Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Conservative Loser, and proud of it.

The Democrats have kicked Republican butt. No doubt about it. They've taken the House back by pretty much the same margin that the Republicans previously held. It appears that they've taken the Senate or at least tied. That makes GWB a lame duck for the next two years. I don't see any other way to spin it. What does that mean to a conservative?

First of all, conservatism is not the same as republicanism. These two have diverged more widely with each passing year, especially since GWB was elected. Conservatism is for smaller government. Republicanism is not.

How can I say that? Well, actually it's pretty easy to show. Look at the budget for one. It is ballooning worse under Bush than Clinton - even if you subtract out war expenses. Bush removed the conservative plank from the Republican platform about removing the Department of Education first thing. The conservative position on that department, part of the platform since Reagan, was that this kind of fuzzy socialism was wrong, was wasteful, and was not authorized by the Constitution and therefore was un-constitutional

That one action of Bush, accepted by the Republican party hacks, should have forced every conservative to head for the lifeboats and abandon ship (or the Republican party). Because this was a major shift in philosophy. Bush led the Republicans to abandon their strict constitutional constructionism for the vague liberal idea usually described by the politically correct term "living constitution". Living meaning that anyone could interpret the Constitution any way they wanted - basically a moral relativism idea. And once you accept that idea, the floodgates of relativism are opened, the argument of limited government is lost, and the only thing to be settled is how quickly to allow the government to become completely socialized. (Kind of like the old conversation attributed to Churchill or Shaw or others. Churchill asks socialite, "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars" Socialite: "I rather think I would" Churchill "Well here's 10 dollars then" Socialite: What kind of woman do you think I am. Churchill: "We've already established that - now, we're just haggling over price.")

And so, as a conservative, I view the loss of the Republicans with mixed emotions. They haven't really represented me for years. But where else does a conservative go?

Well, I threw my vote away this election on the Constitutional Party. Not that it makes a difference in Republican haven Utah. But at least I voted for candidates whose ideas are conservative. I also enjoyed voting no for the retention of every judge - especially the judge caught on a rant against deer hunters here in Utah. (She actually was turned out of office. You can find a video of her on Youtube.) But third parties stand the proverbial snowball-in-hell chance of winning at present.

The only other thing of interest in the election was a state school board race between a give-more-money-to-the-same-people-who-screwed-up-education candidate, and a candidate who at least gave lip service to "new ideas" - which I assume is code for tuition vouchers. He lost.

But, even though I can't bring myself to shed many tears about Republicans losing, the only argument I could see to voting Republican in a race that mattered was the leadership of the Democratic party that would now be in charge of the House as a whole, and the committees. Intelligence will be headed by Alcee Hastings - yes that Alcee Hastings. The impeached former judge who took bribes. Woo hoo! That-a-way Americans who voted Democratic! I have no words to express my disgust for this guy, and worse for the Americans who put him in this position. I can only comment that anything that happens is exactly what we deserve.

And isn't it fascinating that one of the Democrat election tactics was to point out corruption of Republicans? And then you put a convicted criminal in charge of Intelligence. There are two lessons here. 1. Americans are really, really, really stupid. 2. The Republicans hardly uttered a peep against corruption in the Democrats showing that they were morally bankrupt and worn out.

And then there is John Conyers of Michigan. Read some of his trash. If this is a guy that most Americans want in charge then we deserve the coming disasters.

Henry Waxman of California is another Marxist in liberal clothing.

Ditto Charles Rangel of New York. These guys who will head important committees are so ultra-liberal that even if I'm not heartbroken over the loss of the Republicans, I have this sinking pit in my stomach regarding America and its future.

The list goes on and on. And then there is new speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi - uber-liberal and head of the socialists in the Congress. She doesn't even hide her socialism as she is head of one of the socialist caucus groups. Who would have thought that a socialist would be third in line for the Presidency of the USA? (Of course, VP Henry Wallace was a socialist under Roosevelt, but that is out of the memory of most Americans.)

And so, just as the Republicans aren't conservatives, the Democrats really aren't Democrats - they're socialists. And for that reason, I have chosen the title "Conservative Loser" because conservatives have lost in such a way that I doubt they will ever, in my lifetime, control all the branches of government (if they ever did in a party with Jeffords, Snow, Collins, and Chafee).

Vincet Veritas (Truth will conquer) MEB

Labels: , , , , , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home