Once upon a time, Friend #1 messaged Friend #2 of mine saying that he had no idea I was so right-wing. Friend #2 (the one that knows me better) said that Daniel is not that right wing it’s just that he is confident in his positions. And that pretty much sums up the difference between those who occasionally dip their toe into the public arena (or cluster &$^%) of ideas and. those who either are paid to bat around political tennis balls for a living or take it up as a hobby. If one is not well versed, or somewhat informed, in politics or the culture, then someone who somewhat is and has a pretty strong stance on any given issue will probably be seen like a Right-Wing Nut Job or a Bleeding Heart Dirty Hippie. In order to sift between the people who read a paragraph or two of what I dribble about leading them to have automatic knee jerk/non-opinion-opinions/girly girl-eye-poking reactions and the people who actually want iron out opposing ideas, I write sometimes with abrasive or sophomoric undertones with near fatal doses of attempted humor. The people who can’t handle it are the people who intellectually yell, “Squirrel” at any opinion not delivered in a nicely wrapped package and get sand caught in various private crevices. They usually respond with multiple comments to the tune of “Why are you being so harsh? Don’t you want to draw everyone into the conversation and inform?” Well, yes and no. The ones I am trying to draw in are people who are moderately to extremely interested in the robust exchange of ideas. The ones I am trying to push away are either the ones who do not have an opinion or the one’s that DO have an opinion but are afraid of confrontation and opt out of discussion for the comfort of “unity.” Just like our Founding Fathers did when some government bureaucrat placed a tax on one of their favorite beverages. So, in a way, I am discriminating between people who can juggle both normal lives with being informed about the country they live and the ones who float idly by and leave their commentary about contemporary American life for random Facebook postings in the late of night to the tune of, “It’s sad that Americans aren’t doing anything to stop poverty in the world. We spend more money on our pets than the homeless.” These “in the moment” statements are not bad in and of themselves but they typically are typed up when the person is feeling emotional due to either a hormone influx, near toxic levels of chocolate consumption, having read the latest Social Gospel book, or having seen a random documentary by an admirer of Che Guevara. One can easily judge the sincerity of these “convictions” if they are still posting or speaking about these issues a month later. People who do not have a set of somewhat firm political and/or philosophical principles, develop the worst possible principles, at the worst possible time.
So that just leaves bitter old me and where I stand in the political and cultural arena. Those who have made an honest attempt to engage in dialogue with me (not that such a phenomenon is difficult or virtuous to achieve) find that while I might appear to be a crazed right wing loon, find me more of a black sheep Conservative. I have given up the term Right-Wing Nazi because I am placing Nazi back with the liberals seeing as how they were National Socialists. So, here are some questions that I think people (Opponents and Proponents) might ask me and I’ll answer them as honest as I can without getting too bored and with minimal vomiting.
If I had to choose based on a life and death situation between the Religious Right and the Religious or Secular Left, I would reluctantly place my loyalties with the Religious Right… but not without a bottle of Baileys and coffee. Whether it’s my natural cynicism or my natural distaste for superficial relationships, I don’t much like many of the people in the Religious Right. As a political movement, they seem to weld together moral behavior with secular law. I never understood why we needed prayer in schools when I can do a “better” job of prayer before and after school OR, better yet, DURING SCHOOL. Did the frequency of prayer in school, after it was abolished in school, go up or down after the government reascended its secular blessing? A blessing, might I add, that we never needed. I don’t think that abstaining from sin should be a political platform.
So are you a liberal on social issues then?
I think you can have liberal ends by conservative means. That means that issues that are usually championed by the Left can also be championed by the Right but Conservatives can achieve their goals differently. Take poverty for example. The Left seems to think that the government can eradicate poverty by taxing evil rich white men. Well, the Left has been proven wrong for the past 30 plus years after the War on Poverty was given an adrenaline shot in the arm. Poverty rates have remain stagnant since President Johnson and lets not forget that the majority of America’s wealthy citizens are liberals.
At this point in history, I don’t think we can get government out of the “social justice” profit venture but what I would prefer is that we severely reform the system. How about drug tests for welfare recipients? I know of people who truly need the government’s assistant and they play by the rules and try their hardest to work their way out of poverty. I also know people who abuse the system to buy things that have little to no relation with basic survival needs. If we can get rid of the waste and help the helpLESS and not the clueless, I think most Americans (both liberals and conservatives) would be on board. If we are footing the bill for a safety net that I might one day need to fall on, I want to make sure that net is made in Japan and has a nice springing action that can catapult me out of the welfare mindset. The second method I would enforce is a ground up change from the individual, to their families, to their communities, to their cities, and to their states. What if we reformed the notion of true individualism which means to take care of and build for oneself that will, in turn, take care of the initial needs of, that in turn opens up the individual to conviction and allows the personal liberty to not only look after oneself, but for one’s own family and friends. Do you know of a family member or close friend that has lost their job or has come up on some hard luck? Why not offer money with no strings attached to that person so that they can get back on their feet? Why not offer to help them foreclose on their house and open up your home to them? This might sound old fashioned, but what if we return to the notion of families (which can include close friends) taking care of each other? What if the only thing we expected in return is that the “helped” at some point becomes the “helper?” Do you know how much waste and fraud would vanish if families and friends took BETTER care of each other? And what happens when one’s family is taken care of and everything is “tip-top?” Then these families share some of their fortune and blessings with the surrounding communities in some form or another. We don’t have to take the homeless off the street and take them into our homes, but I think being prosperous means giving out of the goodness of one’s heart and by the conviction of the Divine. Where I think government can step in and help is where the people who are truly alone or whose families are unable to help them. But the aid to those in need (Not in want) must change from the old entitlement system that breeds constant poverty to a system that encourages and heavily suggests freedom from poverty. If the government can help 13 year old girls obtain abortions across state lines without the parents knowledge or consent, I think the government can actually guide the poor out of poverty.
What about social issues like abortion, gay marriage, social justice, the environment?
Abortion: The taking of a life outside of the health of the mother is never an option. And I define health of the mother, for example, if the infant’s shoulder is caught on the mother’s pelvic bone and the mother is hemorrhaging out and the only option is to abort, then I feel it’s up to the couple. I drew upon this example from the T.V show ER where such an incident happened. I am not basing my principle on a T.V show but what I am saying is that things happen during the birthing process and in some rare cases, hard decisions have to be made. Depression, cleft palates and Down’s Syndrome babies are not sufficient reasons for abortion.
I believe marriage is an institution, albeit a dissolving institution, between a man a woman. I base this on both moral, practical and spiritual principles with the latter not affecting public policy. A man and a woman have the necessary “parts” (Huh-uh… he said, “Parts”) for reproduction. A man and a woman also have the natural tendency to reproduce like rabbits given the chance so a committed relationship between a man and a woman who are committed to raising kids, and to buy them fancy cell phones so they can text naked pictures of themselves in their teens, is ideal for any society because it usually produces moderately responsible adults. Having said that, while I have moral qualms with homosexuality, which are based in Biblical principles, I see no where in the Bible where it demands that a government refuse certain rights to homosexual couples. Since it is not a Biblical concept of marriage to leave property to a surviving loved one, visit a loved one in a hospital, be on the same insurance policy, to have “His and His Towels,” I do not see a surface level issue with civil unions. Believe me, no where in the Old or New Testament does it say that it is forbidden for a gay man or woman to leave their estate with their partner or forbids them to have the same Aflac policy. I don’t see the Christian Right get bent of same when some moron old lady leaves her estate to her cat when she dies.
See previous posting https://clearlycaneda.wordpress.com/2009/07/09/we-should-eat-the-poor/
The Left has successfully painted we Conservatives (or us Conservatives) as the villains Captain Planet is always fighting against and yet this is the one issue where common sense is totally avoided. You either agree with Bill Maher or Al Gore on this issue, or you are a Holocaust Denier! Sorry, but I do not want to be lectured by rich people on the evils of Styrofoam cups (which are on every movie set and in every Green Room), florescent light bulbs (which contain mercury), electricity usage (From the comfort of multi-million dollar mansions), and carbon emissions (Which no liberal travels by wind). My philosophy is this, we need the more traditional sources of energy now so we can get to cleaner ones later… faster. We need strict guidelines on carbon emissions and clean fuel like clean coal and natural gas but we need these to buy us time to develop solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal energy so that it BOTH WORKS (Which it doesn’t always work right now) and is COST EFFECTIVE (Only the evil rich can really afford to go all green).
Unless we are home with Jesus, we will always be at war at some point in time. If my fellow emo-Christians cannot come to grips with this, then they are in for a big surprise when Armageddon finally comes. I think war is a necessary tool when all other options have failed but there is a big difference between a warrior and a war-monger. William Wallace was a warrior and General Zod was a war-monger; there is a difference. I have sort of a nuanced view of the current War on Terror which I have already explained (And won might I add) in a previous posting https://clearlycaneda.wordpress.com/2009/02/20/the-unavoidable-war-war-on-radical-islam-the-liberation-of-iraq-beyond/
Why do you hate President Obama so much?
Ah yes, the question that you really want to ask! Unlike Liberals, I do not hate any particular President of the United States (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096 , http://www.prlog.org/10181278-the-assassination-of-george-bush-its-not-just-about-killing.html ) I have a major issues with the current President’s policies and since many on the Left cannot divorce policy from race, they see me and others like me as racists. Yes, there are racists who hate Obama! And yes, there are racist liberals too. They just are racist towards people it’s okay to be racist towards. Since I am a Conservative, I have the natural inclination and ability to distrust ANYONE who holds or runs for public office. Running for public office is similar to wanting to a monarch… you are a little crazy. And while I can put my support behind a candidate, I will not sacrifice my principles if the politician I am supporting fails to live up their principles. Thus, towards the end of the Bush Administration, I was ready for him to leave office and I might have put a figurative boot to put. Fiscal Conservatives are not suppose to lend out money to fix a problem that a majority of Americans are guilty of… Living Beyond our Means. Which is why I can praise President Obama when he made the difficult decision of taking out Somalian Pirates/Terrorists but rail against him on everything else. I do not (l)ike President Obama because of his policies but HE IS STILL MY President. I did NOT vote for him (Which confuses many young people who voted for him to make a fashion statement) but he is my President. And I only disagree with him on two fronts, domestic and foreign policy, but other than that I think he is a likable guy. And I must say that this in and of itself makes me 50 times more evolved than many on the Left.
But how could you not vote for Hope & Change? How could you not vote for the first Black/African American President?
A.) Hope and Change is the slogan for EVERY Presidential candidate that has ever run. B) Being a Conservative, I strive to try to take race out of every situation just like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. taught me. Thus, I place my vote based on the content of character and the track record of a candidate. I do not have time for “White Guilt” and bean counting. I leave that type of superficiality voting for rabid American Idol viewers. And if you want to get technical, President Obama is our first Bi-Racial President. It’s funny how mixed people, who as young children and teens often have difficulty identifying between the white and black culture, are suddenly embraced by one race. “Hallelujah… my President is finally black.” “Um, yeah, the new President is still white!” And for the record, President Obama does not have any slave blood in him, so lets not worry dwell to heavily on cosmetics. If a candidate has the right platform and a majority of my principles, he’ll more than likely get my vote. It’s really that simple.
The itch to wrap this up is becoming unavoidable at the moment but I plan on elaborating on further subjects in the future. In the future, if you find yourself procrastinating going to class/work, having a bout with insomnia, or have a kinky taste for schadenfreude or masochism, then serve me up an issue and ask me what my take is on it! I am single and have nothing better to do!!!