Sunday, August 29, 2010

On why I think conservatives are a better choice

So I read the J-Walk blog almost every day. 
I really enjoy his blog ... it's an eclectic mix of stuff but  sometimes heavy on making fun of religion and conservatives.

Anyway, I love reading it and tossing my two cents into the comments. Ohhh, the comments ... you can't swing a dead cat full circle in there without maiming three or four socialists/communists of your intellectual betters ... and boy do they howl ... it's great fun ... go getcha some.

So anytime J-Walk posts about Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Michele Bachman etc, the libs go into a veritable frenzy ... it's like someone tossed a lame, bleeding missionary into a  drinking party in a headhunter's camp. Some of them think before writing but mostly it's just a rush to see who can be the quickest to assign a Hitler label ... or a racist label ... or an idiot label ... or all three.

The entertaining part is reading the "logic" they use to get there ... HYS-terical (if you don't get brain damage.)  Seriously, it wouldn't be funny unless they actually believed their own logic and rhetoric.  The place is dripping with "goodthink" but there ARE some who provoke me to think through different positions etc and I appreciate that.

A few days ago, J-Walk posted about Glenn Beck and the frenzy was on. I pointed it out in the comments and J-Walk responded with the following:
Evil Klown, you're very quick to laugh at people when they call people like Beck idiots, but you never actually say anything positive about these conservative heroes of yours.

How about a summary of exactly what it is you like about Beck, Palin, Limbaugh, Bachmann, etc? Be specific. Also tell us how America would be a better place if people like that were in charge. Think it through, and don't just use what others have said.

Write it up and post it on your blog. I'll make a blog post about it, link to it, and you'll get lots of attention.
Ok, where to begin.  First of all, the people he mentions aren't my "heroes" (although Rush comes closest.)

Secondly, let's begin with this understanding ... no matter what I say, a liberal goodthinker will rip it apart using their "logic."  We can argue and argue about the "benefits" of statism -- i.e. social security, welfare, roads, on and on, so I won't bother.  All I'll say is this ... all I want is for do-gooder liberals to leave me alone ... that's it.  As long as I'm not violating someone else's rights or property then I should be free.

If I am violating someone else's rights or property then that person is free to take me to court to seek redress.

To my mind, people like Palin, Bachmann, et all are more likely to vote against people who want to torment the crap out of me  "help me."  I think of Obama, Pelosi, and their ilk, as the guy around your neighborhood with nothing better to do than go looking for imagined violations of the POA rules ... or to find situations that need solving with more POA rules or spending/raising more POA money.  And no matter how much you do, it's never enough.  And no matter how much he raises the dues, it's never enough.

I also think that Palin, Bachmann, etc would vote to reduce/limit the size and scope of the federal government.  One way to do that is reducing taxes.  When the government doesn't have money then they can't fund a kazillion departments and agencies ... all of which are hell bent on tormenting "helping" me.

The thing I don't like about many Republicans is  that they always seem about one inch away from finding a reason to impose their religious beliefs on me (abortion/gay marriage.)  I don't want anyone pushing ANY of their beliefs on me ... period ... I want people to keep their beliefs (especially religious beliefs) to themselves.

It is for this reason that we need the Constitution ... i.e. the rule of law, not the rule of man (in fact -- the least amount of "ruling" possible.)  If we just defend individual freedom and property rights, that's about 90% of the "ruling" we need ... people can seek redress in the courts.

Right now it seems we have the rule of man.   We have people in high office who do nothing but investigate each other ... and whichever party is holding power uses it to conduct endless "investigations" into the other.  For example, as I write this, the Obama administration is doing its damnedest to jail Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Sure, they CLAIM he's "profiling" but I think that's a crock of crap.  They're going after him because he's enforcing federal immigration law and I think this "going after your political enemies " is beneath contempt.  The Obama administration is doing everything it can to undermine enforcement of immigration law and then pretending otherwise.  I guess they think they're fooling everyone.

So, to sum up ... 

What I like about conservatives is:
I believe they'll try to reduce the size and scope of government and they'll vote to protect me and my property from the libs and their beliefs statists.  They'll be more likely to keep the federal government out of making decisions for me regarding which types of toilets and light bulbs I can use.

The reason I think the country would be a better place with conservatives in charge is:
Because I think conservatives will vote to reverse course on many of the policies in place now. I  think that freedom is better than tyranny ... and right now I think we're closer to tyranny than freedom.  That way libs (and everyone else) are free to organize themselves and "help" as much as they want ... as long as they don't take my money to do it.  I think libs making me give them my money is the same as a church forcing me to donate to subsidize their agendas. (By the way, churches are tax exempt so, as far as I'm concerned, I AM subsidizing them.)

How long have the libs been in charge of all three branches of government?  Why don't they make themselves useful and kill the religious tax deduction?  The Republicans couldn't stop them.

Speaking of taxes -- there is hardly anything that isn't taxed anymore (and they're always looking for more.) Is the tax code even comprehensible by the average high school graduate? What do you call a person whose master takes more than 50% of what he earns?

Is there anything that is no longer within the purview of the federal government (which  the libs try to justify by the commerce clause.)   If the founders meant for the commerce clause to justify unlimited federal government then why did they bother writing the rest of the Constitution?  Just common sense items like this are why I believe we're closer to tyranny than freedom.

And lastly ... what of the Constitution? Either it was ineffective at preventing this ... or the government people (including the judiciary) have just been ignoring it ... one or both?


WOMBAT said...

I know I wasn't asked, but I sure can list what I like about the people listed.

1. They tell the truth and the truth they tell can be backed up with facts and the further you investigate, the more you find that these facts are actually true. This is the opposite experience I get from Liberals and Democrats.

2. They encourage individual responsibility, individual achievement, and individual success. They discourage a herd mentality and they discourage succumbing to peer pressure. They believe in strength of character and not just in strength of numbers.

3. They understand that this country was built by people with strong religious beliefs that while diverse, all taught a strong sense of right and wrong. Liberals believe there is no "real" right and wrong.

4. They believe in being productive. They see no honor in individuals or groups whose only goals are to rip apart those individuals or groups who are successful. I fully believe that some "watchdog" groups are necessary for the health and well being of people and the planet. However, there are many Liberal groups who despise any corporation or any individual who succeed or prosper.

I'm really just getting started but I remind myself this is a comment and not a post so I'll cease. Some of you will get my point and others will remain Libs.

scot said...

I got banned from the JWalk site. I went over the line. I finally said something marginally offensive about that sewer to our south and how the only things they'd ever contributed to the world were burritos and tequilla and population. You'd think the Jwalk would have a clue and maybe one eye open, living in Arizona as he does... But I had fun while I was allowed to post and offend. It was kind of like stepping into a world of Bobble-Heads when you were wearing a neck brace.

Evil_Klown said...

Ha ha - I wondered what happened to scot over at J-Walk.

WOMBAT said...

When Conservatives disagree with you, they debate you. When Liberals disagree with you, they ban or censor you. The message J-walk sends is simple, "you're more than welcome to share your opinion here- as long as you agree with me and with what is already being said." His blog is a haven for the "I'm OK, you're OK" crowd.

Post a Comment