Is there any hope for American politics? Presumably not for the next four year at least, not with Obama in imminent danger of inauguration. Conservatives might be able to see a light at the end of the tunnel, but it’ll be a while. However, just as in economics there is the “business cycle” in which employment, inflation, consumerism, etc, rise and fall, so also in politics there are apexes and troughs in conservatism, and the trends of common thought are constantly shifting. There may be cause for hope yet.
Speaking of economics, we can take pleasure seeing capitalism and our financial system of usury taking a plunge, which hopefully will all be blamed on Obama. I don’t personally have any adverse feelings towards a recession, not having any money myself. In fact the current economic trend is one of the few things that I can enjoy.
This crime against humanity still going on in the Middle East, which doesn’t seem to have any close end, certainly can’t bring anyone joy. Coming in January, I will personally know four different people who will have served time in Iraq or Afghanistan. One more way that only Ron Paul had a good platform was his plan for an immediate withdrawal of troops from both these countries.
There is an old saying, “Sufficient for the day are the evils therein.” There’s no point worrying about the future and what it will hold. What will happen will happen and we can only take things one day at a time. Yes, Obama may be the President-elect, and disaster may be inevitable, but whatever happens tomorrow will happen then, and so for the moment just live. Right now I’m a college student with homework, essays, grades, and work on my mind. I don’t have any extra energy to devote to worrying about how badly Obama’s going to screw things up. All I can do is hope for better times in the future. All bad things, like all good things, must eventually come to an end.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Saturday, November 15, 2008
A True Conservative Had No Where to Vote in This Election
Now, it may sound crazy to say that there was no conservative vote this election, but let’s take a look at all of the serious candidates of this previous election: (Democrats first) Hillary Clinton: Wrong, wrong, wrong, on so many levels. She’s a feminist, she’s pro-abortion, and she’s a borderline Communist. Barack Obama: Once again, so wrong. He’s a socialist, he’s pro-abortion, he supports border-jumpers, he’s obviously in favor of civil rights, and besides all that, he has no executive governmental experience. John Edwards: Not really all that bad of a guy, but just not worthy of a conservative’s vote.
(Now the Republicans) Mitt Romney: He’s a Mormon. I’m sorry but a Mormon is just never going to get the conservative vote. As far as cults go it’s just a little too far out there. And he’s not even part of the fun, so-whacky-its-cool, polygamist FLDS. At least if he was we could have hoped for legalized “Big Love.” He’s just too crazy to get the vote, but not crazy enough to get the vote. Mike Huckabee: Now he at least is a Bible-thumping Christian, and proud of it. However, he isn’t really a conservative. He’s too middle-of-the-road on too many issues for a real conservative to trust him. John McCain: Definitely seems conservative on most issues, especially abortion. But he’s still a puppet of someone. He’s not willing to leave behind the old administration and be a true conservative.
But wait, he chose Sarah Palin for his running mate, and she’s a true conservative right? But is she? She chose a career over her proper place in the home; she may be hard on abortion, but she promotes contraception, an almost equal evil; she decided to run for vice president while her family was having a crisis with the illegitimate birth of her granddaughter. She’s a woman, and her place isn’t in politics, no matter how great of a person she is.
So what was a true conservative to do? Well, Ron Paul seemed like the best bet, but he, the only candidate who came close to representing extreme conservative values, had the least chance of any of the candidates. Besides, it really was important to try to stop Obama, and that meant voting for the one with the best chance of beating him. So a “wasted” vote (like one for Pat Buchanan), which would be the right vote based on principles, wouldn’t work this time. That left voting for McCain, not a terrible thing, but not a truly conservative vote, either. It was a very sad election, made even sadder by the fact that Obama won.
(Now the Republicans) Mitt Romney: He’s a Mormon. I’m sorry but a Mormon is just never going to get the conservative vote. As far as cults go it’s just a little too far out there. And he’s not even part of the fun, so-whacky-its-cool, polygamist FLDS. At least if he was we could have hoped for legalized “Big Love.” He’s just too crazy to get the vote, but not crazy enough to get the vote. Mike Huckabee: Now he at least is a Bible-thumping Christian, and proud of it. However, he isn’t really a conservative. He’s too middle-of-the-road on too many issues for a real conservative to trust him. John McCain: Definitely seems conservative on most issues, especially abortion. But he’s still a puppet of someone. He’s not willing to leave behind the old administration and be a true conservative.
But wait, he chose Sarah Palin for his running mate, and she’s a true conservative right? But is she? She chose a career over her proper place in the home; she may be hard on abortion, but she promotes contraception, an almost equal evil; she decided to run for vice president while her family was having a crisis with the illegitimate birth of her granddaughter. She’s a woman, and her place isn’t in politics, no matter how great of a person she is.
So what was a true conservative to do? Well, Ron Paul seemed like the best bet, but he, the only candidate who came close to representing extreme conservative values, had the least chance of any of the candidates. Besides, it really was important to try to stop Obama, and that meant voting for the one with the best chance of beating him. So a “wasted” vote (like one for Pat Buchanan), which would be the right vote based on principles, wouldn’t work this time. That left voting for McCain, not a terrible thing, but not a truly conservative vote, either. It was a very sad election, made even sadder by the fact that Obama won.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Q: Was Obama Elected Only Because He’s Black? A: Of Course.
Well, that’s not absolutely true. He was also a Democrat. It was a combination of those two things that got him the vote.
There’s no way that such a radically liberal socialist would ever had gotten the vote if he hadn’t been black. Let’s face it, being black encompasses so many different levels of “change.”
His being black means that he automatically receives the black vote, regardless of policy, experience, or other qualifications. We can thank Howard Stern for proof of this when he sent fake reporters into the Harlem slums to interview random blacks on the street. Those people didn’t care about anything that he stood for; they didn’t know who his running mate was! All they knew was that Obama was black, and McCain wasn’t. They were the stereotypical “one-issue voters.” And the issue was race.
Furthermore, there were many whites who believed that electing a black would be striking a victory for civil rights. “It’s the black’s turn.” These were the ones who voted the politically correct way, regardless of Obama’s stance on many issues.
Now, honestly, there were many people who were already voting Democrat. Lot’s of people were fed up with the Republican administration, and didn’t want another four years of George W. Bush. There were possibly even Republicans who felt this way and voted Democrat regardless of candidate. It this way it wasn’t simply his race, but also his party (but not necessarily his particular platform) that won him the vote.
We have to admit that there must have been some incredibly powerful factors that could make people ignore such glaring flaws to Obama’s background as: his father (or lack thereof); Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the radical, racist, anti-American Black Supremacist (anyone still remember “Not God bless America, God damn America!”?); and Bill Ayer, a terrorist whose book Obama almost certainly plagiarized. Yes, something had to trump all of these deficiencies. And we can’t imagine that it was his socialist platform. It was simply the idea of a black President. That, and the fact that he wasn’t John McCain, got Barrack Hussein Obama bin Laden elected.
There’s no way that such a radically liberal socialist would ever had gotten the vote if he hadn’t been black. Let’s face it, being black encompasses so many different levels of “change.”
His being black means that he automatically receives the black vote, regardless of policy, experience, or other qualifications. We can thank Howard Stern for proof of this when he sent fake reporters into the Harlem slums to interview random blacks on the street. Those people didn’t care about anything that he stood for; they didn’t know who his running mate was! All they knew was that Obama was black, and McCain wasn’t. They were the stereotypical “one-issue voters.” And the issue was race.
Furthermore, there were many whites who believed that electing a black would be striking a victory for civil rights. “It’s the black’s turn.” These were the ones who voted the politically correct way, regardless of Obama’s stance on many issues.
Now, honestly, there were many people who were already voting Democrat. Lot’s of people were fed up with the Republican administration, and didn’t want another four years of George W. Bush. There were possibly even Republicans who felt this way and voted Democrat regardless of candidate. It this way it wasn’t simply his race, but also his party (but not necessarily his particular platform) that won him the vote.
We have to admit that there must have been some incredibly powerful factors that could make people ignore such glaring flaws to Obama’s background as: his father (or lack thereof); Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the radical, racist, anti-American Black Supremacist (anyone still remember “Not God bless America, God damn America!”?); and Bill Ayer, a terrorist whose book Obama almost certainly plagiarized. Yes, something had to trump all of these deficiencies. And we can’t imagine that it was his socialist platform. It was simply the idea of a black President. That, and the fact that he wasn’t John McCain, got Barrack Hussein Obama bin Laden elected.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
California's Proposition 8 and Why It Failed
Just over one week ago there were many significant changes throughout America. We have a new President-Elect, our own state of Ohio kept their absolute ban on casinos, and gay "rights" were checked in many places, perhaps most surprisingly in California. Yes, California, that infamous hot spot of liberalism and progression, saw its Proposition 8, titled Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry, pass.
The debate over homosexual marriage is not a new one in California. Field polls have been tracking support for same-sex marriage in California since 1977. In its first poll, the issue found a mere 28% suport. Support actually reached a majority in 2008, with a 51% support. Despite this majority, the controversial issue received a vote in the negative last Tuesday.
We can feel certain that there was no confusion as to what the proposed bill was going to do. We thank California Attorney Gen. Jerry Brown for this when he changed the proposition's original title, "Limit on Marriage" to its much more descriptive(and much longer) one, "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." I think that there's also little confusion over how the Att. Gen. feels on the issue...
The title is actually correct in a legal sense, for after a State Supreme Court decision in May, California had already revised its constitution to allow homosexual marriage in June, becoming one of only two states to allow such marriages, along with Massechusetts.In this sense, gay couples did have a "right" to marriage for the last five months. In those months California gave marriage liscenses to 18,000 homosexual couples. The court has said that the ban on gay marriage does not apply to those marriages.
But why exactly did the poposition pass? Why do gays no longer have the right to marry in California? The polls showed a majority support for gays, so why did the good people of Cali say no to them? I believe that there are two reasons.
Primarily, I believe that it shows how laughable the idea of true separation of Church and State really is. Institutionally speaking, the idea is obviously very possible. There is no religious institution in control of America. This is the bare minimum of separation and is what I believe our founding fathers meant. But it is not a true separatin, that is a separation in the minds of the people. I believe the fact that Proposition 8 passed shows that may still be hope for America for two reasons: 1) it shows that democracy just might work, and 2) it shows that people still vote with their principles. The press is blaming the Black community, which is largely Christian, for passing this bill. It says that they aren't, but should be, able to leave the Bible behind. The press says that this isn't separatin of church and State.
But this is just why such a separation is impossible. People do (and should) vote with their convictions and principles. And what determines these principles? Our religion. Blacks for the most part are "God-fearing folk." This means that they do what the Bible tells them to. And the Bible says that homosexuality is wrong.
Secondly, I believe that Proposition 8 passed because gays are still a true minority. Despite what the media says, people simply don't like gays. No matter how much we have homosexuality shoved down our throats, the American people are simply too traditional as a whole to ever truly accept them. The Black community is also blamed for this, with the press saying that Blacks should be understanding of how discrimination feels, and should be more supportive of gays. The reality, however, is tht they're not.
So California's Proposition 8 passed, and it passed not because the opposition's ads weren't forceful enough, but because the people of California voted with their principles, and those principles (which they got from the Bible) say that homosexuality is simply wrong.
I certainly feel no chagrin. In fact I feel hope (not because Obama is the President-Elect). I feel hopeful for America; if our most liberal state still has enough sense to ban gay marriage, maybe true change can happen. Stay tuned for tomorrow's installment!
Tomorrow: Was Obama elected because he was Black? We'll see...
The debate over homosexual marriage is not a new one in California. Field polls have been tracking support for same-sex marriage in California since 1977. In its first poll, the issue found a mere 28% suport. Support actually reached a majority in 2008, with a 51% support. Despite this majority, the controversial issue received a vote in the negative last Tuesday.
We can feel certain that there was no confusion as to what the proposed bill was going to do. We thank California Attorney Gen. Jerry Brown for this when he changed the proposition's original title, "Limit on Marriage" to its much more descriptive(and much longer) one, "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." I think that there's also little confusion over how the Att. Gen. feels on the issue...
The title is actually correct in a legal sense, for after a State Supreme Court decision in May, California had already revised its constitution to allow homosexual marriage in June, becoming one of only two states to allow such marriages, along with Massechusetts.In this sense, gay couples did have a "right" to marriage for the last five months. In those months California gave marriage liscenses to 18,000 homosexual couples. The court has said that the ban on gay marriage does not apply to those marriages.
But why exactly did the poposition pass? Why do gays no longer have the right to marry in California? The polls showed a majority support for gays, so why did the good people of Cali say no to them? I believe that there are two reasons.
Primarily, I believe that it shows how laughable the idea of true separation of Church and State really is. Institutionally speaking, the idea is obviously very possible. There is no religious institution in control of America. This is the bare minimum of separation and is what I believe our founding fathers meant. But it is not a true separatin, that is a separation in the minds of the people. I believe the fact that Proposition 8 passed shows that may still be hope for America for two reasons: 1) it shows that democracy just might work, and 2) it shows that people still vote with their principles. The press is blaming the Black community, which is largely Christian, for passing this bill. It says that they aren't, but should be, able to leave the Bible behind. The press says that this isn't separatin of church and State.
But this is just why such a separation is impossible. People do (and should) vote with their convictions and principles. And what determines these principles? Our religion. Blacks for the most part are "God-fearing folk." This means that they do what the Bible tells them to. And the Bible says that homosexuality is wrong.
Secondly, I believe that Proposition 8 passed because gays are still a true minority. Despite what the media says, people simply don't like gays. No matter how much we have homosexuality shoved down our throats, the American people are simply too traditional as a whole to ever truly accept them. The Black community is also blamed for this, with the press saying that Blacks should be understanding of how discrimination feels, and should be more supportive of gays. The reality, however, is tht they're not.
So California's Proposition 8 passed, and it passed not because the opposition's ads weren't forceful enough, but because the people of California voted with their principles, and those principles (which they got from the Bible) say that homosexuality is simply wrong.
I certainly feel no chagrin. In fact I feel hope (not because Obama is the President-Elect). I feel hopeful for America; if our most liberal state still has enough sense to ban gay marriage, maybe true change can happen. Stay tuned for tomorrow's installment!
Tomorrow: Was Obama elected because he was Black? We'll see...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)