About Me

Name: Allen Caeden
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Obama worship & its consequences.

I just went out for a bite to eat and as I was driving I thought pretty deeply about Obama and as I was driving I realized what kind of danger America truly is in. The danger of which I speak is that we have in Obama a president with a “god complex” and historically leaders with such a complex have never been kind to humanity. When Obama stated that, "I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president."  I knew that this man will never deviate from his hardcore extreme leftwing Marxist agenda in any way. This statement combined with his really becoming a demagogue against the American people in his SOTU speech and in subsequent speeches since then, is that things are not working out because of us “ignorant Americans”, it cannot be his fault because in his mind he is: “The One”, “The Messiah”, or “God-like” all of these phrases I have heard liberals use to describe Obama. The problem is that when too many people tell you that you are “god-like” often you run the danger of actually believing it and this is exactly what has happened to Obama. Obama now is simply delusional in his thinking and he can no longer connect the dots that he has become the problem and is no longer viewed as the solution and in attacking the American people for their “ignorance” is not going to help him in 2012. So what has this to do with anything? My friends think about what a man can do who is at the head of the last remaining superpower but also has a “god complex” and sees nothing as his fault because in his mind he is “The Messiah”. I really believe we have yet to see a more destructive side to Obama; he is now agitated with the American people but we have yet to truly see his wrath show its true colors for our daring not to follow him as “The One”, “The Messiah”, and “The god-like”.I think history will unfortunately bear me out and it scares me.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mark Levin- 10 steps to destroy our republic.

  This list is from Mark Levin on the Democrats 10 steps to destroy American society.

1.) Rewrite the Constitution and break down its firewalls through Judicial and Bureaucratic fiat.

2.) Concentrate all meaningful power in the Federal Government.

3.) Suppress and Repress the Individual by attacking his Unalienable Rights through laws and constant torment.

4.) Eliminate Private Property through Confiscatory Taxation and Regulation and wage constant war against Business Enterprises and Entrepreneurs.

5.) Control Institutions of Education at all levels and turn them into Indoctrination Centers for the State.

6.) Change the Citizenry by opening National Borders to virtually all comers and changing the qualifications for Citizenship to include mostly poor, uneducated illegal aliens.

7.) Destroy the Private Financial Institutions that have funded the Greatest Production and Accumulation of Wealth for the Most People the World has ever known.

8.) Destroy Capitalism and replace it with Redistributive Policies by Destroying the currency and Replacing it with a new currency or Revaluing the old currency.

9.) Eliminate American Sovereignty through arrangements and agreements with Foreign Countries and International Bureaucracies.

10.) Use American Foreign Policy not to improve American Economic and National Security, but to advance the Notion of One Government Globalism.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

We are helping Marco Rubio now let's help J.D. Hayworth!

Over the last few months grassroots conservatives on a national level have been supporting Marco Rubio over the GOP sellout Charlie Crist (who is supported by John McCain) and now in some polls Rubio is ahead of Crist. My friends we now need to do the same thing for J.D. Hayworth in the GOP Arizona primary because John McCain has to go and we need to do it now! John McCain is a menace, he is utterly damaging to the GOP and has been for over two decades. The man is not a conservative in the least, he is a progressive which is fancy word for "liberal". He constantly backstabs GOP conservative senators and sides with the Democrats all too often. All grassroot conservatives and even libertarians whether you are in the GOP or not should give to J.D. Hayworth and defeat John McCain. Let us pay back John McCain for his single greatest contribution to the American people: John McCain ran the worst campaign in modern presidential politics and gave us the marxist Barak Obama as president. If for no other reason than this please support J.D. Hayworth and pay back McCain for what he has given us in Barak Obama.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Never trust the federal government!

If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand.

-Milton Friedman
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

We did it for Marco Rubio now do it for J.D. Hayworth!

Over the last few months grassroots conservatives on a national level have been supporting Marco Rubio over the GOP sellout Charlie Crist and now in some polls Rubio is now ahead of Crist. My friends we now need to do the same thing for J.D. Hayworth in the GOP Arizona primary. John McCain is a menace, he is utterly damaging to the GOP and has been for over two decades. The man is not a conservative in the least, he is a progressive which is fancy word for "liberal". He constantly backstabs GOP conservative senators and sides with the Democrats all too often. All grassroot conservatives and even libertarians whether you are in the GOP or not should give to J.D. Hayworth and defeat John McCain. Let us pay back John McCain for his single greatest contribution to the American people: John McCain ran the worst campaign in modern presidential politics and gave us the marxist Barak Obama as president. If for no other reason than this please support J.D. Hayworth and pay back McCain for what he has given us in Barak Obama.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Tea Parties & The New Federalism

  I came across an interesting website called Reagan2020.com, and on the website that advocated a movement which they referred to as “New Federalism”. Federalism is the doctrine of a separation of powers, limited federal government, and states’ rights. It was enshrined in our Constitution in the Tenth Amendment. It was an issue hotly debated between the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers, and we now know that if you read the Anti-Federalist Papers their fears and predictions about the weaknesses of the Constitution are now a living reality. However, getting back to my point as to why this caught my eye is that this is what I believe the Tea Party people are; I believe they are “New Federalists”, crying for less government, more restraint, and more economic and political liberty. So I thought I would post the “New Federalist Platform” for you to read, it is long but go through it at your leisure.

Preamble

We the New Federalists advocate individual, family and community rights and responsibilities in acts of self-governance, as set forth by our Founders, in originally establishing our nation by the Declaration of Independence and later codifying our governing principles in our Republic's Constitution. We begin from our Founders' premises, that self-evident truths exist, and are the only right ground for political declarations that offer a decent respect for the opinions of humankind in establishing a nation among the powers of the earth.

We call ourselves "Federalists" because we humbly acknowledge that our guidance derives from the original ideals and principles of federally distributed powers as explicated by The Federalist Papers. But we are "New" Federalists for two basic reasons: first, because we are well aware that the cautionary warnings of the Anti-Federalists have proven true about the central government embarking on a long crusade of usurpations and encroachments that have substantially abridged the rights of individual citizens and state and local governments; and second, because we follow in the tradition of New Federalism that was implemented under Ronald Reagan's presidency, but has since then languished. We strive to reassert the principles of New Federalism, to roll back those abridgements and infringements of our rights as plainly set forth in our Founding Documents.

We hold, as our Founders declared, that all humans are created equal, as image bearers of Our Creator, who made us all as morally choosing beings whose proper condition is freedom. We further hold that this freedom is expressed in terms of our possession of unalienable rights, just claims that we possess inherently and that can properly neither be revoked or surrendered, including the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness through our freely chosen actions. The political consequences that flow from this view of our human nature are seriously limiting to the permissible reach and scope of governments over us. The chief consequence of this view is that the purpose of government is to secure these rights for its citizens, and that the only just and legitimate government is one based in the consent of those governed, who freely assent to it. Another serious consequence that follows from these beliefs is that we have a moral duty to alter or abolish any government that fails to secure these rights to us. And that is why we New Federalists advocate the timeless and enduring truths set forth in our nation's Founding Documents, and based in our Judeo-Christian heritage.

We note, though, that our current circumstances in the 21st century are not greatly different from those surrounding our Founders, who remarked on the long train of abuses and usurpations whose ultimate design seemed clearly to abrogate all the citizens' rights and render them subjects of an absolute despotism. The Founders' impending tyranny arose under an unjust king; ours derives from a centralizing and increasingly powerful national government that intrudes into ever-growing aspects of our lives, and prevents us from freely exercising our acts of self-government. We New Federalists therefore seek a return to our foundation on the principles of self-government.
 
You can read the reast here: http://reagan2020.us/platform/
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Reagan: NO THIRD PARTY!

  I know that some people like Glenn Beck have advocated a third party but folks I would rather take Reagan's advice on this issue then Glenn Beck's. Reagn in 1975 told liberal and sellout Republicans to get lost. You can read it here:

http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/reagan/reagan1975.asp

Here Reagan in 1977 smacks down any notion of a third party and he tells us that we Traditional Conservatives need to take back the Republican Party. You can read it here.

http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/reagan/reagan1977.asp

A vote for a third party is a coward's way out because it takes hard work and great fortitude for us Traditional Conservatives to take back the Republican Party and many such as Glenn Beck simply lack these qualities. Friends listen to Reagan and let's begin to clean out the phonies in the Republican Party starting with the up coming GOP primaries. Let's get to work and take back the Republican Party!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

GOP Elite bullcrap!!!!

I love this new line put forth by the GOP pundits and Washington "elites". The line goes like this, " Well everyone knows that the #2 guy in past primaries goes on to be the next in line for the Republican nomination." Thus, since Mitt Romney was number two guy last year, then he is "next in line" for 2012. Funny nobody knew about this "rule" until the worthless David Frum a leftist member of the GOP discovered it about two months ago. Now we hear it pandered by the GOP Washington chattering class. Funny given that the GOP base rejected Romney because he was in the past a fullblown liberal and flipped flopped on every issue when he wanted to be president.
 
But is this theory really true? In 1976 Gerald Ford was never even in a primary. In 1980 when Reagan was the number two guy in 1976 and should have been "next in line" the GOP Washington elites still hated Reagan, viciously attacked him and backed Bush 41. In 1996 Dole was not the number two guy, Quayle was. In 2000 little Bush J.R. was never even in a primary prior to running for president in 2000. Folk's this bulllllshiiiiitttt lie was put forth for one reason and this is that they do not want a conservative like Sarah Palin to win the nomination in 2012. Thus they are backing a man who was a liberal accross the board (save taxes) and not a conservative, Mitt Romney. This is not new they hated Ronald Reagan and now they hate Sarah Palin as well. Is it any wonder that there is a hate relationship between the GOP base and the GOP elites?       YouTube - The Real Romney?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The GOP can reach the Hispanic community.

        So what can Republicans do to break into the Hispanic community? The answer is simple. First, we appeal to their cultural conservatism. Hispanics are overwhelmingly more culturally conservative than the average white American. Their Catholic Faith runs deep in their veins and they have little tolerance for gay activism, porn, the out of control sexualization of everything, and abortion. We recently saw this in California where Hispanic Catholics voted overwhelmingly to get rid of gay marriage in the state. The Republicans need to actively reach out to the Hispanic community on cultural issues where they are already completely in line with the Republican Party platform. Second, is economic and immigration issues. Most Hispanics in this country are legal immigrants and this works in the Republicans favor. How so? Because illegal immigrants take jobs away from legal immigrants, we must show the Hispanic community that they are the ones hurt the most by the illegal immigrant crisis. Show them that it is in their best interest to have a secure border. Hispanics are a hard working people and like other people they want a fair shake in living the American dream, they do not want their jobs and money going to those who do not work for it. Right now the Hispanic community believes that Republicans are an angry white party that is hostile to them, but Republicans need to show them that they have more in common with conservatism then they do with liberalism. We have a golden opportunity here least we squander it.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

10 Principles of Traditional Conservatism.

The following was taken from the Russell Kirk Center. Russell Kirk is widely accepted to be one of the founding fathers (if not the chief founding father) of Traditional Conservatism. I think it would be good for all Republicans,as we battle to establish what the Republican Party stands for to go back and take a second look at those who founded the conservative movement. It might shock you but conservatism did not begin, with nor shall it end with President Ronald Reagan. Here are the principles:
 
Russell Kirk's 10 Principles:
 

(1) Men and nations are governed by moral laws; and those laws have their origin in a wisdom that is more than human—in divine justice. At heart, political problems are moral and religious problems. The wise statesman tries to apprehend the moral law and govern his conduct accordingly. We have a moral debt to our ancestors, who bestowed upon us our civilization, and a moral obligation to the generations who will come after us. This debt is ordained of God. We have no right, therefore, to tamper impudently with human nature or with the delicate fabric of our civil social order.

(2) Variety and diversity are the characteristics of a high civilization. Uniformity and absolute equality are the death of all real vigor and freedom in existence. Conservatives resist with impartial strength the uniformity of a tyrant or an oligarchy, and the uniformity of what Tocqueville called “democratic despotism.”

(3) Justice means that every man and every woman have the right to what is their own—to the things best suited to their own nature, to the rewards of their ability and integrity, to their property and their personality. Civilized society requires that all men and women have equal rights before the law, but that equality should not extend to equality of condition: that is, society is a great partnership, in which all have equal rights—but not to equal things. The just society requires sound leadership, different rewards for different abilities, and a sense of respect and duty.

(4) Property and freedom are inseparably connected; economic leveling is not economic progress. Conservatives value property for its own sake, of course; but they value it even more because without it all men and women are at the mercy of an omnipotent government.

(5) Power is full of danger; therefore the good state is one in which power is checked and balanced, restricted by sound constitutions and customs. So far as possible, political power ought to be kept in the hands of private persons and local institutions. Centralization is ordinarily a sign of social decadence.

(6) The past is a great storehouse of wisdom; as Burke said, “the individual is foolish, but the species is wise.” The conservative believes that we need to guide ourselves by the moral traditions, the social experience, and the whole complex body of knowledge bequeathed to us by our ancestors. The conservative appeals beyond the rash opinion of the hour to what Chesterton called “the democracy of the dead”—that is, the considered opinions of the wise men and women who died before our time, the experience of the race. The conservative, in short, knows he was not born yesterday.

(7) Modern society urgently needs true community: and true community is a world away from collectivism. Real community is governed by love and charity, not by compulsion. Through churches, voluntary associations, local governments, and a variety of institutions, conservatives strive to keep community healthy. Conservatives are not selfish, but public-spirited. They know that collectivism means the end of real community, substituting uniformity for variety and force for willing cooperation.

(8) In the affairs of nations, the American conservative feels that his country ought to set an example to the world, but ought not to try to remake the world in its image. It is a law of politics, as well as of biology, that every living thing loves above all else—even above its own life—its distinct identity, which sets it off from all other things. The conservative does not aspire to domination of the world, nor does he relish the prospect of a world reduced to a single pattern of government and civilization.

(9) Men and women are not perfectible, conservatives know; and neither are political institutions. We cannot make a heaven on earth, though we may make a hell. We all are creatures of mingled good and evil; and, good institutions neglected and ancient moral principles ignored, the evil in us tends to predominate. Therefore the conservative is suspicious of all utopian schemes. He does not believe that, by power of positive law, we can solve all the problems of humanity. We can hope to make our world tolerable, but we cannot make it perfect. When progress is achieved, it is through prudent recognition of the limitations of human nature.

(10) Change and reform, conservatives are convinced, are not identical: moral and political innovation can be destructive as well as beneficial; and if innovation is undertaken in a spirit of presumption and enthusiasm, probably it will be disastrous. All human institutions alter to some extent from age to age, for slow change is the means of conserving society, just as it is the means for renewing the human body. But American conservatives endeavor to reconcile the growth and alteration essential to our life with the strength of our social and moral traditions. With Lord Falkland, they say, “When it is not necessary to change, it is necessary not to change.” They understand that men and women are best content when they can feel that they live in a stable world of enduring values.

Conservatism, then, is not simply the concern of the people who have much property and influence; it is not simply the defense of privilege and status. Most conservatives are neither rich nor powerful. But they do, even the most humble of them, derive great benefits from our established Republic. They have liberty, security of person and home, equal protection of the laws, the right to the fruits of their industry, and opportunity to do the best that is in them. They have a right to personality in life, and a right to consolation in death. Conservative principles shelter the hopes of everyone in society. And conservatism is a social concept important to everyone who desires equal justice and personal freedom and all the lovable old ways of humanity. Conservatism is not simply a defense of “capitalism.” (“Capitalism,” indeed, is a word coined by Karl Marx, intended from the beginning to imply that the only thing conservatives defend is vast accumulations of private capital.) But the true conservative does stoutly defend private property and a free economy, both for their own sake and because these are means to great ends.

Those great ends are more than economic and more than political. They involve human dignity, human personality, human happiness. They involve even the relationship between God and man. For the radical collectivism of our age is fiercely hostile to any other authority: modern radicalism detests religious faith, private virtue, traditional personality, and the life of simple satisfactions. Everything worth conserving is menaced in our generation. Mere unthinking negative opposition to the current of events, clutching in despair at what we still retain, will not suffice in this age. A conservatism of instinct must be reinforced by a conservatism of thought and imagination.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Michael Steele should resign as RNC Chairman.

      A while back I said in no uncertain terms that Michael Steele was the wrong man for the job as RNC Chairman. It looks like I was right; in light of the massive national “tea parties” and the “townhall meetings” last year, and in spite of massive GOP victories in both Virginia & New Jersey in last year’s elections and with Republican Scott Brown being within 2% of Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts’ special election for the U.S. Senate, Michael Steele has done little since becoming RNC Chairman. Has Michael Steele tapped into the “Tea Party Movement”? No he has not. Has Michael Steele gone out and advocate a message of Traditional or what Sarah Palin refers to as “Common Sense Conservatism”, no Michael Steele has not. Has Michael Steele endorsed true conservatives like Marco Rubio over the likes of Charlie Crist, no he has not. Given that Obama’s poll numbers are nose diving is Michael Steele raising money for the 2010 election, no he is not. Has Michael Steele cheered the GOP on to retake Congress in the upcoming election, no instead he claims we won’t win back the House of Representatives. 

   Folk’s Common Sense Traditional Conservatism is on the ascendency and liberalism is being rejected by the American people, but all of this is happening in spite of Michael Steele’s gross incompetence as the GOP Chairman. Let me say this quite clearly: Michael Steele should resign as the RNC Chairman immediately and should be replaced by someone who has a proven track record of getting things done like Katon Dawson the state RNC Chairman of South Carolina. Folks I want to be perfectly frank with you Michael Steele was elected by many because he was black and many in the GOP wanted to avoid any stereotype of just being a “southern white man’s party”. I have no problem with a black man as the RNC Chairman but I want some who is competent in doing what the job entails. If Michael Steele was white he would still be incompetent. My friends too much is riding on the 2010 mid-term elections and Michael Steele has no vision and no leadership abilities to either bring the GOP back to it’s Traditional Common Sense Conservative platform nor the heart or drive to retake both Houses of Congress. So I am calling on Michael Steele to resign as RNC Chairman.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Obama will not win in 2012.

 Obama will not win re-election in 2012 for the following reasons:

1.) George Bush will not be around anymore to blame for our economic woes because by 2012 the economy will be completely owned by Obama. Attacking George Bush was a favorite and effective tactic used by Obama in 2008 but it will be worthless in 2012.

2.) Obama’s famous words of, “If you make less than $250,000 a year your taxes will not go up one dime”. This obviously is a promise that Obama can no longer deliver on and his broken pledge can be very effectively used against him in 2012. In fact, Obama recently has proposed a 40% tax on employer based health coverage which has now alienated some of the most loyal of Democrats, namely the Unions.

3.) Obama simply has spent way too much money and has done so in a reckless manner. He has doubled the national deficit and has massively added to the national debt. Given that economic policy, government growth, and government spending will be a major factor in 2012 Obama’s over spending will be a noose around his neck that only has to be tightened in 2012.

4.) Obama is losing two wars. Obama really can care less about waging war in both Iraq and Afghanistan and by 2012 things will be disastrous in both nations. The GOP has only to point it out.

5.) By trying terrorists in civilian court Obama looks like a fool. If Justice Department wins that can only come at the cost of sacrificing legal rights such as the fact that the terrorists were never “mirandized” which calls for an immediate dismissal when not done for the accused. If any judge enforces such rights Obama is in trouble because the terrorists must then be legally freed, but Obama said that even if acquitted he will not release the terrorists. Then what was the point of the trial? This is a lose-lose situation for Obama. Opposition in 2012 just have to yell, “I am re-opening GIMO!” to beat Obama on this issue.

6.) National health care will be an issue that will sink him, because Americans do not want a government take over of healthcare. Even worse is the health care rationing that will be associated with it something that will alienate all seniors and most women with children  in this country.

7.) Inflation is going to be an issue starting this year. Obama has simply spent too much money and he has to find it somewhere and he cannot massively raise taxes across the board (or maybe he will) but it seems that printing more money will be his choice. Thus inflation.

I can point to more issue but these seven issues will be enough to sink Obama in 2012 and the good news is that Obama will provide us with even more fodder for 2012 over the next 3 years.     

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The problem of the Religious Right.

As an Evangelical Christian I want to point out what I see as a problem within this movement. The Religious Right seems to have become a three issue voter and it consists of the following:

1.) Is the person pro-life?
2.) Are they against gay rights?
3.) Is the person a Christian?

Now notice what is missing? What about economic policy? What about tax policy? What about growing or slashing government? What about foreign policy? What about federalism & states rights? I find this problem with Mike Huckabee supporters all the time and they usually say that they support him because he is a man of "integrity". Folks, "integrity" is a code word for "he was a Christian pastor" and as such they believe that he will on this basis alone fix the country. They never know anything about his tax policy or his economic policy or his foreign policy views and yet they want him to be President. My friends you have to be more than a two issue or three issue voter. The Religious Right need to become familiar with the philosophy of Traditional Conservatism and I can think of no better primer than Mark Levin's book Liberty & Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. I want to see the Religious Right become informed Traditional Conservatives and support only Traditional Conservatives (regardless of their faiths) in the GOP Primaries and then the general election in 2010 & 2012.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Traditional Conservatism vs. Neo-Conservatism

    Over the past months Mark Levin's book Liberty & Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto has been an absolute bestseller. In this book Mark Levin strongly puts forth a manifesto for what is known asTraditional Conservatism. Now since the election I have heard every Republican under the sun saying that our party needs to return to its conservative "roots". I have heard this from Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Tammy Bruce, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Bobby Jindal, Rick Perry, Michele Bachman, Mark Levin, Sarah Palin, and etc. They all claim that the Republican Party has left its conservative "roots", yet how can this be since we have had a Republican President for eight years and even a Republican Congress from 1994-2006? My friends we have been living under conservative rule, but it has been the policies of what is known as Neo-Conservatism. It is easy to fall under the belief that all "conservatives" believe the same thing, but nothing could be further from the truth. There are basically two streams of conservatism.

   The battle that is going on is between: Traditional Conservatism and Neo-Conservatism. So what is the difference? Let me point out what each camp believes.

Neo-Conservatives on the issues:

1.) Their origins- Neo-Conservatism began in the 1970's and they were semi-conservative pro-government Democrats who left the Democratic Party because of its move toward extreme socialistic liberalism and they joined the Republican Party (and brought their semi-liberalism with them).

2.) Their foreign policy- Is to convert the world to democracy, even in places where democracy will never work because of the cultural barriers to democracy.

3.) Government- They support big government and have a low opinion of states' rights.

4.) Spending- They are big spenders on social programs and believe in deficits. Balancing the budget is not a priority.

5.) Welfare- They generally support it.

6.) Social issues- Generally give lip servive to conservative social issues, but rarely pursue them when in office.

7.) Economic issues- Very extreme in free trade and globalization. Supporters of big buisnesses.

8.) Immigration- Believe in open boreders and have done nothing to secure the borders and they support general amnesty.

9.) Education- The federal government must regulate it and support it.

10.) The Constitution- They never bother to ask whether the laws they vote for are constitutional or not. They reject the notion of federalism (divided government).

11.) Judicial Activism- They have no plans to oppose unelected judges who make laws that violate the Constitution. 

Faces of neo-conservitism: Both Bushes, Bill Kristol, Fred Barnes, the Weekly Standard, Walter Krauthammer, most of the Senate Republicans and especially John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

Traditional Conservatism on the issues:

1.) Their origins: Thomas Jefferson's Republicanism, Andrew Jackson's Popularism, Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, John Locke, The Federalist Papers & The Anti-Federalist Papers, Barry Goldwater, and finally Ronald Reagan.

2.) Foreign policy- Use force to protect American intrests but it is not our job to always build and save nations and police the world in every particular circumstance. It is not the job of the United States to convert the world to democracy. It is our job to intervene when human rights are being completely trampled by evil tyrants.

3.) Government- Government is the problem not the solution. Cut government programs. Strongly protect states' rights (federalism).

4.) Spending- Strongly believe in cutting government programs and radically reducing spending. Balancing budgets should be a goal. Primary spending should be on the military.

5.) Welfare: Oppose it.

6.) Social issues: Takes social issues seriously. The root of most problems in the country are the result of immoral behavior. Welfare and social programs is simply the goverment bailing people out of the consequences of their actions. A virtuous and prudent people has little need for government.

7.) Economics- Deregulate businesses. Tax cuts across the borad and remove many taxes such as the death tax and the corporate tax. Supports free trade and low tariffs if they be needed. 
 

8.) Immigration- Supports securing the border and limited amnesty.

9.) Education- Is not the job of the federal government but is a state and local issue. Support vouchers or tax credits at most.

10.) The Constitution- They take seriously whether the Constitution prohibts a law or not. It is well understood that the Constitution mandates limited government. Federalism is passionately held up.

11.) Judicial Activism- Activist federal judges including the U.S. Supreme Court must be reigned in and their power to create unconstitional laws from the bench must be fought. Judges should have term limits, or be subject to popular elections. The U.S. Congress should have the power to overturn outragous and unconstitutional rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court, thus the ultimate power must rest with the people and not unelected judges who are responsible to no one.

The most famous Tradtional Conservatives are President Ronald Reagan, most Southern Republicans, Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Senator Jim Demint, and Sarah Palin.

Please read Mark Levin's book, in it he refers to moderate Republicans and neo-conservatives as "Neo-Statists" as opposed to the Democrats who are full blown "Statists". My friends we must support the traditionalist conservatives, because the neo-conservatives have been killing our party. We have not had a decent Republican President since President Reagan and we all know it. Bush senior led to Bill Clinton, Bob Dole was a dud and led to 4 more years of Clinton, and Bush junior (along with John Mccain) has led us to a radical Democratic Congress and BO (Barak Obama). It is time to reclaim our party. The Republican elites are all neo-conservatives and the base are mostly traditionalist conservatives, and we need to reclaim our party from the neo-conservatives. This is why it is so important to pay attention in selecting Republican state chairmanships and in selecting true traditional conservatives during the primaries: both on a local level and a national level. The last thing we need is another government growing neo-conservative. My friends throw the Republican neo-conservatives overboard and put traditional conservatives back in power and things will change for the better! Neo-Conservatism has been tried and has been an absolute disaster, now let's throw the S.O.B's out!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Restoring a dead Constitution and our choices.

  It is time for us to be honest, ¾ of the U.S. Constitution is dead and it will not take long (if Traditional Conservatives do not start winning elections) for the remaining ¼ of our Constitutional rights to disappear as well. As conservatives we have some hard choices to make about our future and the future of our nation as well. As I see it our choices are becoming limited and they are the following: First, we get Traditional Conservatives to take over the GOP and then take back Congress in 2010 and the White House in 2012. We first contain Obama until we vote him out of office and replace him with a solid Republican Traditional Conservative like Sarah Palin and not another liberal/moderate RINO. From here we use the legislative process to roll back and massively slash big government programs and agencies. Also, a new set of Constitutional amendments need to be put forth. Consider the following amendments:

1.) A balance budget amendment

2.) A flat tax amendment at 10% of every American’s income and no more.

3.) Term limits for Congressmen and Senators. Six terms (12 years max) for a Representative and two terms (12 years max) for a Senator.

4.) U.S. Supreme Court Justices and all federal judges can serve for a term of two years (with six terms total or 12 years max).

5.) Congress shall have the power to overturn U.S. Supreme Court decisions with a simple majority in both Houses of Congress plus 7 votes in each House.

        The second option for us is for our individual states to adopt the old “Virginia & Kentucky Resolutions” authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, which states that the states have both the right and the duty to defend their citizens from what they deem as unconstitutional federal laws.

        The third and most dreadful of the options is our last resort where our states in lawful assemblies vote to succeed from the union and either form their own nations or form a new union based on conservative principles. This last option must be on the table and we must never forget that our Founding Fathers revolted against Great Britain for tyrannical laws that were far less oppressive than our federal government is today.

        To be blatantly honest folks the road ahead of us is going to be very hard work and yes we are going to have to accept the reality that some of our choices maybe bad, terrible, and even worse. The bright spot is that the majority of the American people seem to have had enough of liberalism, big government, taxes, cultural degradation, and even Republican sellouts. So let us focus like a laser beam on the first option I proposed and Lord willing we (with very hard work) will restore our American Republic. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »