malpractice cases.
We like the way Thompson unhesitatingly attacks the liberal ideologues and their activists such as MoveOn.org and the ACLU, and the way he reaches out to those we knew as the Reagan Democrats.
The question now is whether Sen. Thompson will do what he has not yet done: Take the advantages he is given by his intelligence, his principles, his political skills and this endorsement and make the best use of them.
As the primaries and debates speed by, we would like to see Sen. Thompson continue to invigorate his campaign to carry him successfully through Tsunami Tuesday and to nomination at the Republican convention.
Sen. Thompson, you suffer, like most conservatives, from the built-in problem of not being a professional politician. It’s precisely as Rush Limbaugh said of you: “The problem with Thompson is, and a little bit with me, is I’m a depth guy. I like depth. Television doesn’t reward depth. Television rewards zingers, one-liners, cutesyisms. Fred Thompson produced a brilliant 17-minute video that was on YouTube that explains everything about every issue that he cares about. It’s clear he’s thought deeply about a whole lot.”
I don’t think I could have said it better myself, if you want a double-talking career politician who is going to speak from both sides of his mouth, choose Mike Huckabee or any one of the democratic candidates. But if you are truly a Conservative, and you truly feel that the guiding principles of Conservatism: limited government, individual responsibility and individual liberty are the best values to guide are nation — there can only be one choice. Fred Thompson.
More at: Flopping Aces
Related: My endorsement
The “Moral” Political Quiz
December 24, 2007 by Joe · Leave a Comment
Not that I felt I needed confirmation in this, but it is confirmed — I’m a Conservative.
I never really take too much stock in these online political quizzes, though I do rather enjoy taking them. I found an interesting one which touts itself as a “morality-based political test.” Now I’m not sure what the designers of the test would infer about my morality, via my results — but the results did confirm something that I already knew. I am a Conservative — and according to the quiz more particularly what it refers to as an “Extreme Conservatism.”
According to the results I scored 4 on the Moral Order axis and -7.5 on the Moral Rules axis. Which specifically on the grid, put me dead center between “Economic Conservatism” and “Extreme Conservatism.” It listed Ronald Reagan as the closest out of U.S. Presidents to my political beliefs.
Interestingly enough out of the 399169 people who took the test, only 0.3% scored the same as me.
There are two versions the short and the long, I took the long one.
I’ll take a little more stock in this one, because according to the main page:
This test is (or at least tries to be) a different political test. Most tests assess your opinion by questioning your stance on political issues. This test explains why you think what you think by mapping your personal moral system. Moral views are the major factors that influence political opinions. Every political stance can be explained by one’s moral position on the inner value of human beings and their role in society.
Ronald Reagan’s 1981 Inaugural Address
December 19, 2007 by Joe · 1 Comment
Great words from the greatest President of my lifetime.
The 30 Year War: Mike Huckabee and the death of Conservatism.
December 15, 2007 by Joe · 5 Comments
Peggy Noonan, former Reagan speech-writer and author whose most recent book was a biography of Pope John Paul II, has written an excellent piece for the Wall Street Journal. With the rise of Mike Huckabee running as a “Christian leader” as opposed to a leader who just happens to be a Christian, Noonan wonders if the Gipper would have been able to be nominated in the current climate in the GOP.
Christian conservatives have been rising, most recently, for 30 years in national politics, since they helped elect Jimmy Carter. They care about the religious faith of their leaders, and their interest is legitimate. Faith is a shaping force. Lincoln got grilled on it. But there is a sense in Iowa now that faith has been heightened as a determining factor in how to vote, that such things as executive ability, professional history, temperament, character, political philosophy and professed stands are secondary, tertiary.
But they are not, and cannot be. They are central. Things seem to be getting out of kilter, with the emphasis shifting too far.
The great question: Does it make Mr. Huckabee, does it seal his rise, that he has acted in such a manner? Or does it damage him? Republicans on the ground in Iowa and elsewhere will decide that. And in the deciding they may be deciding more than one man’s future. They may be deciding if Republicans are becoming a different kind of party.
I wonder if our old friend Ronald Reagan could rise in this party, this environment. Not a regular churchgoer, said he experienced God riding his horse at the ranch, divorced, relaxed about the faiths of his friends and aides, or about its absence. He was a believing Christian, but he spent his adulthood in relativist Hollywood, and had a father who belonged to what some saw, and even see, as the Catholic cult. I’m just not sure he’d be pure enough to make it in this party. I’m not sure he’d be considered good enough.
If “Tax Hike” Mike Huckabee is what it means to be a Conservative in the Republican Party today, then Conservatism is truly dead and buried.
Much like Rush Limbaugh remarked a few weeks ago, as a Goldwater/Reagan Conservative, as somebody who believes in his very heart and soul that Conservatism is ultimately the best philosophy to guide our nation and ensure our freedom, liberty and ultimate survival — I find it very disheartening to be forced to bear witness to this radical redefining of what it means to be a Conservative.
Much like radical leftists have hijacked the term liberal and completely redefined what it has always meant, the religious right’s 30-year-long war to hijack the term Conservative and redefine its meaning is dangerously close to being completed, and will be finalized, if Mike Huckabee were to become the Republican Presidential Candidate.
While Mike Huckabee is indeed a Republican, he is most definitely not a Conservative, by any sense of the word. The extreme religious right seemingly adores him because of his socially conservative views, but those so-called socially conservative views not only do not make Huckabee even remotely a Conservative — they go against everything it means to be a Conservative.
This 30 year war waged by the religious right on Conservatism embraces the leftist viewpoint that we as a society have a duty to help the poor, but takes it one step further by stating that it is not just a “duty” but a “moral obligation.” That is at best George W. Bush’s so-called brand of “compassionate conservatism,” which itself is not really derivative of truly Conservative principles. This ideology is a far cry from the Goldwater/Reagan principles of smaller government, individual responsibility and personal freedom.
I somehow cannot see Mike Huckabee make the same kind of statement as Ronald Reagan did during his first inaugural address when he said, “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.”
If Mike Huckabee wins the Republican nomination for President, instead of getting ourselves another Ronald Reagan type as Conservatives have been longing for since the Gipper left office— we will be getting a candidate whom in every single fiber of his being is the opposite of Ronald Reagan and is in fact the Republican version of the man Reagan saved the country from in defeating him for the Presidency, Jimmy Carter.
While there will never be another Ronald Reagan, there is one guy who comes the closest to filling those boots, and it has nothing to do with the fact that he is an actor, but with the fact that whenever he opens his mouth and talks about ideas and potential policies — he is the only candidate who sounds like Reagan and the man who two decades before him sparked the Conservative movement in the GOP, Barry Goldwater — that man is Fred Dalton Thompson, the only Conservative candidate running.
-
Operation: United Forces HC
-
Country First: McCain/Palin '08
-
Torches & Pitchforks
-
Info and Stuff...
-
My Heroes
-
Best Conservative Blogs
-
Site Meter
