Amnesty?
Secure the border?
Let us see what Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly have to say:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4nTGHenhmvU&feature=related
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Edmund Burke: The Rights of Men
Taken from "Reflections on the Revolution in France"
"Far am I from denying in theory, full as far is my heart from withholding in practice, (if I were of power to give or to withhold,) the real rights of men. In denying their false claims of right, I do not mean to injure those which are real, and are such as their pretended rights would totally destroy. If civil society be made for the advantage of man, all the advantages for which it is made become his right. It is an institution of beneficence; and law itself is only beneficence acting by a rule. Men have a right to live by that rule; they have a right to do justice, as between their fellows, whether their fellows are in public function or in ordinary occupation. They have a right to the fruits of their industry; and to the means of making their industry fruitful. They have a right to the acquisitions of their parents; to the nourishment and improvement of their offspring; to instruction in life, and to consolation in death. Whatever each man can separately do, without trespassing upon others, he has a right to do for himself; and he has a right to a fair portion of all which society, with all its combinations of skill and force, can do in his favour. In this partnership all men have equal rights; but not to equal things. He that has but five shillings in the partnership, has as good a right to it, as he that has five hundred pounds has to his larger proportion. But he has not a right to an equal dividend in the product of the joint stock; and as to the share of power, authority, and direction which each individual ought to have in the management of the state, that I must deny to be amongst the direct original rights of man in civil society; for I have in my contemplation the civil social man, and no other. It is a thing to be settled by convention."
If you are more inclined to read the paraphrased works of the "father of conservatism", Edmund Burke, I suggest buying a copy of "The Conservative Mind".
If you would like to explore Edmund Burke's own writings in full, I suggest you visit this site to save money:
http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?author=burke%2C+edmund&amode=words
"Far am I from denying in theory, full as far is my heart from withholding in practice, (if I were of power to give or to withhold,) the real rights of men. In denying their false claims of right, I do not mean to injure those which are real, and are such as their pretended rights would totally destroy. If civil society be made for the advantage of man, all the advantages for which it is made become his right. It is an institution of beneficence; and law itself is only beneficence acting by a rule. Men have a right to live by that rule; they have a right to do justice, as between their fellows, whether their fellows are in public function or in ordinary occupation. They have a right to the fruits of their industry; and to the means of making their industry fruitful. They have a right to the acquisitions of their parents; to the nourishment and improvement of their offspring; to instruction in life, and to consolation in death. Whatever each man can separately do, without trespassing upon others, he has a right to do for himself; and he has a right to a fair portion of all which society, with all its combinations of skill and force, can do in his favour. In this partnership all men have equal rights; but not to equal things. He that has but five shillings in the partnership, has as good a right to it, as he that has five hundred pounds has to his larger proportion. But he has not a right to an equal dividend in the product of the joint stock; and as to the share of power, authority, and direction which each individual ought to have in the management of the state, that I must deny to be amongst the direct original rights of man in civil society; for I have in my contemplation the civil social man, and no other. It is a thing to be settled by convention."
If you are more inclined to read the paraphrased works of the "father of conservatism", Edmund Burke, I suggest buying a copy of "The Conservative Mind".
If you would like to explore Edmund Burke's own writings in full, I suggest you visit this site to save money:
http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?author=burke%2C+edmund&amode=words
A Humorous Solution to the AIDS Epidemic
Letters to a Young Conservative
"[Professor] Hart was one of the few people I have met whose jokes made people laugh out loud. His sense of humor can be illustrated by a contest that "National Review" privately held among its editors following the publication of a controversial Bill Buckley column on the issue of AIDS. People were debating whether AIDS victims should be quarantined as syphilis victims had been in the past. Buckley said no: The solution was to have a small tattoo on their rear ends to warn potential partners. Buckley's suggestion caused a bit of a public stir, but folks at the "National Review" were animated by a different question: What should the tattoo say? A contest was held, and when the entries were reviewed, the winner by unanimous consent was Hart. He suggested the lines emblazoned on the gates of Dante's "Inferno": "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here"."
- Dinesh D'Souza
I fell off the couch from laughing so hard when I read this...
"[Professor] Hart was one of the few people I have met whose jokes made people laugh out loud. His sense of humor can be illustrated by a contest that "National Review" privately held among its editors following the publication of a controversial Bill Buckley column on the issue of AIDS. People were debating whether AIDS victims should be quarantined as syphilis victims had been in the past. Buckley said no: The solution was to have a small tattoo on their rear ends to warn potential partners. Buckley's suggestion caused a bit of a public stir, but folks at the "National Review" were animated by a different question: What should the tattoo say? A contest was held, and when the entries were reviewed, the winner by unanimous consent was Hart. He suggested the lines emblazoned on the gates of Dante's "Inferno": "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here"."
- Dinesh D'Souza
I fell off the couch from laughing so hard when I read this...
Ann Coulter Makes a Point: Muslim Extremists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRZS-rCGgeE
I agree completely.
I agree completely.
Where Will We Be in 4 Years?
This is the question that requires an answer in regards to the presidency.
I offer you this.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-AzjZrtqCIw&feature=related
Although it is an old video you can get the point. The point is that in each candidate we do not see the end of the rainbow and a happily ever after. But in McCain, rather than Obama, we see a road that is more along that rainbow. It might not be exactly what we want. That's life. It is the closest we will get to what we want. The liberal policies that persist today will continue and be added upon, bringing this country even further to socialism than the liberals have been able to take it thus far. So the answer is different for each candidate. If we elect McCain we will be much the same as we are now, with minor differences and maybe even some improvements. If we elect Obama we will sink deeper into the swamp we seem unable to pull ourselves out of.
I offer you this.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-AzjZrtqCIw&feature=related
Although it is an old video you can get the point. The point is that in each candidate we do not see the end of the rainbow and a happily ever after. But in McCain, rather than Obama, we see a road that is more along that rainbow. It might not be exactly what we want. That's life. It is the closest we will get to what we want. The liberal policies that persist today will continue and be added upon, bringing this country even further to socialism than the liberals have been able to take it thus far. So the answer is different for each candidate. If we elect McCain we will be much the same as we are now, with minor differences and maybe even some improvements. If we elect Obama we will sink deeper into the swamp we seem unable to pull ourselves out of.
Is Radical Conservatism Good or Bad?
Many are inclined to say that it is bad indeed. Why might you ask? Because it turns people off to the real issues. Most things that are radical these days seems to be more of a deterrent than an aid. I issue you this response to radical conservatism:
read "Letters to a Young Conservative" by Dinesh D'Souza.
I am currently reading the book and have found that Dinesh comes to the conclusion in some insistences that being a radical is the only way to bring about change. He attended Dartmouth during a liberal time. He stands by his actions as a radical conservative on campus because it allowed the liberal status quo to be infiltrated. Because of Dinesh and others' involvement with the radical conservative newspaper "Dartmouth Review", an enlightenment took place on campus which remains to this day. The status quo was undermined and a freer flow of political ideology was able to influence the student body. Years down the road Dinesh returned to Dartmouth and asked a student what his political position was. The student said he was a conservative, but not as radical as those guys on the Dartmouth Review were. Dinesh smiled at this because he knew the student would not have had the luxury of such political bias had his generation of Dartmouth Review writers not been as radical as they were.
I conclude that radicalism is necessary in special cases to bring about a greatly needed change.
read "Letters to a Young Conservative" by Dinesh D'Souza.
I am currently reading the book and have found that Dinesh comes to the conclusion in some insistences that being a radical is the only way to bring about change. He attended Dartmouth during a liberal time. He stands by his actions as a radical conservative on campus because it allowed the liberal status quo to be infiltrated. Because of Dinesh and others' involvement with the radical conservative newspaper "Dartmouth Review", an enlightenment took place on campus which remains to this day. The status quo was undermined and a freer flow of political ideology was able to influence the student body. Years down the road Dinesh returned to Dartmouth and asked a student what his political position was. The student said he was a conservative, but not as radical as those guys on the Dartmouth Review were. Dinesh smiled at this because he knew the student would not have had the luxury of such political bias had his generation of Dartmouth Review writers not been as radical as they were.
I conclude that radicalism is necessary in special cases to bring about a greatly needed change.
Wikipedia
These past few years we have seen the inception of Wikipedia, the "free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". Consider the old sayings; "nothing is free", Benjamin Franklin's "every advantage has its tax", and Edmund Burke's reflection that something not given by God or a system of governance under God will be taken only at the expense of another man. In this manner of thinking we must wonder what is being taken away from us by Wikipedia and it's increasing popularity. What is taken away is in thought, which can eventually subvert action. If we subject ourselves to the whole of Wikipedia for its vast and free sources, than we subjugate ourselves to its liberal tendencies as well.
I mentioned in the conservative dilemma blog that conservatism must be sought after as a way life and not an ideology or else we have already lost. To consider as fact what Wikipedia has claimed as the meaning of homosexuality, would be a degeneration of my beliefs. Many more topics can be researched and seen on Wikipedia that can have the same negative effect.
Do not get me wrong here. I am not saying that Wikipedia is the devil and we should all stay away from it. I am saying that because of its convenience and vast archives, it is easy to allow the sites liberal bias to cloud our mind. To disrupt the conservative lifestyle that we are to strive for. I label it: "use with caution".
I mentioned in the conservative dilemma blog that conservatism must be sought after as a way life and not an ideology or else we have already lost. To consider as fact what Wikipedia has claimed as the meaning of homosexuality, would be a degeneration of my beliefs. Many more topics can be researched and seen on Wikipedia that can have the same negative effect.
Do not get me wrong here. I am not saying that Wikipedia is the devil and we should all stay away from it. I am saying that because of its convenience and vast archives, it is easy to allow the sites liberal bias to cloud our mind. To disrupt the conservative lifestyle that we are to strive for. I label it: "use with caution".
Stephen Colbert
Should we take him seriously on his political stance or treat him as a comedic talk show host?
I for one, have not been able to decipher the exact political affiliation of Colbert. So I am resigned to stop watching his show to affirm my faith in conservative values. What I do watch his show for can be stated in two reasons.
The first reason is that Colbert champions his Christian faith in a way that is foreign to television. I have seen endless debates where he makes atheists sweat in their seat from his onslaught of faith-filled arguments.
The second is that he makes me laugh out loud on a continuous basis. A welcomed enjoyment I seek out but rarely find.
Needless to say, he has captured the hearts and minds of college students nationwide. For a show to accomplish that and accomplish the first reason I stated is both inspiring and remarkable.
I for one, have not been able to decipher the exact political affiliation of Colbert. So I am resigned to stop watching his show to affirm my faith in conservative values. What I do watch his show for can be stated in two reasons.
The first reason is that Colbert champions his Christian faith in a way that is foreign to television. I have seen endless debates where he makes atheists sweat in their seat from his onslaught of faith-filled arguments.
The second is that he makes me laugh out loud on a continuous basis. A welcomed enjoyment I seek out but rarely find.
Needless to say, he has captured the hearts and minds of college students nationwide. For a show to accomplish that and accomplish the first reason I stated is both inspiring and remarkable.
Conservatives in Person
I strongly urge everyone of you to seek out public appearances and public speeches of modern conservatives. I regret not doing this prior to my first experience when Hugh Hewitt came to guest-speak in our class. I decided to sit right in front (a decision rarely made...) in order to catch every word that Hewitt spoke. It was exhilarating. I enjoyed every time a liberal tried to tell him off or catch him in some verbal trap. He simply told them facts they could not refute. Nearly every time this occurred the liberal would resign to overly passionate arguing, which even still, ended in the liberal's defeat. The last time this happened Hewitt confessed to us that he loves it when a liberal loses his/her cool in debate. He says its at that time when they truly know that "the gig is up". That they are firing from the hip with a sniper rifle at a target too far to see with the naked eye.
Very enjoyable indeed.
Very enjoyable indeed.
Jesse Jackson
Bad representative for minorities or the worst representative for minorities?
I tend to refer to the greats of modern conservatism rather than just every conservative who is currently in politics. The fact stands that history repeats itself or at least keeps following the same misled path it began on. Although the article link at the bottom of the page is over 20 years old, Jesse Jackson has not changed in regards to it. For more information on the most prevalent figure of bigotry and racial strife in American today, feel free to search for any other article that William F. Buckley so eloquently writes on Jesse Jackson.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_v36/ai_3109262
I tend to refer to the greats of modern conservatism rather than just every conservative who is currently in politics. The fact stands that history repeats itself or at least keeps following the same misled path it began on. Although the article link at the bottom of the page is over 20 years old, Jesse Jackson has not changed in regards to it. For more information on the most prevalent figure of bigotry and racial strife in American today, feel free to search for any other article that William F. Buckley so eloquently writes on Jesse Jackson.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_v36/ai_3109262
The Work of Man and the Work of God
The assumption by Reverend John Hagee that "God sent Hitler to help the Jews reach the promised land" is controversial. Not because it is vexing people on both sides and creating needless factions under presidential candidate John McCain, but because it is a declaration that the work of man is the work of God. That God has willed or allowed the holocaust to happen does not, by any means, give man the omniscience to declare holocaust a means for reaching the promised land for the Jews. Because the first allowed the second to happen, does not mean that the second would not happen in 1948 without the occurrence of the first. Giving Hitler a supernatural purpose is Old Testament rhetoric. Since Jesus brought the new covenant to man, we are also given a new image of God in the form of Christianity. Saying that God willed the holocaust to occur for the betterment of the Jewish people raises many questions relating to the Christianity. If the only way to eternal life is through Jesus, and the holocaust killed millions of Jews that did not believe in Jesus. So in the Christian view those millions of Jews will not enter the kingdom of heaven. So if the holocaust was God unifying the Jewish people than, it came at such great a cost, with its purpose for unification (if we are to believe that eternal life is only through Jesus) not met. Millions of Jews were murdered and the Jews still do not believe that Jesus is the only way. Did God really use Hitler to unify the Jews to form the nation of Israel?
Illiberal Education
The link is a review of this book. Because we are college students I feel that a book researched at colleges and written about colleges today is a valued asset to have as reading material.
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Win1992/trtrev.html
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Win1992/trtrev.html
Classical Liberalism and It's Degenerate Offspring
Classical Liberalism is the tree which modern conservatism and modern liberalism stem from today.
Classical liberalism was the ideology of our founding fathers, advocating such liberties as:
* Freedom of speech
* Freedom of religion
* The right to form political parties and vote
* Freedom to invest in and use private property
* Freedom to work as one chooses
* Freedom to enter into economic contracts
* Free trade and freedom of migration
* Sexual freedom
* Equal rights independent of race or sex
Looking at this list you say to yourself "Well gosh, that sounds just like conservatism."
You are right. Conservatism has another addition though. The element of social and civic virtue.
Modern liberalism attests that they have the same views as classical liberals too. But they do not. All you have to do is make your way to any college campus and see otherwise. Who organizes violent protests during a... oh hell... during any kind of rally which opposes modern liberal views. Those that claim they adhere to "freedom of speech" want nothing more than to silence those who speak against modern liberal ideologies. One of the buzz words is "tolerance". But the tolerance they demand from everyone is the same tolerance for such rights as "freedom of speech" which they choose to ignore. Unless it is they who are speaking.
You wonder though when this change happened. When classical became modern. During the 30's we saw the first revolution. This revolution was spearheaded by FDR, who argued that people who lack life's necessities are not free. He believed that to give people these liberties, the government must ensure that the people have them. Thus began the new idea of freedom involving an incredibly greater role of the government unintended by our Founding Fathers.
The second revolution happened in the 60's with a man named Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Before this period Americans attributed their moral conviction to an external force demanding their adherence to it. The Moral Law and Moral Lawgiver. But due to Rousseau's teachings of "looking deep into yourself to find your own morality", we see the emergence of radical factions. The feminists movement, the anti-war movement, and the gay activist movement all took comfort in Rousseau's inner morality argument. This gave them the basis for demanding that current social morality was too narrow and oppressive.
These two revolutions gave way to the degenerate offspring of classical liberalism that we have come to call modern liberalism.
It leaves conservative Americans to wonder whether we should still call ourselves conservatives at all. Because in the true definition of the word we want the complete opposite. We are actually liberals hoping to change this society back to the roots which bore our conservative values.
Classical liberalism was the ideology of our founding fathers, advocating such liberties as:
* Freedom of speech
* Freedom of religion
* The right to form political parties and vote
* Freedom to invest in and use private property
* Freedom to work as one chooses
* Freedom to enter into economic contracts
* Free trade and freedom of migration
* Sexual freedom
* Equal rights independent of race or sex
Looking at this list you say to yourself "Well gosh, that sounds just like conservatism."
You are right. Conservatism has another addition though. The element of social and civic virtue.
Modern liberalism attests that they have the same views as classical liberals too. But they do not. All you have to do is make your way to any college campus and see otherwise. Who organizes violent protests during a... oh hell... during any kind of rally which opposes modern liberal views. Those that claim they adhere to "freedom of speech" want nothing more than to silence those who speak against modern liberal ideologies. One of the buzz words is "tolerance". But the tolerance they demand from everyone is the same tolerance for such rights as "freedom of speech" which they choose to ignore. Unless it is they who are speaking.
You wonder though when this change happened. When classical became modern. During the 30's we saw the first revolution. This revolution was spearheaded by FDR, who argued that people who lack life's necessities are not free. He believed that to give people these liberties, the government must ensure that the people have them. Thus began the new idea of freedom involving an incredibly greater role of the government unintended by our Founding Fathers.
The second revolution happened in the 60's with a man named Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Before this period Americans attributed their moral conviction to an external force demanding their adherence to it. The Moral Law and Moral Lawgiver. But due to Rousseau's teachings of "looking deep into yourself to find your own morality", we see the emergence of radical factions. The feminists movement, the anti-war movement, and the gay activist movement all took comfort in Rousseau's inner morality argument. This gave them the basis for demanding that current social morality was too narrow and oppressive.
These two revolutions gave way to the degenerate offspring of classical liberalism that we have come to call modern liberalism.
It leaves conservative Americans to wonder whether we should still call ourselves conservatives at all. Because in the true definition of the word we want the complete opposite. We are actually liberals hoping to change this society back to the roots which bore our conservative values.
On African Americans
In the spirit of the last post, here is another excerpt which addresses the topic better than I could.
"I do not favor reparations. Despite the enormous debt that African Americans owe America, I do not think it is fair to ask that blacks be asked to pay money in order to express their gratitude for American prosperity and American freedom. I guess I am sounding facetious, but I don’t think I am being unreasonable in casting the issue in this way. The crimes that blacks allege against America, such as slavery, are universal crimes. The West is unique not in having slavery but in abolishing it. Moreover, although slavery was terrible for the slaves, it has proven to be beneficial to the descendants of slaves because it was the transmission belt that brought them to America, where their lives are immeasurably better than if they were living today in Africa. When Muhammad Ali returned to America from Zaire after winning the heavyweight title, a reporter asked him, “Champ, what did you think of Africa?” Ali replied, “Thank God my grand-daddy got on that boat!""
- Dinesh D'Souza
"I do not favor reparations. Despite the enormous debt that African Americans owe America, I do not think it is fair to ask that blacks be asked to pay money in order to express their gratitude for American prosperity and American freedom. I guess I am sounding facetious, but I don’t think I am being unreasonable in casting the issue in this way. The crimes that blacks allege against America, such as slavery, are universal crimes. The West is unique not in having slavery but in abolishing it. Moreover, although slavery was terrible for the slaves, it has proven to be beneficial to the descendants of slaves because it was the transmission belt that brought them to America, where their lives are immeasurably better than if they were living today in Africa. When Muhammad Ali returned to America from Zaire after winning the heavyweight title, a reporter asked him, “Champ, what did you think of Africa?” Ali replied, “Thank God my grand-daddy got on that boat!""
- Dinesh D'Souza
Gay Marriage: Yes or No?
I have stated in previous posts that my education as a writer does not allow me to portray certain feelings about topics as lucid as I wish them to be portrayed. Growing up in a Christian household, attending church, attending nothing less than private Christian schools from my very inception into the educational system (until now...), has given me a complete bias against the principles of homosexuality. Of course that last part was merely my bias emerging once again to feign a basis for homosexuality. Because we all know that homosexuality has no principles. It can in my opinion be attributed to love on the most basic of levels: infatuation of the flesh.
Dinesh D'Souza displays my feelings on this matter without even speaking on behalf of faith-based principles. So I think it is perfect for every audience to relate to.
"Journalist Andrew Sullivan argues that it is social ostracism that encourages the reckless promiscuity and socially destructive behavior of male homosexuals. If gays are allowed to marry like everyone else, Sullivan is confident that this outrageous element of gay culture would diminish. Sullivan’s argument can be condensed to the slogan, “Marriage civilizes men.” But Sullivan is wrong. Marriage doesn’t civilize men, women do. This point is even evident in the gay community: it helps to explain why lesbians are generally much better than male homosexuals in sustaining long-term relationships. The reason that society privileges marriage and gives it a special legal status is because marriage is the only known incubator for the raising of children. This arrangement works best when marriage is restricted to heterosexual couples who are of adult age and unrelated to each other. Polygamous arrangements, incest, and homosexual relationships do occur in society, but there is no reason to give them greater social acceptance, nor to give them the special legal status of “marriage"."
- Dinesh D'Souza
Dinesh D'Souza displays my feelings on this matter without even speaking on behalf of faith-based principles. So I think it is perfect for every audience to relate to.
"Journalist Andrew Sullivan argues that it is social ostracism that encourages the reckless promiscuity and socially destructive behavior of male homosexuals. If gays are allowed to marry like everyone else, Sullivan is confident that this outrageous element of gay culture would diminish. Sullivan’s argument can be condensed to the slogan, “Marriage civilizes men.” But Sullivan is wrong. Marriage doesn’t civilize men, women do. This point is even evident in the gay community: it helps to explain why lesbians are generally much better than male homosexuals in sustaining long-term relationships. The reason that society privileges marriage and gives it a special legal status is because marriage is the only known incubator for the raising of children. This arrangement works best when marriage is restricted to heterosexual couples who are of adult age and unrelated to each other. Polygamous arrangements, incest, and homosexual relationships do occur in society, but there is no reason to give them greater social acceptance, nor to give them the special legal status of “marriage"."
- Dinesh D'Souza
The Humor of Ronald Reagan
This video can do two things:
1) make you laugh
and 2) wish you were alive or involved in the 80's to experience it for yourself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpOgYbr234Q&feature=related
1) make you laugh
and 2) wish you were alive or involved in the 80's to experience it for yourself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpOgYbr234Q&feature=related
Ronald Reagan: Great President or Greatest President
The heading as I have written it is not of my own cognition, but a phrase popularized by talk show comedian, Stephen Colbert. The current generation of college students were of course born during the era Ronald Reagan, but I would be surprised if they could tell me anything of relevance about him.
There are three reasons why Ronald Reagan was the a great or greatest president:
1) He had an unchanging belief that he knew what this country needed. He was a man of convictions and these convictions would not be changed, by his own political team or opposing.
2) He knew that as president he could not change the world in every way that it so greatly needed. So he changed it in the ways that he thought needed it most. He wanted to defeat inflation, revive the economy, and stop the advance of the Soviet empire. These things he worried about - these things he accomplished.
3) He was able to overcome the desire to worry and subsequently appease the elite culture which pressures every political figure. When faced with an accusatory article attacking some recent decision he had made, Reagan did not question his own actions but questioned "what's eating this guy?"
These qualities complimented by his enduring title as "the great communicator" allowed him to become as many refer to as "the great or greatest president".
There are three reasons why Ronald Reagan was the a great or greatest president:
1) He had an unchanging belief that he knew what this country needed. He was a man of convictions and these convictions would not be changed, by his own political team or opposing.
2) He knew that as president he could not change the world in every way that it so greatly needed. So he changed it in the ways that he thought needed it most. He wanted to defeat inflation, revive the economy, and stop the advance of the Soviet empire. These things he worried about - these things he accomplished.
3) He was able to overcome the desire to worry and subsequently appease the elite culture which pressures every political figure. When faced with an accusatory article attacking some recent decision he had made, Reagan did not question his own actions but questioned "what's eating this guy?"
These qualities complimented by his enduring title as "the great communicator" allowed him to become as many refer to as "the great or greatest president".
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
The Iraq War
Ever since the Twin Towers were taken from us we have been in a "war on terror". I would disagree with this statement. We are in a war against evil. Little do Americans know that there is evil outside these borders. We have been so sheltered to think otherwise. Evil persists in the religion of Islam and we call them terrorists. Terrorists hate everything about America. There is no gray area. This is black and white. Outside of these borders it is a kill or be killed world. If we did not take action and hunt these terrorist organizations down than how many more attacks on our homeland would it take to mobilize and destroy the evil?
Many say that Saddam was just in our way to get oil, so we invaded his country to ensure our oil supply. Did the American people forget that Saddam killed over 300,000 innocent civilians during his reign? As I have already said, evil is out there and America is too sheltered to realize it.
If we made a mistake in Iraq, the mistake was that we did not mobilize the force necessary to eradicate the evil by now. It should have happened a few years ago. But it did not so the current objective is that we get the job done. We said we would do it now we must finish it.
America is the light of the world. Don't you ever forget that. Liberals would much rather rip into her at every perceived error. But the fact of the matter is "there are always going to be errors". The truth remains that America is the light of the world, and those that say otherwise are outside of these borders and jealous, or they have too much free time to sit around and bitch.
Many say that Saddam was just in our way to get oil, so we invaded his country to ensure our oil supply. Did the American people forget that Saddam killed over 300,000 innocent civilians during his reign? As I have already said, evil is out there and America is too sheltered to realize it.
If we made a mistake in Iraq, the mistake was that we did not mobilize the force necessary to eradicate the evil by now. It should have happened a few years ago. But it did not so the current objective is that we get the job done. We said we would do it now we must finish it.
America is the light of the world. Don't you ever forget that. Liberals would much rather rip into her at every perceived error. But the fact of the matter is "there are always going to be errors". The truth remains that America is the light of the world, and those that say otherwise are outside of these borders and jealous, or they have too much free time to sit around and bitch.
Dinesh D'Souza vs Peter Singer
Recently I had the utmost privilege of enjoying a debate set at Biola, also known as the Bible Institute of Los Angeles. The debate featured Dinesh D'Souza and Peter Singer.
Dinesh: an ex-policy analyst from the Reagan administration, Christian writer, and conservative writer.
Singer: animal rights supporter, atheist, accomplished biologist, and writer.
These two went head to head in the most gentlemanly of ways to debate the existence of God.
Here is the link for the first part:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Phgb67NAaHA
After watching the first part you will easily be able to find each subsequent part of the debate.
This is a debate between Faith and the faithless. Do not make the mistake of not watching this.
Dinesh: an ex-policy analyst from the Reagan administration, Christian writer, and conservative writer.
Singer: animal rights supporter, atheist, accomplished biologist, and writer.
These two went head to head in the most gentlemanly of ways to debate the existence of God.
Here is the link for the first part:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Phgb67NAaHA
After watching the first part you will easily be able to find each subsequent part of the debate.
This is a debate between Faith and the faithless. Do not make the mistake of not watching this.
The National Review Politically Incorrect Reference Guide
There is such a reference guide available that has all the answers you seek...
The National Review Politically Incorrect Reference Guide
That is her name. Seek her out on Amazon.com for less than a dollar used, or splurge on the nearly twenty dollar one - quite the pretty thing to set on your coffee table.
The reference guide contains an alphabetical listing of anything you want to know about in the socio-econo-religious-racial-political (can make up words like that?) realm of discussion. But here's the catch - Its from a conservative research group, so it has all the right answers.
This reference guide was created by the National Review. Do you remember me talking about William F. Buckley Jr.? He started the National Review Magazine from the ground up soon after his tenure at Yale. It is a conservative magazine. Enough said.
The National Review Politically Incorrect Reference Guide
That is her name. Seek her out on Amazon.com for less than a dollar used, or splurge on the nearly twenty dollar one - quite the pretty thing to set on your coffee table.
The reference guide contains an alphabetical listing of anything you want to know about in the socio-econo-religious-racial-political (can make up words like that?) realm of discussion. But here's the catch - Its from a conservative research group, so it has all the right answers.
This reference guide was created by the National Review. Do you remember me talking about William F. Buckley Jr.? He started the National Review Magazine from the ground up soon after his tenure at Yale. It is a conservative magazine. Enough said.
The Economics of College
A topic that would be intriguing for college students, but specifically for economics majors, is the economics of college.
Thomas Sowell, a conservative economist out of the University of Chicago School of Economics, wrote an impressive article (article link below) responding to the "need" for the government to come to the aid of the less fortunate and pay for their college. His article is a response to a human interest story written by the New York Times.
Sowell uses examples outlining why the government should not touch the market. If you read this article and still want big brother to make college cheaper, then you have missed the point. It is because big brother intervenes that the market is diluted and therefore prices for college go up.
These are basic economic principles that occur whenever Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is tampered with. Conservative thought seeks to keep government in check while bleeding-heart liberals want a bigger budget and more useless things to spend it on.
Imagine the society we could have if infrastructure was given the full attention of the government and not social programs meant to do for families what they already have the means, but no will, to do for themselves.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzM4MjU1NjE0NjcwOTJiODE3MDcyNTAwNDI0ZTUzNzg=&w=MA==
Thomas Sowell, a conservative economist out of the University of Chicago School of Economics, wrote an impressive article (article link below) responding to the "need" for the government to come to the aid of the less fortunate and pay for their college. His article is a response to a human interest story written by the New York Times.
Sowell uses examples outlining why the government should not touch the market. If you read this article and still want big brother to make college cheaper, then you have missed the point. It is because big brother intervenes that the market is diluted and therefore prices for college go up.
These are basic economic principles that occur whenever Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is tampered with. Conservative thought seeks to keep government in check while bleeding-heart liberals want a bigger budget and more useless things to spend it on.
Imagine the society we could have if infrastructure was given the full attention of the government and not social programs meant to do for families what they already have the means, but no will, to do for themselves.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzM4MjU1NjE0NjcwOTJiODE3MDcyNTAwNDI0ZTUzNzg=&w=MA==
The Six Canons of Conservative Thought
As I mentioned briefly in the dilemma blog, Russell Kirk says there are six canons of the conservative thought. These can be found in the first chapter of Kirk's profound book, "The Conservative Mind". As you may have noticed (the intelligent observers among you...) the heading of my blog is named the same. This is because Kirk's book was one of my first steps to knowing why I was raised a conservative and not remaining satisfied by quality breeding and nurturing. Although quality breeding on my parents part was definitely not left out. Thanks Dad and Mom.
Now this may be hard to grasp for all of you non-believers out there, but conservatism has its deepest roots in Christianity. A more appropriate place to begin can, in my opinion, not be found.
"1) Belief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience.
2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems.
3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes, as against the notion of a "classless society."
4) Persuasion that freedom and property are closely linked: separate property from private possession, and the Leviathan becomes master of all. Economic levelling, maintain, is not economic at all.
5) Faith in prescription and distrust of "sophisters, calculators, and economists" who would reconstruct society upon abstract designs. Customs, Convention, and old prescription are checks upon man's anarchic impulse and upon the innovator's lust for power.
6) Recognition that change may not be salutary reform: hasty innovation may be devouring conflagration, rather than a torch of progress. Society must alter, for prudent change is the means of social preservation."
As you can see the language is very complex and colorful. If you had trouble understanding some of the words as I did to start out, I implore you to find favor with your nearest dictionary.
These are the mere basics of Conservatism; the pillars and foundation which we build our temple upon. Because as I said in the dilemma blog, Conservatism is not limited to the political arena of argument or thought; it is a way of life. And to not treat it as such is failure indeed.
Now this may be hard to grasp for all of you non-believers out there, but conservatism has its deepest roots in Christianity. A more appropriate place to begin can, in my opinion, not be found.
"1) Belief in a transcendent order, or body of natural law, which rules society as well as conscience.
2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of human existence, as opposed to the narrowing uniformity, egalitarianism, and utilitarian aims of most radical systems.
3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes, as against the notion of a "classless society."
4) Persuasion that freedom and property are closely linked: separate property from private possession, and the Leviathan becomes master of all. Economic levelling, maintain, is not economic at all.
5) Faith in prescription and distrust of "sophisters, calculators, and economists" who would reconstruct society upon abstract designs. Customs, Convention, and old prescription are checks upon man's anarchic impulse and upon the innovator's lust for power.
6) Recognition that change may not be salutary reform: hasty innovation may be devouring conflagration, rather than a torch of progress. Society must alter, for prudent change is the means of social preservation."
As you can see the language is very complex and colorful. If you had trouble understanding some of the words as I did to start out, I implore you to find favor with your nearest dictionary.
These are the mere basics of Conservatism; the pillars and foundation which we build our temple upon. Because as I said in the dilemma blog, Conservatism is not limited to the political arena of argument or thought; it is a way of life. And to not treat it as such is failure indeed.
Why Welfare, Social Security, Minimum Wage?
This is a question I have trouble answering because of my youth and lack of clarity in the English language. So I leave it up to they whom are much wiser than I. I cannot say this more clearly than acclaimed conservative economist Milton Friedman. Here is the video I speak of:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&resnum=0&q=milton%20friedman&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
These government programs which claim to work for the people are doing less for the Americans than what they can do for themselves. The same programs exist today and have only worsened since their inception. This video is old, but the man speaking was beyond his time. Big government is what liberals fight for everyday. It does nothing for Americans that they cant do for themselves.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&resnum=0&q=milton%20friedman&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
These government programs which claim to work for the people are doing less for the Americans than what they can do for themselves. The same programs exist today and have only worsened since their inception. This video is old, but the man speaking was beyond his time. Big government is what liberals fight for everyday. It does nothing for Americans that they cant do for themselves.
The Greatest Host of all Time
Now it may intrigue you to know that the man in modern media who has had the longest running single-host show of all time was in fact a conservative. Not only was this man a conservative, but he was the tip of the sword of the modern conservative army. A modern word smith. A speaker of truth. This man was named William F. Buckley Jr. His show on TV was called "Firing Line". There are a few excerpts from the show that you can find on youtube.
Along with being a true conservative one must adhere to the higher being (God) and His/Her/Their given moral law. We call this higher being the moral law giver or I refer to Him as Jesus/Christ/God/Father ect. William F. Buckley has an interesting article named "How Is It Possible to Believe in God?" that you must certainly read (there will be a link to the article below). It deals with the existence of God much the same as C.S. Lewis does in his first few pages of "The Problem of Pain". Simple, clear, and concise thoughts which come to a resounding conclusion.
This week I will be in full search of a greater compilation of "Firing Line" than youtube has to offer that can be easily acquired. I will report back to you all with my subsequent success or failure.
Here is the link to the Buckley article:
http://mustv.com/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4656595
Along with being a true conservative one must adhere to the higher being (God) and His/Her/Their given moral law. We call this higher being the moral law giver or I refer to Him as Jesus/Christ/God/Father ect. William F. Buckley has an interesting article named "How Is It Possible to Believe in God?" that you must certainly read (there will be a link to the article below). It deals with the existence of God much the same as C.S. Lewis does in his first few pages of "The Problem of Pain". Simple, clear, and concise thoughts which come to a resounding conclusion.
This week I will be in full search of a greater compilation of "Firing Line" than youtube has to offer that can be easily acquired. I will report back to you all with my subsequent success or failure.
Here is the link to the Buckley article:
http://mustv.com/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4656595
The Conservative Dilemma
The meaning of this blog began to suffice a grade requirement for my upper division Political Science class at UC Irvine. I wish to continue this endeavor but with a new found goal which encapsulates both a good grade as well as a form of basic database for young minds to see the modern conservative geniuses that have been kept behind the liberal curtain.
This new goal came to me in a most distressing of situations when the classroom of 189 students that I am enrolled with were asked to raise their hands if they were conservative or liberal. I was sadly one of two students that raised his hand attributing oneself to the conservative ideology. I say ideology not because that is how I perceive my political bias but that is how nearly all conservatives, or republicans for that matter, view the importance of conservatism in their own life. The great historian of conservative values, Russell Kirk, tells us that the ideals of conservatism cannot be an ideal or else they are meaningless. Conservatism is a way of life. It is a molding of the six canons of conservative thought into every action in our life.
I detest leaving you on the end of such a branch as these last few sentences, but sadly my blog is graded partly on the number of posts I have completed.
This new goal came to me in a most distressing of situations when the classroom of 189 students that I am enrolled with were asked to raise their hands if they were conservative or liberal. I was sadly one of two students that raised his hand attributing oneself to the conservative ideology. I say ideology not because that is how I perceive my political bias but that is how nearly all conservatives, or republicans for that matter, view the importance of conservatism in their own life. The great historian of conservative values, Russell Kirk, tells us that the ideals of conservatism cannot be an ideal or else they are meaningless. Conservatism is a way of life. It is a molding of the six canons of conservative thought into every action in our life.
I detest leaving you on the end of such a branch as these last few sentences, but sadly my blog is graded partly on the number of posts I have completed.
Monday, May 26, 2008
The Science of Global Warming
Global warming is what is making me hotter as the years go on. Those living in beautiful orange county would agree that making people hotter would be bad for our already enormous egos. All jokes aside, global warming has been popularized by liberal media, a minority of scientists, and the movie by Al Gore, an acclaimed scientist and inventor of the internet. OK, now all jokes aside, people need to stop listening to everyone on TV, internet, radio, and print. There is a well defined liberal biased, which has its attention greatly focused on the myth of global warming. Consider the argument brought forth by Conservapedia.com.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming
http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming
McCain is in Great Health
Everyone who talks about McCain as being too old to fulfill the duties of president has first of all not even seen his energy for the campaign for office and second of all seen his newly released medical records.
"At the present time, Sen. McCain enjoys excellent health and displays extraordinary energy," said Dr. John D. Eckstein, an internal medicine specialist at the Mayo Clinic who has treated the candidate for 16 years.
"While it is impossible to predict any person's future health, today I can find no medical reason or problems that would preclude Sen. McCain from fulfilling all the duties and obligations of president of the United States."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/23/update-mccain-in-excellent-health-doctor-says/
"At the present time, Sen. McCain enjoys excellent health and displays extraordinary energy," said Dr. John D. Eckstein, an internal medicine specialist at the Mayo Clinic who has treated the candidate for 16 years.
"While it is impossible to predict any person's future health, today I can find no medical reason or problems that would preclude Sen. McCain from fulfilling all the duties and obligations of president of the United States."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/23/update-mccain-in-excellent-health-doctor-says/
Conservatism vs Liberalism
A friend of the family and noted southland conservative, Karla Downing, has compiled a comparison between conservatism and liberalism that every young mind should read. As my father says, "I want to teach a young mind how to think, if I can do that then I will take my chances with how he votes." So please take a good look at this list and think for yourself.
the comparison is in the link below.
http://www.karladowning.com/article3.html
the comparison is in the link below.
http://www.karladowning.com/article3.html
Citizenship Through Service
McCain just released a video about Hispanics in the military. I believe that citizenship through service is the most desirable way. You are constantly living and interacting with young Americans. It sticks you right in the middle of some of the most patriotic citizens of this country. It is an opportunity to show how much you really want to be citizen that you would take up arms and risk your life or even give your life. If military service was required for naturalization we might see fewer immigrants and a greater appreciation for this country that we daily take for granted.
Here is the video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8k3Or06g9YA&feature=user
Here is the video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8k3Or06g9YA&feature=user
McCain on Veterans
McCain speaks to veterans and their families for Memorial Day. I think he captures the image we all should have of American veterans in these few words:
“The sacrifices made by veterans deserve to be memorialized in something more lasting than marble or bronze or in the fleeting effect of a politician's speeches. Your valor and devotion to duty have earned your country's abiding concern for your welfare. And when our government forgets to honor our debts to you, it is a stain upon America's honor.”
God Bless America.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/26/mccain-focuses-on-gi-bill-iraq-on-memorial-day/
“The sacrifices made by veterans deserve to be memorialized in something more lasting than marble or bronze or in the fleeting effect of a politician's speeches. Your valor and devotion to duty have earned your country's abiding concern for your welfare. And when our government forgets to honor our debts to you, it is a stain upon America's honor.”
God Bless America.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/26/mccain-focuses-on-gi-bill-iraq-on-memorial-day/
Vice President?
CNN has compiled an interesting list of pros and cons regarding the top 10 Republican and Democrat possible picks for the second billing on the presidential ballot.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/26/veepstakes/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/26/veepstakes/index.html
McCain and Amnesty for Illegal Residents
As many of you know one of the supporting audiences for McCain in these primaries and soon to be the general election are the Hispanic immigrants. This term includes first, second, and third generation immigrants. You may ask yourself why they would be supporting him when Hispanics are notoriously democratic voters. One part of the answer is McCain's promise to give amnesty to over 12 million illegal immigrants. The majority are in fact Hispanic. America is well on her way to becoming a bilingual nation today. But where would we stand when the right of citizenship is taken advantage of. A right and a privilege that would then become nothing. As an American I am disheartened. But what can the Republican party do when McCain sure enough won the votes and is the best candidate to run against the Democrats. The answer I propose is to vote for the lesser evil. The lesser evil is most certainly McCain.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8WNuoKxr3w&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8WNuoKxr3w&feature=related
Crude Oil Prices
Crude oil prices have reached $133 a barrel now. Leaving Americans wondering when it will end. In the southland the lowest unleaded gasoline prices are just under $4 a gallon but well over $4 for any sort of premium gas. As many have said this war is about oil. But if we are winning, then why are the prices continually rising? The real question is when are the environmentalist going to do their part and allow the government to proceed with offshore oil drilling all along the western United States. Colorado has already been drilled for oil and experts say there is an inconceivable amount of oil still to come from the Rocky Mountain state. If we want to get out of this oil crisis it will take a movement on the home-front to drill on our own property. The result will be more jobs for Americans, cheaper prices at the pumps, and a continued world power to light the way for democracy.
here you can check the latest crude oil prices:
http://www.oil-price.net/
here you can check the latest crude oil prices:
http://www.oil-price.net/
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Memorial Day Weekend
This weekend is Memorial Day weekend. We remember and honor American soldiers who have died fighting for this great country. Whether you agree with this war or not, instead of binge drinking until Monday, take a few moments to give thanks for the men and women who have died so you don't have to. The soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan right now don't have the luxury of a weekend off. Spends your's well.
the link is an article by Wolf Blitzer you might find interesting.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/23/blitzer-remember-the-soldiers/
the link is an article by Wolf Blitzer you might find interesting.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/23/blitzer-remember-the-soldiers/
The First
Greetings and welcome to my blog. The purpose of this blog is to bring up and discuss some of the ongoing issues in America today. As you should have noticed from the heading this is a conservative blog. I hope I do not scare away the liberals, but instead encourage everyone to comment on each post.
Regards,
James
Regards,
James
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)