Late Saturday Morning Bump !
Eastwood's got your back covered ...
Posted on 12/11/2003 7:59:11 AM PST by happykidjill
Like most Toogood Reports readers, I observed this year's battles within the conservative ranks with profound discomfort. In my mind, there are far too many real enemies out there to waste time and print fighting one another.
It seems that the world of conservatism has been split up between the "conservatives" and the "paleo-conservatives" or between the "conservatives" and the "neo-conservatives." Both sides present themselves as the bona fide article and the other side as the one in need of a prefix.
Personally, I just want to spit up this strife the same way the bleachers of Wrigley Field do the opposition´s home run balls. This qualifies as a "which side are you on boys" issue. It is my goal to conserve America's wonderful, non-living Constitution, and to forever preserve the personal and economic freedoms that embody our way of life. If you agree with me about these basic propositions, then you're on my side and the rest of your views are of secondary concern. Simply revering the spirit of the Founding Fathers puts you in the top 50 percent of the population on the Chap-o-meter.
Not only is an inter-journalist, inter-intellectual, conservative civil war fruitless, it is also detrimental to the nation as a whole. The country needs all of our efforts just to have a chance of mitigating the damage the culture war has wrought.
Our daily resistance may be the biggest obstacle to the federal pacman swallowing up fifty percent of the economy. We cannot afford to bicker amongst ourselves. The odds are too great. Obsessing over who said what about Taki, Buchanan, Frum, Lowry or any of the other public figures who make up the American right is counter-productive.
The neocon/paleocon debate is as bewildering as it is petty and misguided. Sadly, some conservatives now feel more comfortable with leftists than they do their own kind [I know of one who astonished me by saying that he regards the American Enterprise Institute as "The Death Star"]. Certainly, internal disagreements are to be expected, but they are trivial in comparison to accepting the positions advocated by the other side of the political spectrum. Socialism, cultural Marxism, white guilt, and radical feminism are eternal obstacles to advancing society. Other conflicts pale in importance when compared to them.
I propose that we abandon slurs like paleo-con and neo-con. Instead we should all evolve into "Logicons." The Logicon refuses to slash at the brethren who march alongside him because maintaining some level of public harmony is the only logical way in which we will succeed. Logicons realize that our fighting strength should not be diluted by internecine combat.
Much of the controversy currently centers around President Bush and whether or not one approves of his job performance. I've written here and elsewhere how much I personally admire him, but I also acknowledge that certain criticisms have been valid. Those who label him a big spender are correct in their assessments. He has not used his veto to curb the size of government and has developed a habit of hugging Ted Kennedy's voluminous appropriations.
While this is unfortunate, to pretend that Bush is not the best bet for advancing the country's interests is shortsighted. There are many conservatives out there who could do a better job of slashing outlays, but it is highly unlikely that any of them could get elected by our emotive and squishy electorate. On our side, George W. Bush "feels their pain" better than anyone. He brings in moderate voters the way my old Erie Dearie lures used to bag walleyes .
The problem is one of perspective. We can spend time complaining about steel tariffs or the administration´s pathetic capitulation on affirmative action last summer. Yes, I would have been greatly pleased if he disseminated a Michigan Law brief of his own after the decision entitled “O´Connor a Known Fruitcake,” but the fact is that he didn't and there´s nothing we can do about it. However, we must keep our outlook global by remembering what the alternatives are.
What would Al Gore do with affirmative action? How about Howard Dean, the neurotic would-be-king, with Al Qaeda? Makes you shudder doesn´t it? After the election, Al Sharpton would take his standup around the world as our Secretary of State and we´d hear Patricia Ireland lambasting “patriarchal textbooks” in her role as Secretary of Education.
In actuality, my examples really aren´t all that farfetched. The radical left has been carrying the Democrat Party since 2001 and, now, if the Democrats win, bills will need to be paid.
Rather than fantasize about an ideal future, conservatives need to think about how things can, and will, get devastatingly worse, should Bush lose. Be it Dean or Kerry or whatever burrito they decide to roll out of the Taqueria next summer, the fate of the country will be in jeopardy. By this time in 2006, there will be a foreign policy coward in every pot and a benefit check in the hands of every college drop out. Think France, think Germany, and then be grateful we have a president who doesn't spit after saying "tax cuts."
Besides, the Bush Presidency has produced many hidden benefits. His appointees may well be our salvation even though he backs obese budgets. In the latest issue of The New Criterion, we see that his appointments to the National Endowment of the Arts have had a wonderful effect. Under Dana Gioia, the agency is sponsoring Macbeth for military bases and has resurrected traditional Shakespeare at the national level [Shakespearean plays are now staged as in the days of old which means brothels and bath house scenes are no longer mandatory].
I don´t care if you insult him or trade in Karl Rove conspiracy theories, but, in November of 2004, this particular rightist is going to stand by George W. Bush just as the bumper sticker on my car promises. Our hopes for a better tomorrow rest in the White House on his bed. We must support him because heady days await and also because his reelection keeps the Democrat Party headless. Let´s proudly stand by our man as he loudly subsumes the popular positions of the left while promoting many of ours in the shadows though his judges, appointees, and minions.
To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Bernard at bchapafl@hotmail.com .
I only seek honest debate on topics. It's hard to find around here. Anytime someone posts something that another finds disagreeable, they start attacks, not on the message, but the messenger. It's pitiful.
Now go call someone else names. You should be ashamed of yourself. But I'm sure your not.
Anyone who votes for anyone on moral grounds is fundamentally insane
But not in a vacuum. I responded to someone else. Taking things out of context is business as usual. Anyway, you go your way, I'll go mine.
Without any parting shots, particularly misleading shots.
But you've done your share of it on this threat, haven't you? You can dish it out, but you can't take it.
I didn't find your post to be in support of me. If it was, oh well. I ask no support.
If I want to support one of your posts, you'll take and like it.
I only seek honest debate on topics. It's hard to find around here. Anytime someone posts something that another finds disagreeable, they start attacks, not on the message, but the messenger. It's pitiful.
You've been doing exactly what you're accusing other of doing. And we all see through your transparent word play. You're not good at it.
Now go call someone else names. You should be ashamed of yourself. But I'm sure your not.
That's more of the phoney transparent stuff I mentioned above. Grow up.
I'm sorry I simply do not aggree. The God of the Bible is not the same as the one the Muslims worship. Allah was an Arabian moon god (an idol origianally) while Jehovah was never an idol.
When God gave instuctions to the Israelites regarding how he (Jehovah) was to be worshiped, the Lord was very careful to make sure that his temple was constructed and managed in such a way so that visitors from a foreign land would not confuse him with pagan idols and other pagan gods worshipped during the day.
Late Saturday Morning Bump !
Eastwood's got your back covered ...
Dittos on that. We can critique him when he is wrong, but let's not lose perspective.
I'll repeat the point of my post.
A voter cannot support a Libertarian candidate, and use morality as a reason for doing so.
While I'm sure many libertarians believe in morality, their platform supports license without responsibility.........which is not morality.
Sorry, the Constitution is important to some of us, just not the President and GOP legislators.
We're at WAR. Sorry if you haven't grasped that yet.
So now Bush is making a slave out of you?? Give me a BREAK!
Our country is in need of protection because PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO KILL US.....including YOU! It is the President's job to protect this country from its enemies, and there is no one better suited to do that job right now that President Bush.
There will BE no Constitution if there that is not done.
(Aren't you supposed to be off playing with a Green Knight somewhere??)
And he could do that while not destroying the Constitution. National defense and upholding your oath of office are not mutually exclusive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
