Now That It’s Clear

With McCain having actually won the nomination, free and clear, the real work begins. We must not only convince American conservatives that McCain is a workable choice that we should be willing to put effort into electing, we must also show Americans in general how McCain is so vastly superior a choice for effective and constitutional leadership of America.

To do this there ought to be a “dream team” of the former presidential contenders, working together, giving speeches, stumping for McCain.

I have often thought one of the biggest failures of conservatism is it’s inability to spread it message effectively.

Liberalism has the entire university and college and public school system. It has the media and the combined peer pressure of millions of sheeple living around us.

Conservatism exists because people in the real world, working hard and living on the fruits of their own labor, realize the purpose and power of personal property and the necessity of personal responsibility and moral self-governance.

We need to get this message out, showing incontrovertible proof of the superiority of conservative principles in all of life.

The way we do this without the ‘help’ the left gets for their ideas from bastions of culture, is to make it so accessible and frequent as to be unavoidable by the common masses and our intellectual enemies, those who need more convincing.

This is not politics, this is necessity.

19 thoughts on “Now That It’s Clear”

  1. I think it’s funny that you perceive left wing liberals as being helped by the media. Open your mind a bit lad, you will find that people want change. Younger people are turning democratic because it is the only party which encourages change. It’s great that you are conservative and you have pride for the republican party but be honest about whats happening. GWB has done a horrible job and the bottom line is people want change.

  2. Have there been terrorist attacks on American soil since 9/11?

    And democratic refers to those people or intentions of democracy, not the democrat party. A bit of a pet peeve of mine.

    Back to your arguments though: Democrat leadership has controlled BOTH houses of congress and for going on two year and have accomplished exactly what?

    Young people have always “turned democrat” because they are idealists without a sense of reality which usually comes with age and experience. Druggies and aged hippies and losers turn to the democrat party for the same reason, except they ought to be expected to have found realism and experience by their age.

    GWB has done a horrible job just how? He brought down the tax rate for you if you pay taxes AT ALL by at least 20 percent. Not the rich, not the republicans, you, and me.

    And about opening my mind, why do you assume it is my mind which is in need of opening? I have spent significant amounts of time researching and involving myself socio-politically for many years and yes I’ve voted for both Democrats and Republicans depending on their grasp on reality and principles of the Constitution and just government.

    Please don’t assume that just because someone does not agree with you does not mean they don’t have an open mind.

    Democrats generally subscribe to moral relativism, which would also cause me to wonder at your criticism if indeed you subscribe to that ideology. If you believe in relativism my ideas would be just as valid as anything you believe, even if they are mutually exclusive.

    I’m a moral absolutist. Moral relativism is both pointless and ludicrous in application and theory.

    So, Matt (btw, I like your name… not sure why), I encourage you, reciprocally, to check the real world and see if the policies and ideologies of the democrat party are truly inline with how the world actually works.

    Idealism is great, if it is mated with a sure grasp on reality.

  3. Matthew, I love the idea of the former presidential contenders giving speeches for McCain. Can you imagine the effect of Guliani, Huckabee, and Romney all stumping for him? (Yes, um, I purpose, uh, fully, uh, left, um, Fred, uh, Thomp, uh, son, uh, out.) Talk about demonstrating party unity!!!

  4. Wow, seems like another Bush v Kerry choice. What a choice!

    Bush is ONLY better than the rest because the rest are communists. However, in the big picture of “conservativism” Bush is NOT ONE WHAT SO EVER. So I guess the question is, do we judge nominees based on relativism or idealism?

    NO time in history has a nation reversed itself from the tendency towards statism, moral/ethical relativism, economic downfall and ultimately impotency which results in it being conquered. I’m looking at this in the long run and America is falling. Most likely Christians and others who perceive the life-saving value of good morals, etc will survive and move onto the next great nation but America will fail. It is just a matter of time. The Bible doesn’t promise the success of a nation but a people.

    Nevertheless, OF COURSE I’m going to vote for people who will retard this and not accelerate it. Furthermore, I’d also grant that the world IS getting better and better as more and more Christian principles are implemented. All of what I say is a matter of perspective and realism. I have no hope in the Rep or Dem party. But I guess to some that is all that matters. A bigger game is being played.

    The fall of America will likely result in the fall of radical Islam because it is our mortal enemy as they believe we are theirs. One “ism” at a time Christian conquers but a sacrifice must be made in order for that to happen. Slowly but surely the light of Christ will encompass the world. Not only is Islam next so is China.

    So I do have hope and I’m no pessimist but this is how I see the big picture.

  5. There will be no new country, America is the last great nation on earth. I’ll need to write on that a bit more.

    For now, suffice to say that as each previous nation or culture imploded under the weight of their own bloat, there was a new land for the purists to go to in which they could set up a new country.

    There is no more land.

  6. To briefly answer a couple of your challenges- I dont want to offend you on your own blog, especially with a great name like yours.

    Why doesnt anything get done when the house is Blue? Bush Vetoes everything. Stem cells, troop withdrawl, Iraq spending…

    Reality is often biased because of age…you may believe that with age comes a great understanding of the world which may be true in part but not wholly- that argument is flawed.

    GWB lowered taxes? Thats great. Too bad this war is going to cost each person in the US $10,000…also, is it just me or are we in a recession right now? Please dont judge his presidency by economics…he has failed in SO many more ways than that.

    Democrats subscribe to relativism? Thats news to me. I actually believe the exact opposite. True I am in NO way an absolutist (because I believe there is NO one right answer to anything, especially economics) but I believe the democratic party is more observant to the big picture than republicans are.

    This is longer than I intended, I will quit now.

  7. Also, just to clarify- I wasn’t saying that you dont have an open mind simply because you dont agree with me- I was stating that because you are totally unaccepting about what people want. You called democrats “sheeple,” which angered me to an extent because we are not sheep. We legitimately want change for all the right reasons…it is in that way which you must open up your mind. I was in no way calling you ignorant to politics…

  8. Thank you, but don’t fear offending me: I walk around with a chip on my shoulder a mile wide daring people to knock it off and make my day. 🙂

    But seriously, here is perhaps a big indicator of our differences: Your statements of what I assume to be agendas and policies which GWB has vetoed which you support: Stem Cells, Troop Withdrawal, and Iraq Spending.

    Stem Cells: There has been a plethora of successful treatments developed which use Adult stem cells, and news from last November included the report that scientists had found ways of causing successful differentiation in Adult stem cells.

    Differentiation was the only real benefit which Embryonic stem cells claimed over Adult, and even then, Embryonic stem cells, in every application, would not differentiate, but would grow into masses of useless, purposeless blobs. Causing harm rather than health.

    Adult stem cells have the benefits of a zero chance of rejection as they are harvested from the patient to which they will be applied.

    Embryonic stem cells have not been used successfully in any treatment. They seem to hold great promise, but Adult stem cells are proven to currently be able to achieve everything which Embryonic cells can only hope for. And without harvest embryos, or, as I prefer to call them, human babies.

    So all the benefits and none of the problems: Why support embryonic stem cells at all?

    And that is just the point. Private funding for Adult stem cells is easy to find. Every major biomedical lab researching Adult stem cells has more than enough support because the Adult stem cells are able to be used right now in real treatments.

    Embryonic stem cells enjoy none of this support, which is why their proponents have gone to the government for funding. Private companies don’t consider them viable.

    Regardless of the moral argument, is it even the governments job to fund scientific research which is already surpassed by less controversial, more practicable, and current feasible treatments?

    Troop withdrawal: Currently we are winning. To withdraw now, even people who’ve not supported the war at all from it’s inception are now saying if we pull out now, when we are so close to bringing about a major and historic change in the whole region, is foolish at best, and evil at worst.

    Iraq Funding: I wish we weren’t spending so much, but this is a necessary and good cause.

    Recession: A recent commentator, an economist, stated that if indeed there were a recession, it would be completely fabricated by the Democrat presidential candidates and their allies in the media.

    Surveys have shown, over and over again in the last years, that people overwhelmingly say that they themselves are better off than they were, financially, stability, emotionally, etc. And at the same time they believe everyone else is having a hard time.

    That means most people believe a lie which has been told them over and over.

    There is not a recession.

    I have to go for now, but I’ll be back.

    I appreciate your points and argument. Please do not hesitate to keep up the conversation.

  9. We can sit here and debate about stem cells all day as well. Fact is, I was using that as a mere example of why- even though the house majority is democratic, nothing has changed. Your belief about stem cells may even be correct but you are missing the biggest picture that I have tried to paint. Democracy…Greek origin- meaning one person, one vote. There is no democracy when our leader shuns change.

    Troop withdrawl- who says we are winning anything? What are we supposed to be winning? Terrorism? HA.

    Iraq funding- No…it is NOT necessary. At all…what in the world makes it necessary?

    Recession- http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/opinion/16recession.html

    unless you are an economimist, I would save your opinions and survey results…because you probably have no idea if that study is validated or how random the sample was.

  10. I think it quite foolish to believe ‘land’ defines future countries and if you really think the USA is the last great hope you’re a fool too. I love America, I am one and will forever be one but honestly? Don’t be such a materialist. Jesus Christ has power over heart and mind which will be conquered in the future. And the last time I checked there were many native Americans here before colonization.

    Anyways seems you got your hands full so I wont keep you any longer. 🙂

  11. JPennStarr: I did not say it was the last great hope, America, that is.

    I just don't believe that the social, religious, and cultural relief that has been found throughout history by expansion into new lands, will be able to be found in another, already settled, portion of the world.

    The cycle of expansion can be simplified into these steps: >Strong vision and leadership draw scattered people into a geographic location, building cities and a nation.

    >Nation grows, experiences change, eventually significant portion of the population is either not wanted or has sufficient dislike of the surrounding culture, they leave or are force, through persecution, to leave.

    >Leaving group finds it's own strong leaders which draw people to them and a new group identity is born.

    The problem is there is no further land to expand to.

    The freedom experienced by these groups to form their own group structure or government will not be experienced by any subsequent groups, as all land is under control and rule by some government.

    If space flight were advanced to the point of colonizing other worlds, we would have that freedom once again. But it is not, and so all ideologies and cultures are contained on this globe. We will not expand further.

    I won't rule out the possibility of other nations experiencing some form of reform and becoming "better" than America. But the chances are slim to nil. There are not enough altruistic people with the charisma and desire to enact major societal change bringing another nation to be a "city on a hill", I don't believe.

    And I don't believe America is the last great hope because we are incapable of saving the world. Only God is. And in His sovereignty he has shown that even the best of man's inventions are completely incapable of bringing man any closer to the nirvana of peace and success man so deeply longs for.

  12. But we aren’t a pure Democracy.

    Our founders wisely noted that Democracy and Anarchy are too close, tied by the bond of the predilection of man to do wrong: human nature.

    Instead, the took the strength of the averaging nature of Democracy and melded it with the stability of the Republic. It wasn’t until the 20th century that the Senate was elected by popular vote, a change not entirely for the better. And even that change has not moved us out of a Republic, for the whole system the Electoral College, the appointment of the Judiciary by those we’ve elected and not by popular vote, are both systems of the Republic.

    We are not a one man, one vote society and with good reason.

    It is not disenfranchisement if that is how the system was designed. We live within the system, and it has protected us from our baser inclinations heretofore.

    As to my being an economist, are you?

    I’m a business student, and as such, I’ve studied macro and micro economics, as well as statistics. But more than that, I’m a learner, and I’ve learned.

    There is no rule which says that without exception there is no understanding without a degree or expertise. Take a higher view of your own potential and don’t subscribe to any such notion.

  13. Thanks for the unnecessary history lesson. I understand how our voting system was brought about. I think where we differ is- you think the system is working and I do not.

    I was a business major as well and currently work as a.business analyst for the three largest hospitals in Denver,CO. I do not claim to be an expert in economics because stdying the subject at an undergrad level doesn’t give the subject the justice it deserves. When debating, it is foolish to use your opinion you are not a subject expert and you shouldn’t bring up points that are unvarified because it weakens your arguments. I assume your done because you really didn’t answer any of my responses.

    Take care, it was fun.

  14. Hey guys, looks like you’re all having fun. I just wanted to weigh in here quickly with a couple points.

    First, we are not in a recession. The definition of recession is two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth. As far as I know the numbers for the fourth quarter of 2007 were growth of about .5%. Not great admitted. But still, it’s not even negative yet. We’ll have to wait and see what the numbers for this quarter are. The talks of recession are largely inflated in my opinion. I just posted a blog about why turmoil in the credit markets is driving most of this talk about recession and the tumbling stock market.

    As far as the political system not working, I might agree with you. Of course we would have to clarify what we mean by “working”. If we merely mean that it reflect the will of the people, in a populist sense, then you’re right. It isn’t working. That’s not how the system was set up. There are checks and balances, we have a Republic. I’m sure you know this, I just want to reiterate the point that the founders did not set up the government to respond directly and immediately to the will and whim of the people. They write in the Federalist Papers that the various branches of government are meant to moderate the views and actions of the people, not directly reflect them.

    As far as absolutes go, I think someone mentioned they didn’t believe in them. Now if that isn’t what you meant, great. Otherwise, I gravely disagree. As a Christian you must believe in absolutes. That there is right and wrong, good and evil. We can’t define standards however we want. God exists in reality and has fixed laws by which the universe operates. Physical laws by which matter behaves, and moral law by which society operates and we human beings live. Now, as far as politics go, we can disagree about what methods best provide for a just, prosperous, happy, and good society. But we must agree that certain things are actually good because God created them so, not because we decided they were.

  15. So a case of your economists versus my economists. Except there’s the date, January 10th for yours, and yesterday for mine.
    And they’re not mine and yours, they are humans who by definition have biases and personal interest.

    So who is right?

Leave a Reply