Concerning Strange Bedfellows (repost)

I am reposting this as I have noticed many crazies have once again grabbed the coattails of conservatism.

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

In my daily attempt to shed light on the liberals statist agenda that seeks to convert our fine republic into a socialist doormat for the world, I come across a great many characters with quite a few interesting viewpoints.

Throughout 2009, as President Obama and the liberal congress made it increasingly obvious that the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution of The United States meant nothing to them, a movement began which has been dubbed the “Tea Party Movement.” As the movement grew and gained popularity as a strong attempt to reclaim conservative values based upon the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets, many different viewpoints and, in some cases “fringe” elements have attempted to attach their causes to the coattails of this movement. Let’s examine some of the different schools of thought I come in contact with daily:

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress support policies that are socialist in nature, and therefore are not supported by our Constitution. I would say the vast majority of conservatives, myself included, believe this is true.

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress are enacting reckless spending policies on purpose in order to cause a catastrophic failure of the free market in order to enact a new socialist government…see Cloward/Piven Strategy. Quite a few are beginning to accept this theory, and I consider it to be a possibility. Whether you believe this is true or not, the problem here is that this thought process begins to lend itself to the conspiracy theorist crowd, which loves to take a small fact or truth, and run with it to the point that it becomes laughable.

The libertarian school of thought has been more widely accepted as of late, and a great many conservatives find themselves having “common ground” with the libertarians’ strict views of limited government and personal liberty. The problem with becoming too cozy with libertarian philosophy is the broad spectrum it encompasses. Some libertarians take limited government and go so far as to desire the abolition of the state completely. This school of thought seems to vilify all government representation as evil and an enemy of individual rights. Their “live and let live” philosophy is a close cousin to pacifism, which is typically espoused by liberal fringe groups…thus, completely perverting the initial belief system 180 degrees, and allowing persons who do not represent conservatism in any way a perceived voice in the discord.

For example, I have made many friends in the last year writing my blog and have utilized facebook as a mechanism for keeping up with these alleged like-minded thinkers. I recently witnessed disturbing articles and videos from some of these self-avowed fellow tea party patriots which were in no way based in conservatism or the Constitution. Everything from anti-war veterans speaking of how evil corporate fatcats forced them to take part in unjust wars to schizophrenic 9/11 “truthers” were included. Needless to say they are no longer on my friend list.

Overall, the Tea Party Movement has done a great deal to fight the statist policies that threaten to bring this wonderful republic to its knees. I am a staunch supporter of it and would march in every event they coordinated if my status as a U.S. Marine allowed for it. My concern in this article is to point out that as this movement continues to grow at such a brisk pace, it will be important to ensure that the leaders of the movement are policing the ranks for those that would misrepresent the principles the movement stands for.

Why Ron Paul Cannot Be President

As we begin to edge closer to the midterm elections this fall, an obvious pattern is beginning to develop. Anti-incumbent sentiment is at an all-time high, and rightfully so. Unfortunately, it seems that when the people of our nation are dissatisfied with the party holding power, they tend to go to extremes in the other direction (see Barack Obama). The recent success of Ron Paul in Republican polling has me, at a minimum, raising an eyebrow.

Many of my fellow, alleged conservatives, have jumped on his bandwagon and I pray it is not the beginning of a trend. I know, I know, Ron Paul is the popular choice these days, but I cannot lend my support for many reasons. First and foremost would be the obvious...he is not a conservative. Ron Paul is a Libertarian and he can run under the guise of any party he wishes, his beliefs are still Libertarian. Don't get me wrong, I am firmly on board with many Libertarian beliefs and these days the line seems to be getting blurred between conservatism and libertarianism. I wrote an article earlier this year noting my concerns over this growing trend.

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

Quite simply, we cannot allow Ron Paul to be President for one huge reason. Ron Paul is an isolationist, as are many libertarians. As much as the majority of Americans want less government intrusion into their daily lives, we must not accomplish it by neglecting the safety and defense of our nation. Too many nations detest our way of life and would like nothing more than to bring it to a conclusion. Ron Paul does not believe in getting involved in the world's conflicts. It's an easy stand to take, and no doubt garners present day support from many Americans who have not the stomach for the ongoing “war on terrorism”. However, the easy decision is not always the correct decision. It would be easy to withdraw our troops back home and stay out of these affairs. Unfortunately, if this foreign policy were adopted it would be but a matter of time before this hatred for our nation hits us within our borders again.

It's actually quite amazing how short-term our memories are when it comes to our safety. After 9/11 everyone supported the strengthening of our defenses, the beefing up of our border security, and the war on terror. It took less than two years for the anti-war lobby to regain the voice of naivety they have been for the last forty years. Do we need to be involved in every conflict which takes place on this globe? No, but isolationism is a foolish recipe for disaster. We must protect our interests at home and abroad. The failure to accomplish this weakens our nation and emboldens our enemy; who, unlike our cowardly administration, I have no problem stating is Islam.

Al Qaeda and all of it's other radical muslim splinter groups have been quite vocal that their strategy involves ongoing, debilitating attacks. They proudly claim that they know Americans do not have the stomach to see such a conflict through, and so far they are correct. We, as a nation, having once again achieved a general feeling of security within our borders and have immediately gone back to our ways of taking it for granted.

In the book Endless War by Ralph Peters he described our conflict with radical muslims by claiming, “we're playing checkers, they're playing chess.” If you dig deeply into world history and the current exploding population of Islam throughout Europe you will see that this is not a time in our history that we can support isolationism. It would simply be suicide for our nation. As much as nobody likes the idea of it, war is often necessary to defend the freedoms which this great nation provides. That, quite simply, is why we must not abandon conservatism for libertarianism.

Take a trip to Arlington National Cemetary and you will see rows upon rows of men and women who knew that if we are to maintain liberty, war is an unfortunate requirement from time to time. This will always be true as long as there is evil in our world. Those who refuse to accept these cold hard facts had better be prepared to kneel on a cold hard floor. I, for one, prefer to die on my feet than live on my knees.

Concerning Strange Bedfellows

In my daily attempt to shed light on the liberals statist agenda that seeks to convert our fine republic into a socialist doormat for the world, I come across a great many characters with quite a few interesting viewpoints.

Throughout 2009, as President Obama and the liberal congress made it increasingly obvious that the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution of The United States meant nothing to them, a movement began which has been dubbed the “Tea Party Movement.” As the movement grew and gained popularity as a strong attempt to reclaim conservative values based upon the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free markets, many different viewpoints and, in some cases “fringe” elements have attempted to attach their causes to the coattails of this movement. Let’s examine some of the different schools of thought I come in contact with daily:

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress support policies that are socialist in nature, and therefore are not supported by our Constitution. I would say the vast majority of conservatives, myself included, believe this is true.

Those that contend the President and the liberal-run congress are enacting reckless spending policies on purpose in order to cause a catastrophic failure of the free market in order to enact a new socialist government…see Cloward/Piven Strategy. Quite a few are beginning to accept this theory, and I consider it to be a possibility. Whether you believe this is true or not, the problem here is that this thought process begins to lend itself to the conspiracy theorist crowd, which loves to take a small fact or truth, and run with it to the point that it becomes laughable.

The libertarian school of thought has been more widely accepted as of late, and a great many conservatives find themselves having “common ground” with the libertarians’ strict views of limited government and personal liberty. The problem with becoming too cozy with libertarian philosophy is the broad spectrum it encompasses. Some libertarians take limited government and go so far as to desire the abolition of the state completely. This school of thought seems to vilify all government representation as evil and an enemy of individual rights. Their “live and let live” philosophy is a close cousin to pacifism, which is typically espoused by liberal fringe groups…thus, completely perverting the initial belief system 180 degrees, and allowing persons who do not represent conservatism in any way a perceived voice in the discord.

For example, I have made many friends in the last year writing my blog and have utilized facebook as a mechanism for keeping up with these alleged like-minded thinkers. I recently witnessed disturbing articles and videos from some of these self-avowed fellow tea party patriots which were in no way based in conservatism or the Constitution. Everything from anti-war veterans speaking of how evil corporate fatcats forced them to take part in unjust wars to schizophrenic 9/11 “truthers” were included. Needless to say they are no longer on my friend list.

Overall, the Tea Party Movement has done a great deal to fight the statist policies that threaten to bring this wonderful republic to its knees. I am a staunch supporter of it and would march in every event they coordinated if my status as a U.S. Marine allowed for it. My concern in this article is to point out that as this movement continues to grow at such a brisk pace, it will be important to ensure that the leaders of the movement are policing the ranks for those that would misrepresent the principles the movement stands for.


Tomorrow I will go more in depth on Pacifists, as I have some very strong viewpoints on this crowd.