I heard Bob Beck on Fox just a few minutes ago (YouTube embed when available), he says that Republicans got their chance and couldn’t govern and that they cause the economic crisis. Further he says that we must give President Obama a chance, since he has only been President for a month.  Well, I call B.S. on this and I will tell you why.

While it is true that we got our chance to govern and in some ways failed, we were not responsible for this economic crisis, not as a party.  

The Republican Party is against the bailouts, against the original TARP, against stimulus, against high risk loans to individuals who show no means of being capable to make payment, against the tax payer insuring those very same loans once default.  Heck the Democrats have been saying that on the T.V. for year’s right??  I say why fight it, they have painted us as obstructionist, fine they own it.   

The problem with Beckel’s concept of how this happened and who is to blame, is the fact that he lives only in the present, the past is just a waste of time for him.  For the last two years the Federal Government has been, ideologically, under the control of the Democratic Party in both the House and the Senate along with a pre-occupied and marginalized Republican President.   President Bush, for all his greatness as Commander and Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, completely gave up the reigns to domestic policies to the moderates and communist/socialist left.  Due to this we had the first Auto-Bailout, back when approx $30 Billion was still a lot of money. We also saw the first Bank bailout, the TARP, the next mini loan to Auto, Stimulus.  All that equates to a 21.36% drop in the Dow since Election day, with precipitous falls coinciding with the passage of the stimulus and the Treasury Sect. Tim Geithner’s answer deficient presser.

Look here Bob Beckel, you guys have talked down the economy for six years now.  Reap it.

Us conservatives who live within our means will be ok.  We will keep our wits and put communist/socialist leftists and the useful idiots, such as yourself, back in the minor leagues come 2010.  Freedom is incompatible with the ideology of the left.  

I encourage all conservatives to re-read Goldwater’s thoughts on negotiation with communists in The Conscience of Conservative.  The communist only enters negotiation when it is strategically beneficial to them, giving away only what they never really wanted in the first place.  Since they do not negotiate in the sunlight, our goal should be total victory over their ideology.  Part of that is calling out the useful idiots, who repeat the big lie ad infinitum.

Bob Beckel, you’re an idiot, straight from the mold.  This isn’t something you inherited…this is something you created with your rhetoric.  I hope you are happy.

So I am a crack dealer, and I like you. In fact go ahead and have this rock..for free, really it’s on me. I know you are thinking that this crap could kill you, but it wouldn’t make much sense to have you die. You are a valued customer, so trust me, I would never give you more crack than you could handle. Now you come back when you want some more ok??

(First time user/eventual crackhead)

Wow, this crack makes me feel alive, I feel like I can do anything…Yes.We.Can!!

A few months down the road…

(eventual crackhead)

Man I remember that time I tried crack…I felt so good while I was high…I need more.

(Crack Dealer)

I hear ya…I can hook you up…you know cause I really do like you..this time though I have to charge you…just business, you know.

(eventual crackhead)

Well I really don’t have the cash for that right now…

(Crack Dealer)

That’s ok man, I will let you put it on credit, once you are feeling good again you will be able to pay me back….::evil grin::

(eventual crackhead)

Thanks man….if you every need me for anything you just let me know, I will be your guy.

(Crack Dealer)

Oh I know…::that evil grin again, wierd::

A few years pass by and everybody in town is craked out…the Crack Dealer is the only shmuck in town with any money and also the only guy with crack. There remains a large contingent of people who just never liked crack, but they are continually demonized and blamed for the joblessness and low benefits that the crackheads need to survive.

(Crack Dealer..sensing the chance at complete domination)

Crackheads, there was a time when you had no crack, and I provided it for you. There were days when you needed crack but couldn’t afford your rock, but I had your back. Soon we can achieve our goal, and crack will come out of the water faucets, free to all. But, in order for that to happen you must protect me from the non crackheads amongst us. You must vote for me to be your Crack Dealer forever. You know that they will take your crack away, don’t you. Besides, you owe me. And I will collect what is owed!!

So goes the story in Venezuela. Chaves has been giving them Socialism in peicemeal, single rocks at a time, always sure to avoid overdose. Now he has achieved his next step towards a socialist dictatorship, the end of term limits for all government officials.

As sad as this is for the people of Venezuela, we have our own crack dealer here at home. President Obama and the Democratic party at large will be employing the same strategies in our country that Hugo has employed in Venezuela. The first bit of crack is already out the door, waiting the final signature of President Obama. All on credit. The Fairness Doctrine is next in the hopper of egregious offenses to the Republic. They have given the people socialism as peicemeal, next they will silence the opposition. Then they will come for our weapons. Then they will insist upon chains, for our own safety.

I am not yet a crackhead, nor do I intend to become one. I don’t intend on taking money via the stimulus, other than those things which I cannot deny. I encourage everyone else to deny, as much as possible, the money that may flow your way via the stimulus. Don’t take the crack rocks. Not even the T.V. converter coupons.

We need to wake up before we all wake up with white ashy lips, crack pipe in hand and chains on our ankles.

I hope that some of the Governors of the States would also fight accepting the Stimulus funds.

This may be our last chance to beat back the wrongheaded ideology of socialism.

The 40% that would go to infrastructure we would require language insuring fastrack approval of all valid projects, which would go to a private contractor within any given state.  The contractor who receives the contract will be chosen by the States Legislature with consent of the Governor.  The State will have an open bid process where the local citizens can see the business and their profiles, allowing them to influence their State legislatures in the desire they choose.  The work would have to take no longer 2 years, unless they continue without money from the federal economic stimulus plan.

The 60% percent that would go to taxes would be a progressive tax cut across the board.  Now I know what you are thinking, this is a good progressive thing.  We would lower all of the tax rates, drop income tax rates by 25% and the corp 10% and so forth (I would need a good mathematician to work this out for me, but it’s the idea I am selling, not a detailed plan…works for Geithner..).  In addition the tax bracket of he income tax would be slightly progressive in nature cut the lower incomes at a higher rate then the higher incomes, clause out the small business reporting as income, this would create wealth at all levels and still satisfy the idea of equality.  Now I know that this won’t win us bipartisan support, but it will show that we tried, and it is not as destructive as other options and can be changed later.

I believe these two things would jumpstart the economy and create private wealth to everyone in the nation no matter the income level.  This could be used to bring targeted, timely, and temporary stimulus to our nation.  We are 7 months into the recession (can’t cite this right now, heard it today somewhere) and the fact is that we may start out of this slump naturally pretty soon.  Even with today’s jitters in the market I still think we are near the bottom and the signs of growth are just over the horizon.

This plan would more than likely speed up a healthy economy, and I think it will also have the capability of saving our sick economy.  Then again, I ain’t no economist, just a simpleton who has had to deal with some tight budgets.  What do I know?

I read a nice tidbit about Rep. Cantor that I got via The New Ledger h/t Erick Erickson.  The Ambinder article is about Rep. Cantor’s counter to the DCCC’s assualt on, private citizen, Rush Limbaugh.  

Rep. Cantor is calling the President’s and his party’s bluff.  The people voted for hope, they were promised “Bipartisianship”, they are getting “Bipartisianship™“.   So Rep. Cantor, well let’s quote from the article:

will soon issue a statement contending that Obama’s promise to “put an end to petty politics” is “threatened” as the White House and their allies “are making political threats rather than crafting a bipartisan economic stimulus plan.”

This is an expected play at some point in any new administration.  Pit the President and his Party against themselves.  Can you say Comprehensive Immigration Reform™?  What is so great about this is that it is so soon.  

Rep. Cantor didn’t just stop there, although that was great in and of itself.  Whip Cantor called for President Obam to “immediately disavow” liberal interest groups like Americans United for Change*, who work regularly with the White House and the Congressional Democrats, who have created commercials targeting Republicans.

Here is the video set to target Sen. Murkowski

Now each of the videos is exactly the same except the endings differ depending on who is being targeted.  They also have a national version that pretty much just blame all Republicans and the Bush Admin…even in victory…classless, but I digress.  Where was I, oh yes, Rep. Cantor.

Let us be clear: attack ads will not create jobs or help struggling families but will only serve to undermine our nation’s desire for bipartisanship. Instead of thinking about winning at any cost, we should all be thinking about creating the jobs Americans need

Rep. Cantor was chanelling Bill Clinton in this quote…but I give him a pass on that for two reasons.  First, He is right.  If Obama employs a permanent campaign philosophy with us we will insure extreme discomfort as often as possible.  Second, this is the absolute reality of what is happening.  The Obama Adminstration and the Democratic Party in and out of Congress are engaging in incitement because they now can’t provide Hope™, none the less Change™.

I say everybody with a spare buck or two should drop a couple off right here, you know, just to show your appreciation.  Or don’t…and wave good bye slowly to the idea of the Republic.  Yep I said it.  We are at a tipping point in our nation.  The statist, socialists have a firm grasp on the reigns of power and if they go unchecked we are screwed. Bad.  Add to that the economic peril that we are in and quips about Weimar don’t seem so dang funny anymore.  

It’s time to stand up and fight, part of that is being their for our leaders like Rep Eric Cantor.  Cantor is as conservative as you can get, and this strategery sounds just right to me.  Go Donate now. You don’t have to donate a lot…I just gave $10…that is what my budget would allow right now.  Some of you can do more, some of you can’t give any money.  Those who can do more, I hope you do.  Those who can’t give money, you should be writing to the editors of you local papers and the national papers.  Write your congress men if you live in one of the targeted States, write the DCCC and let them know that you will never vote for them if they continue this partisan, machine politics where the opposition is silenced.

In sum, Thank you Rep. Cantor!!!!

Now these are just a couple rough ideas that I have, I am sure they can be improved upon.

* I would like to limit the amount of legislation that can come forward in any given year.  This would be a hard limit that could only be bypassed in emergency situations, which would be voted on and would require a 75% majority to justify exceptions to the rule.

* Tax Reform, We must get away from the progressive tax system.  10% across the board, including Corp/Capital Gains/Sales/Payroll (I am not an economist, I will defer to others on the actual rate and whether is should be across the entire spectrum)

* Open all available assets up for energy.  Oil, check..Natural Gas, check…Nuclear, check….Wind, check…Hydro-Electric, check…..all of it.  In coordination with this I would want to see the Dept. of Energy to take a step back and act as a simple mediator for the individual States.  The States should choose which Energy product will best meet their States need and infrastructure.  The Federal Gov’t dictating/mandating what product to use and where will not work.

Anyhow those are my three quick ideas.  Let me see yours.

One last note, no matter what ideas we present it won’t matter unless our leaders on the hill act on them.  If they simple win the majority and then cave….well Obama will be a two term President.  Your choice guys.

I am not writting this to in order to get that RedState member re-instated.  I am merely relating Bird’s explanation and apology so that his character doesn’t get the same treatment that the left gave to our President.  Below is the text of Birdmojo’s explanation of his comment and overall conflict with the war in Iraq.  I hope this gives you a bit more insight about Birdmojo and why he responds the way he does used to.

(I suppose that there may a discussion revolving around whether I was coving up for my sarcasm or whether I was sincere. Here’s an essay that I’d be happy to make into a diary if I am re-instated. If nothing else, perhaps seeing my take on the war could help resolve the question of whether my post was sarcasm and I’m lying by saying it wasn’t or whether my post was sincere and misread as sarcasm.)

9/11 blew me away. I was working 3-11PM at a tech support job at the time. I had a friend call me up from a sound sleep (my sleep hours were messed up) and he told me to turn on the television.

I was floored. I couldn’t believe that this had happened. Half of me stared in disbelief while the other half went down a checklist of the people who might have done this. The Russians? Nah. They’re preoccupied. China? Nah, not their style. Terrorists? Yeah, probably terrorists. I kept trying to get to news websites but they were down. I knew about sites like “instapundit” and he did a good job of posting links to sites that weren’t down… and I got information that way.

Half of me hoped that the American response wouldn’t include nukes, the other half of me hoped it would. Neutron bombs were cleanish, right? Drop them, they kill everybody, then you don’t have to do a whole lot of cleanup, right? That’ll make it okay on the neighbors of whomever we nuke and allow them to move into the now-vacant real estate.

Half of me wished that Clinton was still president. Half of me was glad that this had happened with a Republican in office.

As the weeks passed and the red faded from my eyes, I realized that, yeah, I was probably glad that we didn’t nuke two or three countries. That probably would have been a bit much… but what do we do? Well, Afghanistan was a gimme. Of course we had to go in there… and I was surprised that the Americans sat down to talk with the Taliban first… remember that? “Give us bin Laden.” We didn’t go in there with guns blazing, we didn’t go all Jack Bauer… we sat down to talk. And, of course, the Taliban were lying. Every thing they said was a lie to buy time and to hope/pray that the UN and the rest of the world would talk us down. Well, we went in… but we didn’t go in guns blazing. Every measure was made to protect civilians. Sure, we’d drop daisy cutters on the fighters in the mountains (remember reading about that? I read an article that quoted some British soldiers as saying “oh my god, the yanks are using nukes!”)… but in, say, Kabul, the Americans were downright acting against their own best interests.

Half of me still wanted blood, though.

When Iraq came up, I supported it whole-heartedly. I pointed out that the UN wasn’t certain that Saddam got rid of his weapons. When my lefty friends talked about how that wasn’t sufficient, I went through mailing lists and found quotes from them where they had defended Clinton’s bombing of Iraq against the isolationist Republicans using, wouldn’t you know it, UN reports saying that Saddam had not demonstrated that he had gotten rid of his weapons. I argued that Saddam was a monster, I argued that any country that had Official Secret Police *REQUIRED* intervention by anyone with the strength to do something. Well, that was the argument from half of me. The other half knew that if someone punched you in a bar and knocked you flat, you had dang well stand up pretty quickly and punch *SOMEBODY* out. Maybe the right person, maybe not. The important thing was to send the message to everyone else in the bar.

Iraq fell in, what? A time period better measured in days than weeks? Certainly better in weeks than in months. I watched Baghdad Bob and cackled at his audacity. Before you knew it, the Saddam Statue was being toppled and Iraqis were hitting Saddam posters with the soles of their shoes. See? I pointed out to my lefty friends. SEE???

A short while after that, Saddam was captured… and after that the mission was accomplished.

Half of me thought we should just leave a note on Saddam’s throne that read, in English and Arabic, “We don’t care who sits here. Sunni, Shiite, Baathist, Kurd, Iraqi, Iranian, or Israeli. Don’t make us come back.”

The other half of me thought that, well… we toppled Iraq, we should help it stand back up. These people were oppressed by Saddam for so long that they had forgotten how to be a free people. We needed to Kipling up. Help them back on their feet. Make them a beacon to the rest of the Middle East.

Well… let’s just say that a lot has happened since then. The whole “Weapons of Mass Destruction” thing didn’t pan out the way I thought it would. I honestly thought that he still had them, or (at the very least!) that he had a way to quickly make them again and get back to where he needed to be though, technically, he may have been following the letter of the law by not having the weapons, I thought that the components would be found in amounts that would allow me to point and say “see? He could have had weapons in days, if not hours!” For a while, I jumped on every report that mentioned stuff like proof that they had been smuggled into Syria or proof that they had been dumped in the desert or that a stockpile of mustard gas shells had been found… then I just went back to pointing out that, hey, nobody could have known that the WMDs weren’t there. Not even the UN was able to confirm it. Even Saddam was surprised that he didn’t have them.

But I was ticked at having been wrong.

I then focused on the burgeoning democracy. Remember those purple fingers? Man, I was proud of those. But the Iraqis kept fighting. They kept bombing. Police stations! These were people who were blowing up car bombs in front of POLICE STATIONS. I began to really resent the Iraqis. How could we have freed them from Saddam and have them blowing up car bombs in front of police stations in response? I began to wonder if staying in Iraq wasn’t a mistake. The cultural differences were far, far too much… we should have left a note in Saddam’s chair after all. These people were going to be killing each other whether or not our soldiers were there, why keep our soldiers in harm’s way?

But I kept reading reports from the soldiers who were there who kept saying “I believe in what we’re doing over there.” The soldiers who argued otherwise? They tended to be nuts like Jesse MacBeth. The soldiers who were on the ground and fighting… they wrote back saying that they believed in the Iraqi people. So I figured then, and figure now, that the soldiers know more about what’s going on than I do.

It still galls me to have been wrong about the WMDs and twice as much to have been wrong about how the Iraqi people would have responded to Saddam being gone. Half of me thinks “If I had known then what I knew now, I would have argued against the Iraq war, rather than for it.” The other half of me thinks that that’s wasted effort and, looking back, nobody knew that Iraq didn’t have WMDs, not the UN, not even Saddam.

As much as my being “wrong”, if you want to call it that, about the war galls me, Bush has met with the parents of the soldiers who died in Iraq. I merely defended Bush’s decision but *HE* is the guy who made it. As awful as I feel looking and seeing no WMDs, imagine what Bush feels when he thinks about it. As awful and resentful of the Iraqi people as I feel, imagine what Bush feels when he thinks about it. I guess part of me sort of assumed that he slowed down or even stopped meeting with parents after the Cindy Sheehan thing, but it looks like he didn’t. Even after being wrong about the WMDs and wrong about how the Iraqis would respond, Bush has the humility and strength to meet with the parents of the soldiers who fall in Iraq… these same soldiers who, surely, were writing home and saying stuff like “I believe in this mission” to their parents.

Bush sits down with the parents and looks them in the eye. That’s amazing.

Wow.

That’s mind-boggling.

That’s the essay I suppose I should have written rather than the comment that I left. Neil and Streiff probably think that it couldn’t have been written by the real birdmojo as it doesn’t mention “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” once.

And, I suppose, I should look at how the general response to my post was an automatic assumption of sarcasm rather than an automatic assumption that I meant the whole “amazing, wow, mind-boggling” thing (which, I assure you, I did). I don’t talk about the whole Iraq war because I have so many internal conflicts about supporting it in the first place (you know when people were shouting “NEOCON!!!” so much in 2003 and 2004? I knew that they were shouting at the Fiscal Conservatives who weren’t really Social Conservatives but believed in a vigorous Foreign Policy which is to say… I knew that when someone said “neocon”, they were talking about someone just like me). The main lesson I’ve learned from the Iraq War is to not automatically assume that the isolationists/non-interventionists are automatically wrong but I temper that with the whole “you didn’t and couldn’t have known” thing.

Anyhow, the post that got me blammed was *NOT* sarcastic, though I see now how it could have been interpreted as being so.

Birdmojo has never denied that he is not a registered republican.  Birdmojo was in fact closer to the classical liberal than the modern libertarian.  I knew Birdmojo (Jay) briefly while I live in Colorado, I know that his personal moral compass is true.  I know that I could agree with him 95% of the time, even if I didn’t agree with his way of getting his point across.  I know that his wit will be missed, at least by me.  I hope Birdmojo is not remembered as the guy who took President Bush’s commitment to character lightly, because that would be the absolute opposite of the truth.

Hopefully this will not be my last post, but if it is at least it will have been done for the right reason.  Truth.

There are so many people who I would like to thank, if I miss anyone I am truly sorry.  

First and foremost I would like to thank Erick in particular and the Directors in general, I came here from Politico so I fully appreciate the very existence of this site (anyone who was a member of Politico should understand this).  You guy’s have done a great thing for Republicans and Conservatives by allowing us to have a fairly unfiltered voice to some of the top echelons of the Republican Party.  Thank you very much for that.

Next i would like to thank E Pluribus Unum.  Without your diaries on Fred, Kirk, and conservatism in general, I may have never been able to understand and verbalize the very philosophy that I am a part of.  Thank you for the discussions, critiques, and encouragements.  Congratulations on your promotion to the status of FP contributor, it is truly deserved.

Gamecock…well what can I say brotha, you have challenged me in my thoughts and I love you for it.  Your writing style is so very unique.  I am so pleased that you found your way to our party and have taken up the banner of Reagan.  You unapologetically defend and promote the ideas that make our country great, I thank you for that.

Achance, thanks for trying to impart some knowledge to me, especially on the nuts and bolts.  Your experience invaluable and I hope to continue learning from you.  Although we may disagree on Gov. Palin on some points I appreciate you being frank and honest about what you know as fact and what you expect due to circumstance, that delineation shows character that many who dislike Gov. Palin simply lack.

Mbecker and Moe Lane thanks for the lessons in sarcasm (really that a compliment…;^)).  The two of you have helped me cut through the BS of trolls like a hot knife through butter…which I can then put on my big bucket of popcorn…;^)

Jaded, you remind me each day what it means to be a patriot.

PaRep…give me your luch money…now!!!

Neil, thanks for keeping the site up and running.

Birdmojo…I know you are still reading so let me just say, send me your email aaronbg.gardner@gmail.com …if I am ever in town we will have to close down Jose’s, thanks for all the great conversations.

Speciallist…love the pictures, you make each day speacial!!

Last but not least, AceinTX.  Thanks you so much for all the effort in exposing the fifth colunm within our party.  Never let up.  Conservatism will rise again and those b4stards will rue the day!!!

Ok I know that I have forgotten a buch of others who I should thank, but I have a 9 month old and haven’t slept through the night since her birth…so I apologize if I missed you, trust me though…your are all loved.

So, happy birthday to me….cake is in the kitchen and beer is on the deck, thanks for the education!!

 Some 200 plus years ago our forefathers took it upon themselves to set about to create a new nation.  A nation of free men.  A nation that governed from the bottom up rather than a nation that ruled from the top down.  
 
Upon declaring their indepence from the tyranny and totalitarian rule of King George they fought on the battlefields and in the debating halls.  They came up with a system of government which derived it’s power from the people.  They took caution to ensure that the powers of the government would be separated not only in the three branches of the Federal Government but also between the Federal Government and the State Governments which comprised the whole.  
 
It seems as though immediately after codifying these rules of government, which were meant to establish liberty and freedom for all, some began to usurp those same rules.  

Although the names of these groups has changed over the years the political philosophies have held steady in their basic nature, power belongs to me and not to thee. Today these ideals are held primarily by the Democratic party and, to a marginally lesser extent, by those whom we refer to as Rinos, or big government Republicans.

Today it seems as though we really only have one monolithic goverment with various aparati beneath that claim to be soveriegn governments of the States.  This may seem like a rather pessimistic view of our current situation, but I will provide a few examples of what I mean, so as not to come off as a melodramatic.

First, I will bring up Education in America.  Education, to me, is area of government that is best left to those who are closest to it and affected the most by it.  I was reading today an article about the coming budget battle that will take place in the Vermont Legislature. Gov. Jim Douglas, in his inaugural speech, chose to single out Education Reform as one of the many ways to wrangle in the budget shortfalls that Vermont will be facing. The article was good but it made me realize that there was really not a whole lot that the state on it’s own could do, at least without causing more trouble down the road. Here is a small excerpt from the the article:

We can’t ignore the fact that from FY 2006 through FY 2010 there has been a 23 percent increase in what we spend for our K-12 school system – yet we are educating 4,300 fewer students. We can’t ignore the fact that in the past decade we have added 3,500 positions to our schools, yet we are educating 10,000 fewer students. As the governor pointed out, for every three students we lose, we add a staff position, which, obviously, is an unsustainable trend.

Why is this happening? To a large extent, it’s the result of federal and state mandates. Unfunded mandates. School boards are not hiring additional people because they want the challenge of getting their budgets passed. They hire because they are being told to hire to fill a need.

Now, I am new to Vermont, so I can’t really argue for or against the need for these new positions. Although, I direct your attention to the bolded text. The Federal Government has taken upon itself a wholly unconstitutional ability to mandate to a State, and further the local community, how many positions should be created and thus filled and funded. The Democrat or Rino would read this and see a responsibility for the Federal Government to provide funding for this mandate. Well, needless to say, I am no Rino, and certainly no God forsaken Democrat.

The problem to me is obvious, we need to get rid of the Federal mandate. The only question that remains is how the hell are we gonna do that? Honestly, I don’t know and this was my catalyst for writing this diary.

Before I get too far let me offer up another example of the usurpation of which I speak. Equal Opportunity Employment and Affirmative Action. I am neither a bigot nor a racist, but I have no love for a policy instituted by the Federal Government, and mandated for implementation at all levels of both the private and public sector. Now, I am not going to even attempt to provide links to data sets or give anecdotal evidence that these policies are harmful to the Republic and by most interpertations go far beyond the Constitutional limits on the Federal Government, to me they are, well lets just say “self evident”.

Again, I am drawn back to the question, how the hell are we gonna do it? Again, I don’t know.

The only plausible answer to me is that it will take the majority of Americans becoming so entrenched in the misery of totalitarian government that they finally wake up and say “NO MORE!!!”

The saying goes that, “all politics is local”, this is true in that grassroots are needed to secure any political power.  I applaud Erick Erickson for creating The RedState StrikeForce of which I am a proud member. But, I am coming to the conclusion that we must be prepared to take our local issues and make them national. We must be willing to band together a coalition of pissed off conservatives, federalists, and libertarians to march to the steps of Congress, pitchfork and torches in hand, in order to change the landscape at the top in the hopes of returning to a Federal Government properly limited to the confines set forth in the plain reading of the Constitution, emanations and penumbras not withstanding.

A cultural, political, and philosophical insurrection is what it took to drag us to this point, maybe that is the only way to get back.

I hope that it doesn’t come to violence in the streets before our collective voices will be heard, but I fear that it may be too late.

If I have crossed the line in any way in what I wrote above feel free to replace it with a cute video of a cat jumping headlong into a mirror, it will pretty much convey the same feelings I am having about our current situation.

The proceeds for the ice cream will go to Common Cause, liberally leaning and described as “a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization founded as a vehicle for citizens to make their voices heard in the political process.”

Now this is all well and good and I don’t really care that Ben and Jerry’s did this, but I believe that we here at RedState could have offered a plethora of names that would have been soooo much more clever and appropriate. The description of this new flavor is here but I will also quote so you don’t have to go to there page:

“YES PECAN!” An Inspirational Blend! Amber Waves of Buttery Ice Cream With Roasted Non-Partisan Pecans.

I think we could do better…Speciallist I expect you to have a great comment, maybe even two….;^)

I encourage all to participate and make your voice heard.  Most of us don’t get to vote on the RNC Chair, but at least we can voice our discontent with the current RNC Chair and urge the others to chart a new path that will reflect where we want to party to go.  Whether you are a moderate who wants to expand the tent or a conservative who wants to return to first principles, this is your chance to let the candidates know and get their responses on record.

I hope you all take part.

Apparently the Perry County Commission decided they needed a paid day of in order to celebrate Barack Obama’s presidential win. Granted, electing a black man is historic but he hasn’t even governed anything yet, not to mention succeeded at governing.

The employees of the county will get a day off and the taxpayers of the county won’t. Well I guess all I can say is you get the gov’t you deserve…even at the county level.

This begs the question…who will replace Colmes?

Lately there seems to be a lot of confusion as to what a Conservative is and is not. Some seem to think it has to do with abortion or taxes or national security. Well the truth is that conservatism is not about any given issue, rather conservatism is about principles.

Before we go any further I believe it would behoove us to go over a bit of terminology that is thrown about too often without people understanding thier meanings. the terms I am refering to are Issues, Policies, and Principles.

First let’s deal with Issues.

An Issue, for the purpose of Politics, is something that is a cause of dispute. Issues come and go, some last longer than others, but all issues are fleeting in the long term. Some issues we deal with today are abortion, international terrorism and slowing or failing markets.

Next we have Policies.

Policies are the constructs that we create to deal with any given issue. Policies of today include the ESCR Ban, GWOT, and TARP.

Last but not least we have Principles.

Principles are what guide us in the formation of Policy on any given Issue. All political groups have their set of principles that guide them, but not all principles are equal.

So now we can move on a bit further having defined Issues, Policies, and Principles in their broader sense.

To be a conservative you must follow the Ten Conservative Principles written by Russell Kirk when constructing Policy for any given Issue. Below are the 10 principles.

• First, the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order

Moral order is the foundation to self governance as I tried to convey in this diary. Additionally Kirk acknowledges that order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent. This moral order does not need to be religous but at the same time it should be irreligious.

• Second, the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity

Custom, Convention and Continuity provide us with knowledge of our linked histories, the bodies of law which have been agreed upon in our history, and a way to pass both our history and our laws to generations to come. Kirk explains that when we throw off these customs and continuity that we often end up with a new social order which may be much inferior to the old order that radicals overthrew in their zeal for the Earthly Paradise.

• Third, conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription

Prescription is those things which are established beyond the limits of memory, tradition, or recorded history. This as Kirk says is the acknowledgement that “modern people are dwarfs on the shoulders of giants, able to see farther than their ancestors only because of the great stature of those who have preceded us in time.” With this acknowledgement it is apparent that our minds should not run to the contrary of these established truths which allow us to better understand why we have government and why we believe it must be limited in order to secure liberty.

• Fourth, conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence

Prudence is the act of being wise in handling practical matters; exercising good judgment or common sense. As Kirk says “Any public measure ought to be judged by its probable long-run consequences, not merely by temporary advantage or popularity.” This principle was shared by Burke and Plato among many others and they believed it to be chief among the virtues of a statesman. If definitions were still pure prudence would be the principle of all foward thinkers.

• Fifth, conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety

Variety needs not to be defined, but I will say that it is not the faux diversity of the left that conservatives hold dear. True diversity, or variety, allows for, as Kirk states ” orders and classes, differences in material condition, and many sorts of inequality”. Additionally Kirk recognizes, as do conservatives, that “The only true forms of equality are equality at the Last Judgment and equality before a just court of law; all other attempts at levelling must lead, at best, to social stagnation”.

• Sixth, conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability

Man is a fallen creature, this holds true regardless of any belief in God. Our imperfectability is not limited to the individual or the collective. I do not presume to be able to describe this better than Kirk himself, so I will provide a larger quote from Kirk on this matter:

To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, the conservative says: we are not made for perfect things. All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. By proper attention to prudent reform, we may preserve and improve this tolerable order. But if the old institutional and moral safeguards of a nation are neglected, then the anarchic impulse in humankind breaks loose: “the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell.

• Seventh, conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked

Property is sacred to freedom because of what property requires of the individual. Property must be maintained my the owner, and this as noted by Kirk instills in us all a sense of responsibility, not only to ourselves but to the community in which we live. “The conservative acknowledges that the possession of property fixes certain duties upon the possessor; he accepts those moral and legal obligations cheerfully”, Kirk states. Freedom is strengthened by responsibility.

Property is also the fruit of ones labor, and with that comes the possibility to pass those fruits down to generation after generation, allowing those who come after us to “rise from the natural condition of grinding poverty to the security of enduring accomplishment; to have something that is really one’s own”.

• Eighth, conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism

Here, again, I will quote a full text of Kirk’s writing on this principle for the simple reason that I don’t think I could say it better:

Although Americans have been attached strongly to privacy and private rights, they also have been a people conspicuous for a successful spirit of community. In a genuine community, the decisions most directly affecting the lives of citizens are made locally and voluntarily. Some of these functions are carried out by local political bodies, others by private associations: so long as they are kept local, and are marked by the general agreement of those affected, they constitute healthy community. But when these functions pass by default or usurpation to centralized authority, then community is in serious danger. Whatever is beneficent and prudent in modern democracy is made possible through cooperative volition. If, then, in the name of an abstract Democracy, the functions of community are transferred to distant political direction—why, real government by the consent of the governed gives way to a standardizing process hostile to freedom and human dignity.

For a nation is no stronger than the numerous little communities of which it is composed. A central administration, or a corps of select managers and civil servants, however well intentioned and well trained, cannot confer justice and prosperity and tranquility upon a mass of men and women deprived of their old responsibilities. That experiment has been made before; and it has been disastrous. It is the performance of our duties in community that teaches us prudence and efficiency and charity.

• Ninth, the conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions

This principle was key in the development of our form of government. The Founders, wisely, understood man’s lust for power and where the passions of man would lead once power was attained. For this reason they created the different branches of government and the checks and balances between those branches. Additionally, the Founders understood that there needed to be a check on the Federal Government as a whole and wrote the Tenth Amendment with that in mind:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There is also a balance to be struck on this as Kirk notes in the following passage:

A state in which an individual or a small group are able to dominate the wills of their fellows without check is a despotism, whether it is called monarchical or aristocratic or democratic. When every person claims to be a power unto himself, then society falls into anarchy.

The bolded portion is a reminder to our more extreme libertarian brethren. Liberty unchecked leads to anarchy which quicly avails itself to tyranny. We must find the balance between the two, and the conservative believes that “A just government maintains a healthy tension between the claims of authority and the claims of liberty”.

• Tenth, the thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society

Conservatives understand that with advancements in technology and medicine and science in general we must continually evaluate the status quo, but with that we aslo acknowledge that some things are permanent. Through careful deliberation and adherence to the other nine principles we will embrace progress as long as it is not the cult of Progress (notice the capital P). To better understand this I will provide another quote from Kirk:

The permanence of a society is formed by those enduring interests and convictions that gives us stability and continuity; without that permanence, the fountains of the great deep are broken up, society slipping into anarchy. The progression in a society is that spirit and that body of talents which urge us on to prudent reform and improvement; without that progression, a people stagnate.

These Ten Principles are what guide conservatives in the construction of policies on any given issue.

So now I ask you, are you a conservative?

Aaron Gardner

The site allows you to post 2000 character text posts on a variety of topics. Also it allows you to upload video post, for those of you with pretty faces…;^). Additionally users can rate posts on a scale of 1-5 stars. This, to me is the most important part of the site. This is an opportunity for conservatives to create a grassroots groundswell that cannot be ignored.

Already the site has some comments condemning evangelicals and conservatives in general, but there is hope as most of the 5 star comments appear to be in favor of conservatism.

So I am hoping that you will all take a gander, make your voice heard and give out some stars to the conservative posts. After all if we don’t take this opportunity to speak out now, we may be silenced for a long time to come.

Apparently some are planning to promote a National holiday for Barack Obama. This is absolutely ridiculous. In my life span we have demoted Pres. Washington and Pres. Lincoln to being lumped in with all the other Presidents while promoting Martin Luther King above all others who fought for civil rights for all people, not just African Americans. Now, before he has issued one Executive Order, not to mention, even been inaugurated, there are some who are planning to promote him above all others. Shameful.

Shouldn’t China now understand that we only have their best intentions in mind? After all didn’t HOPECHANGEHOPE win on Tuesday Night?

Free Individuals in a Free Society

Properly informed, our people as individuals or acting through instruments of popular consultation can make the right decisions affecting personal or general welfare, free of pervasive and heavy-handed intrusion by the central government into the decision making process. This tenet is the genius of representative democracy.

Taxes

We believe it is essential to cut personal tax rates out of fairness to the individual.

The Republican Party believes balancing the budget is essential but opposes the Democrats’ attempt to do so through higher taxes. We believe that an essential aspect of balancing the budget is spending restraint by the federal government and higher economic growth, not higher tax burdens on working men and women.
Policies of the Democratic Party are taxing: work, saving, investment, productivity, and the rewards for human ingenuity. These same tax policies subsidize debt, unemployment, and consumption. The present structure of the personal income tax system is designed to broaden the gap between effort and reward.

Therefore, the Republican Party supports across-the-board reductions in personal income tax rates.

Once tax rates are reduced, Republicans will move to end tax bracket creep caused by inflation. We support tax indexing to protect taxpayers from the automatic tax increases caused when cost-of-living wage increases move them into higher tax brackets.

Tax rate reductions will generate increases in economic growth, output, and income which will ultimately generate increased revenues. The greater justification for these cuts, however, lies in the right of individuals to keep and use the money they earn.

Improving the welfare system

The measure of a country’s compassion is how it treats the least fortunate. In every society there will be some who cannot work, often through no fault of their own.

Yet federal government efforts to help them have become counterproductive, perpetuating and aggravating the very conditions of dependence they seek to relieve. The Democratic Congress has produced a jumble of degrading, dehumanizing, wasteful, overlapping, and inefficient programs that invite waste and fraud but inadequately assist the needy poor.

For those on welfare, our nation’s tax policies provide a penalty for getting a job. This is especially so for those whose new income from a job is either equal to, or marginally greater than, the amount received on welfare. In these cases, due to taxes, the individual’s earned income is actually less than welfare benefits. This is the “poverty trap” which will continue to hold millions of Americans as long as they continue to be punished for working.
The Democratic Party continue to foster that dependency. Our nation’s welfare problems will not be solved merely by providing increased benefits. Public service jobs are not a substitute for employable skills. By fostering dependency and discouraging self-reliance, the Democratic Party has created a welfare constituency dependent on its continual subsidies.

We categorically reject the notion of a guaranteed annual income, no matter how it may be disguised, which would destroy the fiber of our economy and doom the poor to perpetual dependence.

As a party we commit ourselves to a welfare policy that is truly reflective of our people’s true sense of compassion and charity as well as an appreciation of every individual’s need for dignity and self-respect. We pledge a system that will: Provide adequate living standards for the truly needy; End welfare fraud by removing ineligibles from the welfare rolls, tightening food stamp eligibility requirements, and ending aid to illegal aliens and the voluntarily unemployed; We support a block grant program that will help return control of welfare programs to the states. Decisions about who gets welfare, and how much, can be better made on the local level.

Through long association with government programs, the word “welfare” has come to be perceived almost exclusively as tax-supported aid to the needy. But in its most inclusive sense—and as Americans understood it from the beginning of the Republic—such aid also encompasses those charitable works performed by private citizens, families, and social, ethnic, and religious organizations. Policies of the federal government leading to high taxes, rising inflation, and bureaucratic empire-building have made it difficult and often impossible for such individuals and groups to exercise their charitable instincts.

We believe that government policies that fight inflation, reduce tax rates, and end bureaucratic excesses can help make private effort by the American people once again a major force in those works of charity which are the true signs of a progressive and humane society.

Veterans

Republicans recognize the very special sacrifice of those who have served in our nation’s armed forces. Individual rights and societal values are only as strong as a nation’s commitment to defend them. Because of this our country must never forget its appreciation of and obligation to our veterans.

We will maintain the integrity of the Veterans Administration. We will seek to keep it separate and distinct from other federal agencies as the single agency for the administration of all veterans’ programs.

We are committed to providing timely and adequate adjustments in compensation for service-disabled veterans and the survivors of those who died as a result of their service. We are also committed to maintaining the pension program for those who have served during a period of war, for those who were disabled and impoverished, and for their widows and orphans.

We will support measures to provide for every veteran at death a final resting place for his remains in a national cemetery and for costs of transportation thereto.

Veteran’s preference in federal employment in all departments and agencies will be continued and strictly enforced.

Private property

The widespread distribution of private property ownership is the cornerstone of American liberty. Without it neither our free enterprise system nor our republican form of government could long endure.

Under Democratic rule, the federal government has become an aggressive enemy of the human right to private property ownership. It has dissipated savings through depreciation of the dollar, attempted to enforce severe land use controls.

Privacy

The essence of freedom is the right of law-abiding individuals to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without undue governmental intervention. Yet government in recent years, particularly at the federal level, has overwhelmed citizens with demands for personal information and has accumulated vast amounts of such data through the IRS, the Social Security Administration, the Bureau of the Census, and other agencies. Under certain limited circumstances, such information can serve legitimate societal interests, but there must be protection against abuse.

Republicans share the concerns of our citizens as to the nature, use, and final disposition of the volume of personal information being collected. We are alarmed by Washington’s growing collection and dissemination of such data. There must be protection against its misuse or disclosure.

The Republican Party commits itself to guaranteeing an individual’s right of privacy. We support efforts of state governments to ensure individual privacy.

Equal rights

The truths we hold and the values we share affirm that no individual should be victimized by unfair discrimination because of race, sex, advanced age, physical handicap, difference of national origin or religion, or economic circumstance. However, equal opportunity should not be jeopardized by bureaucratic regulations and decisions which rely on quotas, ratios, and numerical requirements to exclude some individuals in favor of others, thereby rendering such regulations and decisions inherently discriminatory.

Abortion

There can be no doubt that the question of abortion, despite the complex nature of its various issues, is ultimately concerned with equality of rights under the law. While we recognize differing views on this question among Americans in general—and in our own Party—we affirm our support of a constitutional amendment to restore protection of the right to life for unborn children. We also support the Congressional efforts to restrict the use of taxpayers’ dollars for abortion.

We protest the Supreme Court’s intrusion into the family structure through its denial of the parent’s obligation and right to guide their minor children.

Strong Families

The family is the foundation of our social order. It is the school of democracy. Its daily lessons—cooperation, tolerance, mutual concern, responsibility, industry—are fundamental to the order and progress of our Republic. But the Democrats have shunted the family aside. They have given its power to the bureaucracy, its jurisdiction to the courts, and its resources to government grantors. Government may be strong enough to destroy families, but it can never replace them.

Education

Next to religious training and the home, education is the most important means by which families hand down to each new generation their ideals and beliefs. It is a pillar of a free society. But today, parents are losing control of their children’s schooling. The Democratic Congress and its counterparts in many states have launched one fad after another, building huge new bureaucracies to misspend our taxes. The result has been a shocking drop in student performance, lack of basics in the classroom and manipulative and sometimes amoral indoctrination.

The Republican Party is determined to restore common sense and quality to education for the sake of all students, especially those for whom learning is the highway to equal opportunity.

We hail the teachers of America. Their dedication to our children is often taken for granted, and they are frequently underpaid for long hours and selfless service, especially in comparison with other public employees.
America has a great stake in maintaining standards of high quality in public education. The Republican Party recognizes that the achievement of those standards is possible only to the extent that teachers are allowed the time and freedom to teach. To that end, the Republican Party supports deregulation by the federal government of public education, and encourages the elimination of the federal Department of Education.

We further sympathize with the right of qualified teachers to be employed by any school district wishing to hire them, without the necessity of their becoming enrolled with any bargaining agency or group. We oppose any federal action, including any action on the part of the Department of Education, to establish “agency shops” in public schools.

We support the right of individuals to participate in voluntary, non-denominational prayer in schools and other public facilities.

Federal education policy must be based on the primacy of parental rights and responsibility. Toward that end, we reaffirm our support for a system of educational assistance based on tax credits that will in part compensate parents for their financial sacrifices in paying tuition at the elementary, secondary, and post-secondary level. This is a matter of fairness, especially for low-income families, most of whom would be free for the first time to choose for their children those schools which best correspond to their own cultural and moral values. In this way, the schools will be strengthened by the families’ involvement, and the families’ strengths will be reinforced by supportive cultural institutions.

Health

Our country’s unequalled system of medical care, bringing greater benefits to more people than anywhere else on earth, is a splendid example of how Americans have taken care of their own needs with private institutions.

Republicans unequivocally oppose socialized medicine, in whatever guise it is presented by the Democratic Party. We reject the creation of a national health service and all proposals for compulsory national health insurance.

Our country has made spectacular gains in health care in recent decades. Most families are now covered, or can be, by private insurance, Medicare, or in the case of the poor, the entirely free services under Medicaid.

What ails American medicine is government meddling and the strait-jacket of federal programs. The prescription for good health care is deregulation and an emphasis upon consumer rights and patient choice.

As consumers of health care, individual Americans and their families should be able to make their own choices about health care protection. We propose to assist them in so doing through tax and financial incentives. These could enable them to choose their own health coverage, including protection from the catastrophic costs of major long-term illness, without compulsory regimentation.

Americans should be protected against financial disaster brought on by medical expenses. We recognize both the need to provide assistance in many cases and the responsibility of citizens to provide for their own needs. By using tax incentives and reforming federal medical assistance programs, government and the private sector can jointly develop compassionate and innovative means to provide financial relief when it is most needed.

We welcome the long-overdue emphasis on preventive health care and physical fitness that is making Americans more aware than ever of their personal responsibility for good health. Preventive medicine combined with good personal health habits and health education, can make a major impact on the cost of health care.

Youth

The Republican Party recognizes that young people want the opportunity to exercise the rights and responsibilities of adults.

We reaffirm our commitment to broaden the involvement of young people in all phases of the political process—as voters, party workers and leaders, candidates and elected officials, and participants in government at all levels.

We pledge efforts to create an environment which will enable our nation’s youth:

To live in a society which is safe and free

To pursue personal, educational, and vocational goals to the utmost of their abilities

To experience the support, encouragement, and strength that come from maintenance of the family and its values

To know the stimulus of challenge, renewal through encouragement, provision of opportunities, and the growth that comes from responsible participation in numerous aspects of our society.

The Welfare System

Ultimately, the Republican Party supports the orderly, wholesale transfer of all welfare functions to the states along with the tax sources to finance them.

Secure and Prosperous Neighborhoods

The quality of American neighborhoods is the ultimate test of the success or failure of government policies for the cities, for housing, and for law enforcement.

Obsessed with the demands of special interest groups and preoccupied with the design of expensive “comprehensive” programs, the Democrats in Congress and the Administration have lost sight of that simple but important criterion. They have proposed more social and fiscal tinkering with our cities and towns.
Republicans will address the real problems that face Americans In their neighborhoods day by day—deterioration and urban blight, dangerous streets and violent crime that make millions of Americans, especially senior citizens, fearful in their own neighborhoods and prisoners in their own homes.

Neighborhood self-help

The American ethic of neighbor helping neighbor has been an essential factor in the building of our nation. Republicans are committed to the preservation of this great tradition.

To help non-governmental community programs aid in serving the needs of poor, disabled, or other disadvantaged, we support permitting taxpayers to deduct charitable contributions from their federal income tax whether they itemize or not.

Government must never elbow aside private institutions—schools, churches, volunteer groups, labor and professional associations—in meeting the social needs in our neighborhoods and communities.

Neighborhood revitalization

The city is the focus for the lives of millions of Americans. Its neighborhoods are places of familiarity, of belonging, of tradition and continuity. They are arenas for civic action and creative self-help. The human scale of the neighborhood encourages citizens to exercise leadership, to invest their talents, energies, and resources, and to work together to create a better life for their families.

Republican economic programs will create conditions for rebirth of citizen activity in neighborhoods and cities across the land. In a Republican economic climate, America’s cities can once again produce, build, and grow.
A Republican Administration will focus its efforts to revitalize neighborhoods.

We will:

Cut taxes, increase incentives to save, restore sound money, and stimulate capital investment to create jobs.

Create and apply new tax incentives for employees and employers alike to stimulate economic growth and reduce red-tape for business ventures.

Replace the categorical aid programs with block grant or revenue sharing programs and, where appropriate, transfer the programs, along with the tax sources to pay for them, back to the state and local governments.

Jobs and the Workplace

We propose to put Americans back to work again by restoring real growth without inflation to the United States economy.

We believe inflation can only be controlled by monetary and spending restraint, combined with sharp reductions in the tax and regulatory barriers to savings, investment, production, and jobs.

Savings, productivity, and jobs

Savings and investment are the keys to economic growth. Only that part of national income which goes into savings and which is not consumed by government deficits is available to finance real economic growth.

Republicans are committed to an economic policy based on lower tax rates and a reduced rate of government spending.

Therefore, the Republican Party pledges to:

Reduce tax rates on individuals and businesses to increase incentives for all Americans and to encourage more savings, investment, output and productivity, and more jobs for Americans.

Provide special incentives for saving by lowering the tax rates on savings and investment income.

Limit government spending to a fixed and smaller percentage of the Gross National Product.

Balance the budget without tax increases at these lower levels of taxation and spending.

Unless taxes are reduced and federal spending is restrained, our nation’s economy faces continued inflation, recession, and economic stagnation. Tax rate reductions and spending restraint will restore the savings and investment needed to create new jobs, increase living standards, and restore our competitive position in the world.

Small business

Small business is the backbone of the American economy, with unique strengths and problems which must be recognized and addressed. Small business is family business both in the sense that many of them are owned and operated by single families, and also because most American families rely not only on the goods and services, but on the jobs produced there for their livelihood and standard of living.

We believe that wherever feasible, small business should be exempt from regulations and, where exemption is not feasible, small business should be subject to a less onerous tier of regulation. Republicans believe the number one priority for small business in America is the achievement of lower business and personal tax rates for small businessmen and women and we intend to work to secure them.

By fostering small business growth, we are promoting permanent private sector solutions to the unemployment problem.

Fairness to the worker

The Republican Party is committed to full employment without inflation. We will seek to provide more jobs, increase the standard of living, and ensure equitable treatment on the job for all American workers by stimulating economic growth.

We reaffirm our commitment to the fundamental principle of fairness in labor relations, including the legal right of unions to organize workers and to represent them through collective bargaining consistent with state laws and free from unnecessary government involvement. We applaud the mutual efforts of labor and management to improve the quality of work life.

We recognize the need for governmental oversight of the health and safety of the workplace, without interfering in the economic well-being of employers or the job security of workers.

The Republican Party reaffirms its long-standing support for the right of states to enact “Right-to-Work” laws. The political freedom of every worker must be protected. Therefore, the Republican Party strongly supports protections against the practice of using compulsory dues and fees for partisan political purposes.

Fairness to the employer

The Republican Party declares war on government overregulation. We pledge to cut down on federal paperwork, cut out excessive regulation, and cut back the bloated bureaucracy.

In addressing these problems we recognize that overregulation is particularly harmful to America’s small businesses whose survival is often threatened by the excessive costs of complying with government rules and handling federal paperwork.

While we recognize the role of the federal government in establishing certain minimum standards designed to improve the quality of life in America, we reaffirm our conviction that these standards can best be attained through innovative efforts of American business without the federal government mandating the methods of attainment.

The extraordinary growth of government, particularly since the middle 1960s, has brought mounting costs to society which, in turn, has added to inflationary pressures, reduced productivity, discouraged new investment, destroyed jobs, and increased bureaucratic intrusion into everyday life.

Government regulation produces many indirect immeasurable costs as well and has led to increased bureaucratization of industry. Regulation also restricts personal choices, tends to undermine America’s democratic public institutions, and threatens to destroy the private, competitive free market economy it was originally designed to protect.

Government reform

The Republican Party pledges itself to a comprehensive program of government reform. We propose to enact a temporary moratorium on all new federal regulations that diminish the supply of goods and services and add significantly to inflation.

The Nation

Though a relatively young nation among those of western civilization, we are possessed of one of the oldest institutions of government extant. Steeped in the Judeo-Christian ethic and in theories of law and right, our legal and political institutions have evolved over many generations to form a stable system that serves free men and women well. It governs a people of multifarious heritage dispersed across a great continent of marked geographical contrasts. It presides over a diverse economy that in its collective whole is the largest, most powerful, and most resilient in the world. In its life, though it has from time to time been sorely tested by constitutional, economic, and social crises, it has stood and not been found wanting. Its timeless strength, coupled with and reinforced by the faith and good will, the wisdom and confidence of the people from whom it derives its powers, has preserved us as a nation of enormous vitality.

The intent of the Founders, embraced and reflected by succeeding generations of Americans, was that the Central government should perform only those functions which are necessary to preserve order, and do for people only those things which they cannot do for themselves. It is notable as much for what it permits as for what it proscribes. Government must ever be the servant of the nation, not its master.

Big government

Under the guise of providing for the common good, liberal, both Republican and Democratic, domination of the body politic has produced a central government of vastly expanded size, scope, and rigidity. Confidence in government, especially big government, has been the chief casualty of too many promises made and broken, too many commitments unkept. It is time for change— time to de-emphasize big bureaucracies—time to shift the focus of national politics from expanding government’s power to that of restoring the strength of smaller communities such as the family, the neighborhood, and the workplace.

Government’s power to take and tax, to regulate and require, has already reached extravagant proportions. As government’s power continues to grow, the “consent of the governed” will diminish. Republicans support an end to the growth of the federal government and pledge to return the decision making process to the smaller communities of society.

The emergence of policies and programs which will revitalize the free enterprise system and reverse the trend toward regulation is essential. To sustain the implementation of such policy, it is necessary to raise the public awareness and understanding that our free enterprise system is the source of all income, government and private, and raise the individual’s awareness of his or her vested interest in its growth and vitality.

The Republican Party believes that it is important to develop a growing constituency which recognizes its direct relationship to the health and success of free enterprise, and realizes the negative impact of excessive regulation. Education and involvement in the system are the best means to accomplish this. To this end, we will actively pursue new and expanding opportunities for all Americans to become more directly involved in our free enterprise system.

Government reorganization

The Republican Party reaffirms its belief in the decentralization of the federal government and in the traditional American principle that the best government is the one closest to the people. There, it is less costly, more accountable, and more responsive to people’s needs. Our states and localities have the talent, wisdom, and determination to respond to the variety of demands made upon them. Block grants and revenue sharing provide local government with the means and the flexibility to solve their own problems in ways most appropriate for each locale. Unlike categorical grants, they do not lock states and localities into priorities and needs perceived by Washington. They are also more efficient because block grants and revenue sharing relieve both local government and the federal government from the costly and complicated process of program application, implementation, and review associated with the categorical grant system.

We pledge to continue and redouble our efforts to return power to the state and local governments. The regionalization of government encouraged by federal policies diminishes the responsiveness of state and local governments and impairs the power of the people to control their destiny.

When we mistakenly rely on government to solve all our problems we ignore the abilities of people to solve their own problems. We pledge to renew the dispersion of power from the federal government to the states and localities. But this will not be enough. We pledge to extend the process so that power can be transferred as well to non-governmental institutions.

Election reform

Republicans support public policies that will promote electoral participation without compromising ballot-box security. We strongly oppose national postcard voter registration schemes because they are an open invitation to fraud.
Republicans support public policies that encourage political activity by individual citizens. We support the repeal of those restrictive campaign spending limitations that tend to create obstacles to local grass roots participation in federal elections. We also oppose the proposed financing of Congressional campaigns with taxpayers’ dollars as an effort to protect its incumbent Members of Congress with a tax subsidy. We prefer that the states and party rules determine the presidential nominating process to the concept of a uniform national primary which would only add to the already high costs of, and excessive federal intrusion into, presidential campaigns.

We support the critical roles of competitive political parties in the recruitment of candidates, the conduct of campaigns, and the development of broad-based public policy responsive to the people. We urge Congress and state legislatures to frame their regulations of campaign finance, their nominating systems, and other election laws to strengthen rather than weaken parties.

Energy

Energy is the lifeblood of our economy. Without adequate energy supplies now and in the future, the jobs of American men and women, the security of their lives, and their ability to provide for their families will be threatened and their standard of living will he lowered. Every American is painfully aware that our national energy situation has deteriorated badly over the past.

Gasoline prices have more than doubled. Our oil import bill has risen. Our energy supplies have become increasingly vulnerable. The threat of sudden shortages, curtailments, and gas lines has become a recurring reality.
This steady deterioration has not only compounded our economic problems of inflation, recession, and dollar weakness, but even more importantly, it has infected our confidence as a nation. Energy shortages, spiraling costs, and increasing insecurity are beginning to darken our basic hopes and expectations for the future.

Republicans believe shrinking energy prospects and expanding government regulation and meddling is wholly unnecessary. We believe that the proven American values of individual enterprise can solve our energy problems.
They seem to believe not only that we are a nation without resources, but also that we have lost our resourcefulness. Republicans believe in the common sense of the American people rather than a complex web of government controls and interventions that threaten America’s ability to grow. We are committed to an alternative strategy of aggressively boosting the nation’s energy supplies; stimulating new energy technology and more efficient energy use; restoring maximum feasible choice and freedom in the marketplace for energy consumers and producers alike; and eliminating energy shortages and disruptions, which are a roadblock to renewed national economic growth, rising living standards, and a reawakening of the hopes and dreams of the American people for a better and more abundant future.

We believe the United States must proceed on a steady and orderly path toward energy self-sufficiency. But in the interim, our pressing need for insurance against supply disruption should not be made hostage to the whims of foreign governments, as is presently.

In order to increase domestic production of energy, Republicans advocate the decontrol of the price at the well head of oil and gas. We believe that the so-called windfall profits tax (which is unrelated to profit) should not be applied and that the phase-out of the tax on old oil should be accelerated.
Coal, our most abundant energy resource, can bridge the gap between our other present energy sources and the renewable energy sources of the future
Republicans support a comprehensive program of regulatory reform, improved incentives, and revision of cumbersome and overly stringent regulations.
Coal, gas, and nuclear fission offer the best intermediate solutions to America’s energy needs. We support accelerated use of nuclear energy through technologies that have been proven efficient and safe. The safe operation, as well as design, of nuclear generating plants will have our highest priority to assure the continued availability of this important energy source. The design and operation of these plants can be guaranteed in less than the 10 to 12 year lead time now required to license and build them. We believe that the licensing process can and should be streamlined through consolidation of the present process and the use of standardized reactor designs.

Nuclear power development requires sound plans for nuclear waste disposal and storage and reprocessing of spent fuel. Technical solutions to these problems exist, and decisive federal action to choose and implement solutions is essential. Republicans are committed to the rapid development of permanent storage facilities for nuclear wastes. Since waste disposal is a national responsibility, no state should bear an unacceptable share of this responsibility.

Republicans will also move toward reprocessing of spent fuel.

Republicans will continue to support the development of new technologies to develop liquid, gaseous, and solid hydrocarbons which can be derived from coal, oil shale, and tar sands. Clean air, water, waste disposal, mine reclamation, and leasing rules must be made rational and final to accelerate private investment.

We also believe the government must continue supporting productive research to speed the development of renewable energy technologies, including solar energy, geothermal, wind, nuclear fusion, alcohol synthesis, and biomass, to provide the next generation of energy sources.

Conservation clearly plays a vital role in the consideration and formulation of national energy policy. Republicans reject, however, the position of the Democrats which is to conserve through government fiat, Republicans understand that free markets based on the collective priorities and judgments of individual consumers will efficiently allocate the energy supplies to their most highly valued uses. We also believe that the role of government is best performed by structuring creative cost-effective incentives to achieve energy efficiency and conservation.

We reject unequivocally punitive gasoline and other energy taxes designed to artificially suppress energy consumption.

Much inefficient energy use results from government subsidization of imported oil and holding the price of natural gas substantially below its market value. When the price of energy is held artificially low, there is no incentive for conservation. This kind of energy consumption stems not from the excesses of the public, but the foolish policy distortions of government. Every BTU of genuine energy “waste” in our economy would rapidly disappear if we immediately and completely dismantle all remaining energy price controls and subsidies.
A Republican policy of decontrol, development of our domestic energy resources, and incentives for new supply and conservation technologies will substantially reduce our dependence on imported oil.

Virtually all major environmental legislation in the past reflected a bipartisan concern over the need to maintain a clean and healthful environment. While the new environmental policies have resulted in improving air quality, cleaner waters, and more careful analysis of toxic chemicals, the price paid has far exceeded the direct and necessary cost of designing and installing new control technology. In the energy area, the increased complexity of regulations, together with continual changes in the standards imposed, have brought about tremendous delays in the planning and construction of new facilities ranging from electric power plants to oil refineries, pipelines, and synthetic fuel plants.

Republicans believe that an effective balance between energy and environmental goals can be achieved. We can ensure that government requirements are firmly grounded on the best scientific evidence available, that they are enforced evenhandedly and predictably, and that the process of their development and enforcement has finality.

Republicans condemn the Democrats’ withdrawal of a massive amount of the most promising federal lands from prospective energy development, including the rich potential of our Outer Continental shelf. It is clear that restrictive leasing policies have driven us further to depend on OPEC by severely impairing the exploration for, and development of, domestic oil, gas, and coal resources, thereby aggravating our balance of trade deficit and making our country less secure. Republicans will move toward making available all suitable federal lands for multiple use purposes including exploration and production of energy resources.

Republicans believe that in order to address our energy problem we must maximize our domestic energy production capability. In the short term, therefore, the nation must move forward on all fronts simultaneously, including oil and gas, coal, and nuclear, wind and solar, electric and hybrids. In the longer term, renewable resources must be brought significantly on line to replace conventional sources. Finally, in conjunction with this all-out production initiative, we must strive to maximize conservation and the efficient use of energy.

The return to the traditions that gave vitality and strength to this nation is urgent.

The free world—indeed western civilization—needs a strong United States. That strength requires a prospering economy. That economy will be secure with a vigorous domestic energy industry. That vigor can only be achieved in an atmosphere of freedom, one that encourages individual initiatives and personal resourcefulness.

Environment

The Republican Party reaffirms its long-standing commitment to the conservation and wise management of America’s renewable natural resources.

We believe that a healthy environment is essential to the present and future well-being of our people, and to sustainable national growth.

The nature of environmental pollution is such that a government role is necessary to ensure its control and the proper protection of public health. Much progress has been made in achieving the goals of clean air, clean water, and control of toxic wastes. At the same time, we believe that it is imperative that environmental laws and regulations be reviewed and, where necessary, reformed to ensure that the benefits achieved justify the costs imposed. Too often, current regulations are so rigid and narrow that even individual innovations that improve the environment cannot be implemented. We believe, in particular, that regulatory procedures must be reformed to expedite decision making. Endless delay harms both the environment and the economy.

We strongly affirm that environmental protection must not become a cover for a “no-growth” policy and a shrinking economy. Our economy can continue to grow in an acceptable environment.

We believe that agricultural policy should give emphasis to the stewardship of the nation’s soil and water resources. The permanent loss of productive farm land is a growing problem and we encourage states and local communities to adopt policies that help maintain and protect productive agricultural land as a national asset.

Immigration and refugee policy

Residence in the United States is one of the most precious and valued of conditions. The traditional hospitality of the American people has been severely tested by recent events, but it remains the strongest in the world. Republicans are proud that our people have opened their arms and hearts to strangers from abroad and we favor an immigration and refugee policy which is consistent with this tradition. We believe that to the fullest extent possible those immigrants should be admitted who will make a positive contribution to America and who are willing to accept the fundamental American values and way of life. At the same time, United States immigration and refugee policy must reflect the interests of our national security and economic well-being. Immigration into this country must not be determined solely by foreign governments or even by the millions of people around the world who wish to come to America. The federal government has a duty to adopt immigration laws and follow enforcement procedures which will fairly and effectively implement the immigration policy desired by the American people. We a absolutely against and form of blanket amnesty.

The immediate adoption of this policy is essential to an orderly approach to the great problem of oppressed people seeking entry, so that the deserving can be accepted in America without adding to their hardships.

The judiciary

We pledge appoint Judges whose judicial philosophy is characterized by the highest regard for protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens, and is consistent with the belief in the decentralization of the federal government and efforts to return decision making power to state and local elected officials.

We will work for the appointment of judges at all levels of the judiciary who respect traditional family values, the sanctity of innocent human life and acknowledge the Constitutional limits set upon them .

Taxes and government spending.

The Republican Party pledges to place limits on federal spending as a percent of the Gross National Product. We pledge to reduce it. If federal spending is reduced as tax cuts are phased in, there will be sufficient budget surpluses to fund the tax cuts, and allow for reasonable growth in necessary program spending.

By increasing economic growth, tax rate reduction will reduce the need for government spending on unemployment, welfare, and public jobs programs. However, the Republican Party will also halt excessive government spending by eliminating waste, fraud, and duplication.

We believe that the Congressional budget process has failed to control federal spending. Indeed, because of its big spending bias, the budget process has actually contributed to higher levels of social spending and has been used to frustrate every Republican attempt to lower tax rates to promote economic growth.

The immediate burden of reducing federal spending rests on the shoulders of the President and the Congress. We believe a Republican President and a Republican Congress can balance the budget and reduce spending through legislative actions, eliminating the necessity for a Constitutional amendment to compel it. However, if necessary, the Republican Party will seek to adopt a Constitutional amendment to limit federal spending and balance the budget, except in time of national emergency as determined by a two-thirds vote of Congress.

Defense strategy

Republicans approve and endorse a national strategy of peace through strength.
The foreign policy of the United States should reflect a national strategy of peace through strength. The general principles and goals of this strategy would be:

To inspire, focus, and unite the national will and determination to achieve peace and freedom

To continue overall military and technological superiority

To create a strategic and civil defense which would protect the American people against terrorism and nuclear war.

To accept no arms control agreement which in any way jeopardizes the security of the United States or its allies, or which locks the United States into a position of military inferiority.

To reestablish effective security and intelligence capabilities.

To pursue positive non-military means to roll back the growth of communism, socialism, fascism and terrorism.

To help our aggression and to maintain a strong economy and protect our overseas sources of energy and other vital raw materials.

Our strategy must encompass the levels of force required to deter each level of foresee-able attack and to prevail in conflict in the event deterrence fails. The detailed analysis that must form the intellectual basis for elaboration of such a strategy will be the first priority of a Republican Administration.

So, there you go. These are many of the principles and positions that brought us not only to power, but also inspired one of our Nations greatest times of freedom and growth and respect. Do with it what you will.

Recently I wrote about Self Governance and the Moral Standard. Today I would like to continue in the theme of Self Governance and how Economic Policy can either move our Nation toward or away from that goal.

First I need to define some terms for the purpose of this discussion. In my view there are only three basic views on economic policy, the first is the Free Market, the second is Keynesian Free Market, and the third is the Socialist Market. I am sure that many will call me naive or uneducated in the realm of economics, and I am fine with that. I don’t have a degree in economics and to be honest my knowledge of economics is limited, but, as will become apparent, that does not make what I say any less relevant.

The Free Market.

My understanding of the Free Market is that the Government has limited impact on market activities. With this the Government does not try to effect social change via the market. The consumer, aka We The People, hold a vast amount of power over the free market regardless of whether they own stock or have a vote on the board of any given Corparation. The consumer holds the ultimate vote, whether or not to consume any given product. Obviously this lends itself to Self Governance. The consumer, in choosing what to buy and when to buy it, directs the corparation on what to produce and at what price to sell it’s products. In the Free Market the Government should also limit it’s want for tax revenue from Corparations, being that the Government has no role in the production or distribution of the goods and services produced by the Corparation. This is not intended to mean that Corparations pay no taxes, rather the intent is that they not be forced into a pay to play philosophy such as Keynesian and Socialist economic policies would want.

The Keynesian Free Market

My understanding of the Keynesian Free Market is that the market is free to produce and distribute products as they see fit as long as they are also willing to pay a substantial price for the “Freedom”. At the core of Keynesian Economics is the idea of affecting social change through economic intervention, similar to the Socialist Economics but without the full step of the Government actually owning the means of production. Frankly, I believe we still live in the Keynesian Free Market today. You might question why I believe this, I would direct you to things such as “Sin Taxes”. Granted, tobaco companies are free to procduce and distribute their products but only if they are willing to be taxed at a higher rate for supposedly encouraging the consumer to engage in “immoral” unhealthy behavior. This essentially takes the freedom away from the consumer and puts it in the trust of the Federal Government. The assumption is that the Federal Government has your best interest in mind, which they made indeed. Furthermore, the Keynesian philosophy of interventionism distorts the Free Market by thinking itself better equiped to choose the winners and losers than the consumer would be. An odd thought to be sure.

The Socialist Market

My understanding of the Socialist Market is that the Government controls not only the means of production but also the price and distribution of products. I also understand that the goal of the Socialist is a return to the barter system, this fails quickly and hence you end up with that of the first sentence. As well as the Keynesian Market the Socialist Markets want is to affect social change, not by subtle intervention but rather in overt totalitarianism, price controls, and taxes not seen in this country since its creation. The taxes taken are to be “fairly” distributed among the people. I put fairly in quotes because I do not believe it to be the proper term, instead of fairness I believe they mean equally, for it cannot be considered fair to take the fruits of one mans labor and give it to another for no labor at all.

So now that I have defined my views and understanding of these three basic economic concepts how exactly does it affect Self Governance? Self Governance is the idea that Man has no master on this earth, and therefore, have free will to do as we see fit, as long as our actions do not interfere with that same free will of others. So the Free Market would be assumed to further the goal of Self Governance by not interfering with the free will of the consumer. The Keynesian Market would still allow limited Self Governance, but that is not the goal and the Keynesian Market also tends to be a slow road to the Socialist Market. The Keynesian model assumes that the consumer does not know what is best for them, a sad assumption indeed. I don’t think I even need to address the affects of the Socialist market on Self Governance, because we all know that Socialism discounts the free will of the consumer and further the citizen in general and typically leads to totalitarianism.

Well there you have it….I am not sure whether this makes any sense or not…but isn’t that why I have all of you out there? Please discuss and tell me what you think.