Statistics
Jul
27
Conservatives voting for Obama? I think it’s a bad idea.
July 27, 2008 | Tagged Culture War, McCain, Obama, Second Amendment | 4 Comments
I had another post ready, but Steve raises an interesting argument in his comment on my previous post, “Supreme Court affirms individual right in Heller. Vote McCain!” ( 06-26-08) (Category: Courts) Steve’s approach deserves a response.
Steve opines that Obama and McCain are part of the Left-wing “boiling the frog” analogy, and that our freedoms are being incrementally taken away in such small segments that we won’t notice until the water reaches a boil and we are literally and Liberally cooked. He believes that if McCain wins, we will face an even more radical candidate in 2012. If Obama is elected, Steve is hoping for a backlash against Left-wing socialist excesses a la 1980 and 1994.
Steve is willing to ride out the “hard times” that an Obama Presidency would surely bring. While I agree that we face a serious incrementalist threat, and that John McCain is a less than perfect candidate, I disagree with Steve’s position on trying Ali’s boxing ring “rope-a-dope,” taking the Obama “punch,” and trying to fight our way back in the next round. There may not be a next round. Setting aside what I believe to be Obama’s disastrous plans for the War on Terror and international diplomacy, there are other reasons to vote for McCain.
I believe the Hard-Left Socialists that control the Democrat Party operate like the AIDS Virus. AIDS attacks the “Killer T Cells” that protect the human body from outside infection. Once the T Cell defenders have been neutralized, the way is open for all types of invaders to ravage and destroy the body itself.
The U.S. stands in the way of the “Progressive” Globalist Vision of One World without national boundaries or evil “nationalism,” itself. Liberals are crusaders for a world without weapons (except in the hands of the U.N. “Peace Force.”) The Hard Left wants a world where the ignorant masses are guided to ultimate enlightenment by the Liberal Intellectual Elite.
When the Democrats take over a city, a state (or potentially a country), they make it difficult, if not impossible for Republicans to ever recapture the area. The Dems gerrymander congressional districts to favor their candidates, e.g., the Seventh Congressional District in Colorado was gerrymandered by a liberal judge after the State Legislature failed to agree on boundaries. Republican Bob Beauprez squeaked out a victory in 2002 by 121 votes. A Republican legislative counter-gerrymander was thrown out in court and a “competitive” district was created. See the “unbiased” New York Times article extolling the virtues of this drama from the Democrat point of view.
Democrats promote public and private sector unions that give most of their money to Democrat candidates. (Liberals are now trying to eliminate secret ballots in employee elections to increase the ability of unions to intimidate would-be voters.)
In Colorado about3/4 of state employees are now unionized, thanks to Democrat Governor Ritter and the fact that only about 1/3 of the employees eligible to vote actually voted in the election. As public sector unions become more entrenched and powerful, their members will evolve into election block workers for the Democrat Party. (Look at any number of eastern or mid-western states where it would take a certified miracle for a Republican to win an election in the face of the solid Democrat machine.)
Eventually, the political machines control the civil service systems and the self-serving loop, or rather noose, is complete. I knew a man who wanted a job in New York State with a city government. Did he go down to City Hall and apply with Personnel? No. He went to his local Democrat Ward Heeler and said that he wanted a job. His family checked out OK with the party, and he was hired. The civil authority was reduced to rubber stamping his political patronage appointment.
When the Democrats get into power, they traditionally increase the welfare roles in the name of “compassion.” This activity builds a constituency of voters dependent on the public dole. These folks are reliable Democrats; and, since some of them don’t have to work outside the home, they have a lot of time to walk precincts, stuff envelopes, and attend rallies for, you guessed it, Democrat candidates.
A few years ago, I lived in a rural county in eastern Colorado where going on welfare was like joining the Mafia. About the only way to get out of the system was to die. The county social services department needed big caseloads to justify their large staff. Naturally, both staff and clients made for a powerful Democrat voting bloc.
Democrats already control most public education through the teachers’ unions. They run most university social science and liberal arts departments through restrictive hiring practices and peer pressure to conform to “progressive” ideas. At Colorado University, recently, there was talk of hiring a conservative professor in the name of “diversity.” Of over 800 faculty members in arts/sciences, business, education, journalism and law, there are apparently 23 registered Republicans in the C.U. system.
The Dems are poised to reinstate the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” to “level the playing field” in talk radio, the only part of the traditional media that they don’t control. If the Left succeeds in silencing conservative voices here, I would look for them to try to regulate, tax, or otherwise suppress free speech on the Net. Constitutional guarantees be damned! (China seems to be able to control things pretty well, using I understand, software from U.S. companies.)
In what I believe to be outright defiance of the Heller Decision striking down their gun ban, the Liberal masters of Washington D.C. continue to ban ”machine guns” (any semi-auto firearm with a magazine well), and continue to require that guns be kept locked or disassembled, except in the event of imminent danger. See my post in favor of crystal balls as warning devices, “New D.C. gun regulations seem to flout Supreme Court decision,” 07-17-08, under the category of “Courts” on this site.
I believe an Obama Presidency with a potential 60-vote supermajority in the U.S. Senate would be devastating to our newly reaffirmed right to keep and bear arms. Short of continued outright bans at the state and local level, I think we would have restrictive licensing; roll-back of concealed carry; ammunition restrictions, including “microstamping” requirements; mandatory “smart gun” legislation with eventual bans on “dumb” guns; arbitrary range closures; environment-related harassment of hunters and shooters regarding lead pollution; and government-sponsored campaigns against gun owners modeled after the work of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers. The Dems would like to implement more restrictions on the transportation of weapons and increased regulation/destruction of gun shows. There is no end to their creativity on restricting the use and enjoyment of firearms. (Liberals particularly dislike gun shows, because the shows provide a forum for gun owners to assemble and discuss Second Amendment issues.)
An Obama Administration supported by a Left-wing Congress would encourage and probably fund the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academy of Sciences in their continued quest for a gun law, any gun law, that can be proven to prevent crime or reduce violence. We don’t need to waste additional taxpayer dollars in what has proven to be a fruitless crusade to destroy our constitutionally recognized right to self-defense. No doubt these folks will continue their research until they get the results they want. Those results will then be given as “proof” that we need more gun “control.”
An Obama Administration would be likely to increase the power of the U.N. over U.S. internal affairs and international diplomacy. Under Obama, the courts would be more prone to use international law, rather than U.S. precedents to decide cases. Liberal Justice Ginsberg has already advocated use of international standards in U.S. courts.
Obama would, in my opinion, push farther and faster than McCain to naturalize tens millions of illegal aliens and turn them into newly minted Democrat voters in time for 2012. Dems want to increase the voting rights of convicted felons, most of whom seem to vote Democrat. In 2,000, Democrats moved to reduce the voting rights of active duty military personnel, who tend to vote Republican.
While the GOP seeks to govern, the Democrats want to rule. I believe almost everything they do politically is designed to increase their hold on the political and social processes of this country. Democrat control of the Legislative and Executive Branches at all levels of government in 2008 could mean decades of Hard Left autocracy, assuming the country lasts for decades beyond a Democrat victory.
If we allow Obama to be elected in 2008, a political “backlash” may not be possible in 2012, because the Democrat “AIDS Virus” will have destroyed most of the checks and balances put into place to prevent autocratic, one-party rule in America. With massive tax-based income redistribution to a welfare state constituency, with decisive political advantages bestowed upon unions, the silencing of talk radio, the introduction of tens of millions of illegal aliens into the ranks of Democrat voters, and near total control of the mainstream media and educational systems, it would be very difficult for a revitalized Conservative Movement to gain political traction.
“If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on the support of Paul.” New social programs, “universal” health care, “soak the rich” tax schemes; what’s not to like about the “Big Rock Candy Mountain” in the new People’s Republic of North America from the standpoint of the welfare-dependent proletariat?
The Democrats are masters at using tax money to forge the change (chains?) leading to Socialist hegemony. Welfare is a classic example, as is the recent case of tax-free City and County of Denver gasoline used to fuel vehicles associated with the Democrat Convention. After they were exposed on the gas scam, the Dems agreed to ante up. They always say they are sorry, after they get caught with their hands in our pockets.
In conclusion, I believe that a Sweeping Democrat victory in 08 and four years of Barak Hussein Obama would be so devastating to the republican institutions of this country and to the GOP that it would be next to impossible to politically recover from the “hard times.” I don’t think there would be a “next round.” I also wonder who the Dems could run in 2012 that could be more radical than BHO? Mao, Che, and Stalin are too dead to be on the short list. Vote McCain.
Def Mech
Comments
4 Comments so far
[...] Ellen wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAn Obama Administration supported by a Left-wing Congress would encourage and probably fund the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academy of Sciences in their continued quest for a gun law, any gun law, that can be proven to … [...]
[...] admin wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAn Obama Administration supported by a Left-wing Congress would encourage and probably fund the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academy of Sciences in their continued quest for a gun law, any gun law, that can be proven to … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] noreply@blogger.com (Tracy Karol) wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAn Obama Administration supported by a Left-wing Congress would encourage and probably fund the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academy of Sciences in their continued quest for a gun law, any gun law, that can be proven to … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
I have to agree. We would lose so many freedoms and have too many more governmental programs under Obama that it will be harder to recover.
I am not a big McCain fan, but at least with McCain the process is slower. This gives us time to continue and try to educate others on what is at stake.