What kind of conservative are you?

My Conservative Identity:

You are an Anti-government Gunslinger, also known as a libertarian conservative. You believe in smaller government, states’ rights, gun rights, and that, as Reagan once said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”

Take the quiz at www.FightLiberals.com

Childish

Since when did it become an adequate defense of a bill to say "well I won" every time you can. It seems that this is what Obama and the Democrats seem to be doing. So they add more and more pork to this "stimulus" bill, making it look more like a big spending and huge leap towards socialism, and all they have to say is "well we won." For example, the Republicans make suggestions and they're pushed away because "they lost." This could be a big generalization, but I'm really peeved off about it. I'm glad the Republicans in the house didn't sign on to the bill and I really hope they do the same in the Senate short of fillibustering it.

"Health of the Mother"

I may be showing my true blood radical conservative here when I put this one up. I was pleased to hear McCain bring this phrase to the light in Wednesday night's debate. (I didn't watch. for some reason I find it healthy to play violent fantasy video games during debates and other political events so in case I get mad I can smite the evildoer with my paladin anyways).

I am pro-life. I do not agree with abortion being practiced in any case at all, save LIFE of mother. Yes, this is a difference. People can look over the difference between "health" and "life" just fine, but there is a difference. It is the matter of definition and what sort of loop-holes people can find.

You see, health of mother can cover a plethora of different issues from sickness to mental illness... and even "I don't feel good about having this baby." Sure there are actual health problems that one can have when having a baby and the life gets put in danger. That is why there must be a distinction between the two.

My position on abortion is not something I debate often. I have researched the issue thoroughly and I have found there is substantial evidence that life begins at conception/implantation. This is why I believe abortion is wrong. I'm not totally sure about legislating it. If anything, it's the states decision if at all, the government should butt the hell out. If it was me, I'd never have an abortion. In any case. When it is life or death though, that will be where the true decision will lay. That I don't know... and I think I will reserve that judgement when the time is right.

I am not militant. I think bombing abortion clinics is hypocrisy. I think shouting down women outside of clinics like "don't kill your baby" is extremely judgemental and all in all a bad idea (i've heard of a woman who had just had a miscarriage come out of one and had that shouted at her...). It is a very touchy subject and needs to be treated with the utmost care.

But still, arguing over health vs. life of the mother is a valid argument. Health is very broad, life is not. Life is more important in the end. Isn't that the point?

Liberal Elitism

I've ceased being suprised about today's liberal elitism. I could have many comments about the Obama "bitter" controversy, but after much thought and web surfing, I think my opinion is better clarified in the following Townhall.com column.

Xenophobia: San Francisco Style

On a different note: I have no Weekly Review from last week yet. I "finished" a couple projects, but they still have finishing touches left. There should be a weekly review for this week (and last) coming up.

Punished by a Baby?

Obama said the following quote in a town meeting in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.” (emphasis added)

To equate a baby to getting an STD is ridiculous. And punished? This just does not compute in my mind.

I am a firm believer in personal responsibility. Every action has a direct reaction. Everything one does has a "consequence". I don't see a baby as a punishment but as what happens when you decide to have sexual intercourse (especially if you are doing it unprotected). This is supposed to be an understood sort of thing. If you don't want a baby, either be informed and be protected, or simply don't do it. To call a baby a "punishment" makes it sound like you don't want to take responsibility for your own actions even though you know what you did was wrong.

The Audacity

Ever since I was reminded of this word's existence when some of my players suggested we name our ship that in my game, I have been quite fond of it. But it's relevance to today's political scene never quite hit home until the last few weeks.

I admit that I have gotten annoyed by the constant talk on the radio and tv about Barack Obama's pastor, Dr. Jeremiah Wright, but I knew there was something up with his church long before it started making the mainstream media. It is important for us to know the people who are running for president. We really don't know Barack Obama as he's been relatively new to the scene. I have not really been impressed by his "sweet talk"... I nearly fell asleep during his 40 minute or so Chesapeake Primary Victory Speech that was littered with big government socialist dogma. I never understood why the masses go for that. Perhaps the public is just a sucker for a good speaker.

Which George W. Bush really has never been.

But this brings me to my muse for the day. I have always found it important for us to know what sort of man (or woman) is running for the highest office of the country. It boggles my mind that he would sit in a church for 20 years with a pastor who he "disagrees with". When I had left for college and my old church got a new pastor, my parents found disagreement with him over his lack of belief in the inherancy of God's word. So they left the church. When you live in a big city like Chicago, there has to be plenty of other churches to choose from, so why that church?

I don't profess to know what is truly his heart and mind, but it does throw a bit of doubt into his message of "hope", "unity", and "change." If he sat for 20 years under a pastor who spewed messages of hate and racism, things that don't reflect a true understanding of Christ, how can we really expect him to be the person he claims he will be?

Those are just my thoughts...

Other articles/blogs on this subject for your perusal (i do not deny having a bias, no indeed):
"Audacity of Hype" campaign soldiers on
More points from yesterday's "Audacity of Hype" speech on race
It's not Compassion -- It's Wright-Wing Racism
Throw Grandma Under the Bus
Wimping Out: Obama's Squandered Chance at Post-Racialism
Is Obama Ready for America?
OK, Sen. Obama, Let's Have the Race 'Talk'

I realize the majority of this topic is a little late, but I've been pondering over it for a while, and with Rev. Wright's latest comments about Italians, this particular issue for Obama doesn't seem to be going away.

The Lesser of Two Evils

Most of the time when it comes to elections I hear people saying "I'm choosing the lesser of two evils." Why is it that we have to decide between two evils? Why can't we actually have someone who is not evil at all to choose?

This is something that I've been thinking about a lot when it comes to today's "Chesapeake Primary". Since Virginia has an open primary I have heard of multiple folk going to vote for various different reasons. Today I went to vote, but I did not like the choices that were left. So I voted my conscience. My conscience ended up being a candidate no longer in the race. I could not bring myself to vote in the Democratic primary, like other people I know have done or will do. I believe I know of a person who is going to vote "against Hillary", most likely for the reason that she is disliked and we don't want the Clintons in the White House again. I know another person who is going to vote for Hillary because she believes that she is the easiest for the Republicans to beat. I dislike both of the Democratic candidates on more of policy issues. I dislike who is left in the Republican ticket for similar reasons.

It is because of the primary system and coming out with candidates that are not preferred that the choice between "two evils" becomes the way things happen.

But then there are also a lot of people who dislike and/or distrust politicians altogether.

Super Tuesday

I am not in a Super Tuesday state. My primary is next week in what has been dubbed either the "Potomac Primary" or the "Chesapeake Primary" for it consists of Virginia, DC, and Maryland.

To be honest, I don't know what to expect from Super Tuesday today and whether my primary next week will even be an issue after this one. I hope it will. I'd like to go out and vote and feel as if I can make some difference in the presidential primaries.

I follow the news and I look at all the polls. I don't know which polls are right. The news media was talking all of last week and some are still talking about how McCain is going to sweep and pull out on top. But just recently I heard that Romney is pulling ahead in California and may just have a chance in Georgia.

I was a Fred Thompson supporter. All of his positions were those that fit the conservative mold, but his campaign never really took hold of the party. He did things his own way and perhaps was too laid back for people to really take him seriously. And even then, he might not have even taken himself seriously either. But that is a non issue now.

I think the thing that annoys me most is all the bickering going back and forth within the Republican party. Sure I think McCain is no conservative, but to try to say that you're not going to even go to vote if he is the nominee is just, well, stupid. What about all your local politicians. If more conservatives stay home from voting just because of him, what will that do to our Congress? Instead of not voting, why not vote "write-in" (Ham Sandwich) or third party. You'd get your voice heard that way. But staying home I think is a cop-out and cowardice.

Sure there may be no solid conservative currently in the Republican race. We have a social conservative governor who raised taxes and destroyed the Arkansas Republican Party, we have a security conservative who has pissed off far too many Republicans by legislation that he has supported that go against what we believe in, we have a libertarian who has isolationist leanings, and we have a fiscal conservative who has flip-flopped more than once on his views.

Most of the time when it comes to elections I hear people saying "I'm choosing the lesser of two evils." Why is it that we have to decide between two evils? Why can't we actually have someone who is not evil at all to choose?

When I make a decision, I tend to go with who stands the closest to my ideals out of the available candidates. If the candidates aren't even close to that though, then I may write in or vote third party. I am not to that point yet.

Now if the person who wins the primary for the Republican side were to look at a conservative like Thompson for a running mate, then I would feel extremely strong about supporting them. Until then, I'm going to weigh my options and go for "who is less bad for our country."

I just hope that I will still be able to choose this next Tuesday.