Saturday, November 8, 2008

Post mortem on conservatism (and the Republican party itself)

Although the following excerpt from this essay by Chuck Baldwin deals with guns, a big reason it caught my eye, the rest of the piece dissects the rotting corpse of conservatism. Hence, it's well worth a read.

"Then there was the pathetic attempt by the National Rifle Association (NRA) to scare gun owners regarding an Obama White House. Remember that John McCain is the same guy that the NRA rightly condemned for proposing his blatantly unconstitutional McCain/Feingold bill. McCain is also the same guy that tried to close down gun shows. He even made a personal campaign appearance for a pro-gun control liberal in the State of Oregon a few short years ago. In fact, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) gave McCain a grade of "F" for his dismal record on Second Amendment issues. Once again, Chicken Little-style paranoia over Barack Obama rang hollow when the alternative was someone as liberal as John McCain."

Gun owners had no viable friend as presidential candidate this time, but they talked themselves into believing McCain was their man out of desperation. See where it got them? As the differences blur between the two parties and they slowly meld into one, who can gun owners turn to? Basically no one, at least no one with a snowball's chance in heck of being elected, at least at this point in history.

The best that can be hoped for is Obama doesn't do too much more damage to our already perforated second amendment and the Republican party once again stands as a true alternative, rather than a pale imitation of, the Democrats. Like Baldwin, I am not too optimistic of that outcome.

Of course, even if the Republicans do thoroughly revamp their party and turn it into the antithesis of the Democrat party, that still doesn't guarantee success. Why not? Simply put, the American electorate won't stand for their politicians telling them the truth. Can you imagine a revamped Republican standing up and telling folks we are profoundly broke as a nation, we have to rely on borrowed money just to meet our day-to-day living expenses, and if he is elected that will all stop and everyone will have to tighten their belts and live within their means? He'd be lucky if his share of the vote reached double digits.

Americans can't stand the truth. They want lies, the bigger the better. They want, collectively speaking, something for nothing. I don't see this changing until...well, ever, actually. If/when the two main parties show themselves for the bumbling meddlers they are and everyone finally gets the message, do you really think American voters will turn to someone offering the only viable way out of the mess, liberty and freedom? If you think they will, you're far more optimistic than I. They will almost assuredly go for a fascist or semi-fascist who tells them too much liberty is a bad thing and what's needed is ever-more control from the top. He/she will make big promises (big lies) which the something-for-nothing American voters will eat up and beg for more. If you doubt me, please explain to me how we got to the point we are.

Something-for-nothing Americans, including "The Greatest Generation," with their demands for Social Security/Medicare, have ruined this once-great republic. I only see a bleak future, with the possible exception of a few head fakes here and there that won't last long.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to buy a ticket for tonight's state-sponsored lotto drawing.

Take care.


Anonymous said...

"The preservation of liberty depends upon the intellectual and moral character of the people" - John Adams. Based on the Adams criteria, you have good reason to be pessimistic that any future elections will prove to be any wiser than the one last week.


The Other Mike S. said...

Hey, you're famous! Your picture AND CAPTION (that's why I figure it's from your site) of the dog pissing on the Obama sign was just on a CNN puff-piece on selecting the new Official Dog.

DAL357 said...

I wish I could lay claim to being the originator of that sign, but I can't. I found it somewhere on the 'Net last year when it had "Hillary" on it. It even had the caption "Good boy!" on it, so I decided to use that as my blog's name. Later, I found one with "Obama" on it, so I decided to use that one since he looked to be sure to clinch the Democrat nomination.

You know, it's funny you should mention this because I was just thinking about changing the picture to something else, although I'd keep the name.