Yes, it’s a pun on a RedState blogger’s screen I.D. but it really fits. Pilgrim, himself/herself, took a segment of an old speech and changed but one word in it to say this:
If abortion is right, it ought to be extended; if not, it ought to be restricted — there is no middle ground. If it is right, we cannot justly object to its nationality — its universality; if it is wrong, they cannot justly insist upon its extension — its enlargement. All they ask we could readily grant, if we thought abortion right; all we ask they could as readily grant, if they thought it wrong. Their thinking it right, and our thinking it wrong, is the precise fact upon which depends the whole controversy. Thinking it right, as they do, they are not to blame for desiring its full recognition as being right; but thinking it wrong, as we do, can we yield to them? Can we cast our votes with their view, and against our own? In view of our moral, social, and political responsibilities, can we do this? Wrong as we think abortion is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation.
Mr. Lincoln, stated thus about the issue of slavery in 1860. My reply to the entire missive that pilgrim wrote was that this one segment encapsulates conservative ideals because you can interchange any issue barring those of a federal nature such as national security and use the same argument over and over again.
The more we continue to look to the federal government as the cure to all ills, the less freedoms we have, as outlined in the Constitution.
Read the whole entry at RedState. It’s a very good one. This is the message that conservatives should carry first and foremost and why we need strict Constitutionalist judges. Were they all so, then California could enjoy its socialist state, as well as some others, and those states that reject such ideology could employ what they deem best without the fearsome fighting that is eroding the heartstone of the Constitution itself: individual liberty protected by a small central government with all other rights accorded to the individual states.
If necessary, perhaps it’s time to divorce conservatism from the Republican Party and carry the message to the people. With the state of current affairs, the relationship between conservatism and the Republican Party reminds me of a marriage wherein one spouse is forced to stay married to the other, in spite of the other’s chronic infidelities.
I think he should run for office. I’m not sure what he would think of the idea but he makes me believe there’s hope even for California.
The irony of course is that none of the questioners were really asking if I appreciated the “historical moment.” What they really wanted to know was: “I know you Black conservatives are a bunch of – insert ugly epithet – with no sense of race pride, but can’t you – even now – feel proud as a Black man?”
Of course I have always been proud; proud to be an American and proud of my heritage. I am a conservative precisely because I love my country and believe strongly in the principles of its founding. I do not discount our nation’s founding because of the original sin of slavery; I have always celebrated this nation’s founding. I do not wish to toss away the Declaration of Independence because of white racism; I want to make the principles found in the document real.
It was fascinating to read people describe a sense of finally being able to “unpack their bags,” finally feeling at home. Black conservatives have always felt at home – always believed in the goodness of America and have always been derided with sneering and name calling as a result. That these same newly proud folk would now ask if I recognize the historical moment is great irony indeed. The events of last week are a confirmation of the veracity of the founding; they are a testament to the truth that conservatives have been preaching about America for years. THAT is the historic moment. The issue of race pride completely misses the point.
It also misses the opportunity to truly move to a post racial America.
I disagree with the politics of Barack Obama. To suggest that because we share the same skin color I should be teary-eyed as he takes office is to make the election about racial validation rather than ideas. I feel the same disappointment in this Democratic win as I would have had John Kerry won election four years ago. THAT to me seems the true spirit of a post racial America. The ability of one man to listen to another man and say I disagree with your ideas and for THAT reason cannot give you my vote is the true Promised Land. Truly how much progress can we claim if men are motivated to vote for a candidate because that candidate shares his ethnicity but not his ideology or is condemned as an – add ugly pejorative – when/if he does not? How loud can we really cheer if race continues to trump those principles and values one holds dear?
Not much left to say and I hope he forgives me for pasting so much of his article here.
I opposed the bailout from the beginning, in spite of what was said about what it would do. Looking back, I believe I was right. Nothing has changed since it was signed into law except the Treasury Department has new powers; powers it shouldn’t have.
Companies are lining up to get their share of the bailout fund and the treasury will likely call for more funds. None of these funds are going to be put into the hands of consumers. Instead they will be used to prop up failing businesses which are failing for various reasons. This is not capitalism. Sorry, but, it isn’t.
People are human and have some fault or another. Greed is one of those. Covetousness and envy are two others. Others are wrath, sloth, pride, and gluttony. Any one of these can lead to actions that are not good for the person or the people in his environment. When I hear talk about redistributing the wealth I get a picture in my mind of people who have worked for a wage, used those wages to buy goods or services, and now want their wages back because the people who received them are too rich.
In the real world it doesn’t happen quite that way. The government does it for you under the guise of giving back to the people who aren’t rich. The problem with that is the government plays the “middle man.” Anybody who knows anything about manufacturing, goods and services, knows the middle man has his cut, too. Bulk wholesale prices are far below the retail price, so when you buy those goods and services you’re paying for a lot of jobs on the way back to the manufacturer who initially offered the goods. So, the government becomes the middle man for redistributing what others created; in this instance wealth.
As the richer sectors of America are required to redistribute their wealth via the government, the government is the only one growing richer. Its cut of the wealth comes first. Unfortunately, they’re the greediest of all. The more they have, the more they want. What gets spent down is often the tiniest percentage of that wealth actually in the hands of the people for whom it was garnered in the first place. Rather than trickle down prosperity, we have trickle down poverty.
There is no longer any incentive for the rich to keep creating wealth as it is confiscated by the government. If they’re not creeating wealth, they’re also not offering jobs and expanding the tools by which they create that wealth. The rich become less rich as result, not just from higher taxation, but from the lack of wealth creation. It can be taxed only once… at least until they die and then it will be taxed again.
People are still losing jobs left and right. The government still plans morehardship adding to the economic woes and expects everyone to look to it for the answers. It’s funny how we’re supposed to look to a body of people, most of whom have never created any wealth at all, except for themselves, for the answers to prosperity.
This is just embarrasing. Chris Matthews really should get psychiatric help.
Don’t you love the way Joe Scarborough ends their discussion as the other lefty journalist try to cover for Matthews? And the look on Chris “Screwball” Matthews face…pricelesss.
Michael Steele has a column in the Wall Street Journal today.
Republicans once said that the opportunities this nation has to offer rest not in government but rather in the hands of individuals. Over the past decade or so, however, we Republicans lost our way. The disparity between our rhetoric and our action grew until our credibility snapped. It wasn’t the fault of our ideals. It was the failure of our leadership.
Over time, our principles morphed into baser motives. Continued political dominance grew more important to those who led us than the noble vision most of us originally signed on for. And to maintain power we turned to the controls of government — we became the party of big government. We behaved like Democrats.
True, the country has changed and our party must adapt. However, it is wrong to believe we must change our principles or become conservative-lite. After all, the voters did not suddenly become liberal; but they have lost any sense of confidence that the Republican Party holds the answers to their problems.
Most Americans today see a Republican Party that defines itself by what it is against rather than what it is for. We can tell you why public schools aren’t working, but not articulate a compelling vision for how we’ll better educate children. We’re well equipped to rail against tax increases; but can’t begin to explain how we’ll help the poor. We exclude far better than we welcome.
Things were different as recently as 20 years ago. Back then, Ronald Reagan made it cool to be a Republican — it wasn’t just his specific policies, but the timeless truths he so eloquently gave voice to, and upon which his policies were based. That’s the Republican Party we must re-establish.
Read the rest. There is also an article that Newt Gingrich is competing with Steele for chairmanship of the RNC. Sorry, but if I’m given a say, Newt won’t get it. He may have rediscovered his conservative voice after being elected out of office but he’s got some making up to do. Michael Steele, on the other, never lost his conservative soul, but has been denied much of a voice due to those things outlined above. No one wanted to hear real conservative ideals, only what they thought would keep them in power.
If the RNC is depending on real conservatives to lead the party out of the wilderness, then they best give Steele the lead and Newt will just have to catch up and eat some crow before he’s really trustworthy again. Conservative leadership starts with choosing conservatives who never lost their way.
While Christmas is some time off as yet, yes, there is something to be cheerful about.
The invisible crown will not sit lightly on the president-elect. There is already some buyer’s remorse making the rounds in the MSM. I’m sure it’s just CYA more than remorse. Many of these thoughts could have/should have happened during the finally ended election.
The core problem is Obama, himself. He ran a great campaign, true, but in the speeches, the lofty rhetoric, the glitz and glamor, he promised to be “all things to all people.” His was a diverse coalition, made up of various groups, who all want different things. They will have profoundly competing ideas about what a President Obama should do.
Unfortunately, for him, the nation is still more conservative than liberal. Proposition 8 in California was shot down by the same people who voted for Obama. The success of the ballot has sparked a lot of rage on the left.
What of the MoveOn.org and DailyKos crowds? They played a huge part in getting him elected and they have certain expectations, many of which will run counter to what the nation as a whole wants. If he pleases the hefty lefties, he’s alienates the rest of the nation. However, if he doesn’t please them, the same machine they rolled out in support of him, will later be rolled out against him.
In his first speech addressing the nation, referring to the economic crisis:
“It is not going to be easy for us to dig ourselves out of the hole that we are in,” Obama said at his first news conference since winning the presidency on Tuesday.
I find that rather laughable in terms of the electorate. I remember another President saying something similar in reference to the war on terror due to crises he inherited from the previous president. 9/11/01 was five years in the planning which means “on Clinton’s watch” along with “bad intelligence” on Iraq, which also stemmed from the Clinton administration.
Given what happened to the current president, the “buyer’s remorse”/CYA of the MSM media, no, I don’t think that invisible crown is going to sit lightly on Obama’s brow. The majority electorate seems to be stricken with “I want it and I want it now!” Sorry, guys, it’s just not going to happen and the irony is: Obama knows it now; what he has gotten himself into, and isn’t quite sure what to do about it. On election night, the look on his face as he realized the job is more than trappings and status, says it all. For somebody who just won the highest honor that Americans can give, he doesn’t look all that happy about it, does he?
Not to mention the laundry list of abuses Pelosi, Reid, et al. are waiting to heap upon an… I would say unsuspecting but I believe they’re beginning to suspect now… electorate.
Investors Business Daily Editorials seems to agree with me.
Is it time to say “Merry Christmas?” While it certainly looks dim right now, there are things to smile about. Had McCain won, we’d still be fighting for the conservative right to find a place in the “new politics”/new tone. Now, we have two to four years to reach out and present our message in a way that is easier for the average American to understand rather than the lofty terms that have been used thus far to define it. Those terms are meaningless to this generation, not to ignore how they are wrongly defined by the left.
So let’s get to work on ’10 and ’12, shall we?
Originally posted to RedState.
It’s easy to be manipulated, especially when you’re not looking for problems but are in solutions mode and are looking for gains rather than losses. Manipulators will look for the areas where you seek to gain the most and use them to hook in you in. They also sniff out your greatest fears of loss and use those to bring you into their schemes. They are so good at this you may not even be aware that it’s happening. They will play on your fear of loss and offer a way to avoid it.
Not only are you being manipulated, so is the electorate built of your constituents and theirs. They find the hot button issues, see who is most interested in them and go to work. They do this from both positions of authority or in the subordinate.
Manipulative tactics used by Democrats:
1.Charm: “we’re all in this together and though we may differ we all want what’s best,” promise of favors.
2.Silent treatment if you resist and refusal to do something that is wanted or deemed necessary until they get their way. Shutting Republicans out of committee meetings and discussions.
3.Coercion and threats to get you to do whatever it is they want done. Loading bills up with earmarks for pet projects because the initial bill is a crucial functioning of government but didn’t give them what they wanted and refusing to pass it without those earmarks; all the while complaining about the budget deficit and how much those necessary to government issues costs, i.e. the war in Iraq and other national security threats.
4.Reason: coming up with all kinds of reasons why it should be done and all the good things that will come of it and protestations they would be willing to do the same for you. Everything is almost always of noble purpose on the surface.
5.Regression. If you resist they pout, sulk, and throw tantrums.
6.Debasement: ridicule you using words that hurt such as: “you don’t care about .” We saw it with 9/11 when Bush was criticized and ridiculed for his initial response to being informed of it. Because it happened on “his watch” the fact that it was five years in the planning during Clinton’s watch was swept under the carpet. We saw it with Katrina and a host of other events. The manipulators are adept at sliding out from under responsibility for the events they set in motion or allow to happen without regard to real life consquences.
Come Monday, I’ll turn them into I.C.E. but in the meantime:
Group Electric Company, LLC.
330 Woodycrest Ave
Nashville, TN 37210
This company hires illegal aliens, then lays off American workers for: lack of work. At one time, there were 22 workers, 12 illegal. Now, there are 26 workers, with 18 illegals.
Change is coming. Every day it will get easier and easier to count because there will be less of it. I suppose all the anti-religious people will be happy. It’s kind of hard to have Christmas with this kind of change. Thanksgiving, too, for that matter.