Why Should We Elect You?

I watched the Republican debates in New Hampshire this evening. Several questions intrigued me, but one question in particular caught my attention. The question was "Why should you, and not Barak Obama, be elected President of the United States? I heard a lot of reasons such as "He's inexperienced," or "He'll raise taxes, I won't", or "He's for abortion rights and I'm against abortion...". In my opinion these are all good reasons. But, I haven't heard the thing I'm looking to hear. If I could answer for them I would say something like this:

The reason I should be elected and the reasons Barak Obama should not be elected is because he is a Socialist. He would have us back up to the day before the Boston Tea Party. He would have us back up to the time before the Revolutionary War. He would have us back up to a time when Government Reigns. If you read between the lines and if you read the lines themselves one notices the Democrats plain principle that says I WANT TO IMPRESS YOU AND MAKE YOU TRUST ME. I WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU. HOWEVER, THERE'S A TINY CONCESSION YOU HAVE TO MAKE IN ORDER FOR ME TO TEND TO YOU. IT'S A MINOR HITCH...A SMALL GLITCH IN THE SYSTEM. IN ORDER FOR ME TO TAKE CARE OF YOU, YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME MORE POWER. IN ORDER FOR ME TO TAKE CARE OF YOU, YOU HAVE TO BE WILLING TO RELINQUISH THE IDEA THAT YOUR MONEY YOUR BELIEFS AND YOUR BIASES ARE YOUR OWN. IN FACT, IN ORDER FOR ME TO TAKE CARE OF YOU, I HAVE TO CHANGE ONE LITTLE NOTE GIVEN IN OUR DECLARATION OF FREEDOM. I SIMPLY WANT TO CHANGE ONE SMALL PHRASE TO SAY "WE ARE A NATION THAT IS OF THE GOVERNMENT, BY THE GOVERNMENT, FOR THE PEOPLE. IT'S OBVIOUS, IN FACT, THAT A NATION OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE MAKES LITTLE SENSE AND LIMITS MY ABILITY TO GIVE YOU EVERYTHING YOU WANT."

We want Socialism? We love Imperialism? Why did our forefathers sound so ecstatic about being free?

The other question I noted was the question about earnings of big companies, especially the profits generated by big oil. I heard a lot about how the profits are noted and I heard a lot about how we needed to expand our energy horizons in this country. But I did not hear from them that high gas prices could be reduced if the Government itself did not claim 70% of the profit on fuel usage. You didn't know that? You would instead be the person who rages against big companies and big oil? What if I make a ton of money some day? What happens when I can fly first class, go on great vacations, buy anything I want? I'm a good guy now, but no matter how my character will have remained the same, money will unleash your wrath against me? I don't begrudge anyone their money unless it's ill-gotten, maliciously obtained, illegally attained, brutally stolen. Right now billions of our dollars are finding their way into hands of countries who own oil...some of these hand intend to hurt America at all costs. I don't like this. But I am more aggravated that we can't give a Company in the market system their due profits, but we can willingly and happily give our Government billions and billions more in oil profits than any of us in the Market System could possibly hope to see. I did not hear these things in the debate tonight. I hoped I would. I know that I will not hear principals in the Democratic debate going on as we speak. In fact, I just heard Hillary Clinton pose the idea that the Government should be trusted with your entitlements. "We are looking for a President you can count on", says Hillary...read between the lines. Socialists are quite ok with the above.

The Democrats are now talking about Socialized medicine...they're oogling and oggling about the reasons we should be like every other industrialized nation who offers socialized medicine...they may be industrialized but many of them do not have the level of care that you and I enjoy and many of them pay enormous amounts of their wages to support the system. You could prove that I pay a lot also...and the system isn't working in several key ways...but that does not automatically translate into the fact that the Government will do a much better job with my healthcare...in fact Governments across the world have proved that they act much more inefficiently, much more expensively, much more aggressively, and much more greedily than a system that is of the people, by the people and for the people. Socialized medicine is NOT THE ANSWER. To simply say your working for "change" does not say that I approve (as a citizen who's government is of me, by me and for me) of the changes.

I wish I could simply throw tea into the river as they did long ago in Boston. I can't. But I can use my words to promote the sanctity of life for the poor, the sick and for the unborn, and I can do this as a conservative. I can use my words to promote low taxes, small government, and fiscal responsibility as a conservative. I can promote legal immigration and protection from my enemies as a conservative. I can promote a strong military as a conservative. I can promote a market, capitalistic system, I can promote the pursuit of happiness, I can promote the freedom to Worship as you see fit as a conservative. I can promote peaceful foreign policy, and technology enhancements as a conservative. And I can promote generosity for all Americans by the people, of the people and for the people as a Conservative.

I am a proud citizen of these United States of America. Maybe the reason I should be elected President of these United States over Barak Obama or Hillary Clinton is that I can protect the identity of our people--the identity that builds our national pride. The other Candidates want us to lose our distinction, lessen our position, and remove the power of the people...

France gave us our lady Liberty...but when we lose ours, what country will we pass her to?

Oh yes...I almost forgot. Happy New Year! Be excited today. This is the day the Lord has made.

Cut-N-Run Club

A little thing has me a bit burned. The left has made it a policy to be against the war. Their slogan used to be "Bush Lied, People died" as if he was the only one who knew anything about anything. Intelligence was what it was. I'm certainly for allowing people their opinion, just as I have mine. The above slogan shows a lot of disrespect for their President and for the American system. I can overlook that. Politics are what they are.

But Hillary's fundraising system is taken a lot of heat and yet she's the media's god-child. Other Dems have gotten themselves in a lot of trouble and yet can't keep their mouth shut about a man who may or may not have wanted a little "tryst" in an airport bathroom. I don't support bathroom shenanigans either, and I can understand some politician's relief to have the heat taken off of them for awhile. But now, Senators Schumer, Durban, Clinton, Obama and others have gone too far. I believe they've gone into traitorous "terror"itory. Dick Durban started the malay about a year ago by comparing U.S. military to Pol Pot and Nazi's. He should've resigned for that. Then Obama during a recent speech said the U.S. Military is killing Innocents and raping women and abusing children. Hillary and others have had the indecency to illegitimize a highly decorated General, General Petraeus, who has been trusted with a huge and very difficult job even before he gave his recent report. These people are cut-n-run artists bent on U.S. failure who have proved that they hate their Military...and I think it's unacceptable. I think it's traitorous.

One doesn't have to like everything the Military does. But there are men and women have are coming home from Iraq and Aghganistan and they have to come home to a nation who's leaders are hell-bent to make us distrust them. A few of you out there had to come home to that very same attitude a few decades back...it doesn't feel good. It's awful.

What kind of political policy allows you to say the most terrible of things for the sole purpose of getting ahead. Is that what we should expect from the leaders of one of the greatest nations in the world? To end this blog let me quote New York Senator Chuck Schumer:

"And let me be clear: the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The lack of protection for these tribes from al Qaeda made it clear to these tribes, “We have to fight al Qaeda ourselves.” It wasn’t that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords had to create a temporary peace here on their own. And that is because there was no one else there protecting them."

Chuck and all the others from the Cut-n-Run club used to rail against the time table, about the civil unrest there (middle 1800's...we sort of had our own civil unrest...it happens when you're trying to develop a country), and about faulty intelligence. Now, they've simply gone to hating the American Military and their capabilities...and have sided with the opinions of the local Iraqi warlords. One can't imagine how amazing this is to me, and it's amazing we're willing to let them get away with it.