Does it matter?

There’s been a whole lot going on in the media and government lately… which has led some to ask, does this stuff even matter? Here’s my take on a few of the highlights:

1. The Tiger Woods Scandal

Does it really matter? Is it any of our business that Tiger Woods cheated on his wife? WHY do we have to keep hearing about it?

Yes, it matters. It matters because it was WRONG. We need to keep hearing about it, because the more we hear, the more likely we are to take it to heart.

Tiger Woods was held up as a role model. My 13 year old brother loved Tiger. Sure, he isn’t a pastor or priest, but he is the world’s greatest golfer, admired across the world, and he is responsible for his behavior.

We tend to live in this myth-full state that the things we do are our business. They’re our choices and they only affect us, so they’re only our concern. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing we do affects only ourselves. Everything we do affects those around us, too.

It effects our families, our friends, and in some cases, our country. I personally believe Tiger Woods’ life is never going to be the same. How can it be? He is no longer a role model. He can’t be. He’s losing endorsements and he’ll keep losing them.

Was it worth it? No. It was sin, it has already ripped apart his family, and it will destroy his career. He had a responsibility to his wife and his children. He failed.

But, what about forgiveness? There’s been a lot of talk back and forth on whether or not his wife should leave him. Does she have legitimate, dare I say even Biblical, reason to leave him? I would say yes. Should she? I don’t know. It’s not my decision. Is he willing to change? Will he confess AND repent (CHANGE of thoughts and ACTIONS)? I’d think a lot depends on that factor alone. At the same time, let’s not forget that forgiveness does not mean the elimination of consequences.

My biggest question in this whole catastrophe (and it is a catastrophe – think of his family) is, do people just not have a conscience? Have they violated it so often that it no longer exists? How in the world do people live a lie for that long? How do they look their loved ones in the eye and flat out LIE to them?

So, why does it matter? It matters because Tiger Woods was held up as a role model. Let us learn what we can from his story. Let us remember that our sins will find us out. And may we not repeat his mistakes.

2. Health Care

What is the big deal about health care? Is it really so wrong to want everyone to have affordable access to doctors and medication? Does it really matter? Why, oh why, do we hear about it every time we turn on our tv’s, radios, or pull up a blog? Well… I’ve delved into why this issue is so CRUCIALLY important to our nation in several previous posts, so I won’t elaborate further here. (If you missed them and still want my opinion, you can search the archives. ;-)

What DOES currently matter about healthcare is that if we don’t pay attention, we’re going to miss some very important details which will affect us, our children, and our grandchildren for decades to come. For example, a mere days ago the Senate failed to approve an amendment to the health care bill which would have eliminated the possibility of our tax dollars paying for federally funded abortions...

Then, last night, after days and hours of secret meetings, Sen. Harry Reid said the Democrats have finally agreed on something. This scares me. There is speculation that they have actually DROPPED the public option, but I have my doubts on that… and if they did, why would they? (Very little is done in politics without sure deliberation on how to ultimately achieve your goal even while appearing to concede your point.) What scares me more is that they have supposedly agreed. On something. But they can’t tell us what it is yet. Uh-huh. That can’t be good. If Sen. Reid is happy, that is NOT good news for conservatives. Period. We were better off when he was comparing those of us who oppose the bill to slave holders… (he wasn’t happy then).

3. Approval ratings

Yes, approval ratings. We keep hearing about them. Do they matter? YES!! They are very, very telling. Way over half of Americans disapprove of Congress. This IS important. It means that in all likelihood, Republicans, if they continue to return to their conservative base, will take back the House and possibly even the Senate in the midterm elections of 2010!

In addition, while the White House parties on… yes, big Democratic donors get private White House parties… some of which even include use of the executive bowling alley and theatre… our President’s current approval rating of 47% is lower than ANY PAST PRESIDENT AT THIS POINT IN THEIR TERM.

So yesterday, as his approval ratings continue to plummet, our President gave a speech at the Brookings Institute (a non-profit public policy organization based in Washington, D.C. for research and recommendations). In it, he said, “One of the central goals of the administration is restoring fiscal responsibility, even as we have had to spend our way out of this recession in the near term, we have begun to make the hard choices necessary to get our country on a more stable fiscal footing.” Restoring fiscal responsibility?!? Is that a joke? (Sean Hannity had a great response: “Earth to Obama – what universe are you living in?” Lol…)

Reminds me of what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to say on CNBC on October 21st, “It isn't a tax increase; it is eliminating a tax decrease that was there.”

Yeah, classic. I believe her… don’t you??? Or, does it just not matter to you?

*********

“It is well to remind ourselves, from time to time, that ‘Ethics’ is but another word for ‘righteousness,’ that for which many men and women of every generation have hungered and thirsted, and without which life becomes meaningless.”

~Jane Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 1902

Change or the Constitution

Yes, change has come to our great country.

If Obama's health care plan passes, illegal aliens will be citizens; yes, it's in the bill. So it's true, the bill doesn't contain health care coverage for illegals, because, guess what? They won't be illegal if this bill passes. But no matter what you call them, Obama's health care plan will cover them.


America, is that the change you wanted?

Chairman Michael Steele of the RNC recently had the abortion coverage option removed from GOP worker's health care coverage. (Go Chairman!) On the other hand, as we all know, the Obama health care plan includes abortion coverage. Yes, your tax dollars will be funding abortions for all.

America, is that the change you wanted?

Today, the Congressional Budget Office issued a report stating insurance premiums for individuals outside company coverage (including dependents), will rise 10-13 percent PER PERSON... if Obama's health care passes.

So America, you're getting your change. The question is, do you really believe in it?

Do you really believe in amnesty for all illegals? Do you really believe in the slaughter of innocent millions with your tax dollars? Do you really believe in socialized medicine?

Or, do you believe in the Constitution?

Change vs. Constitution... my bet is the Constitution will win out. My belief is there are too many great Americans still living for change to overrule the Constitution.

But then again, as President John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Change or the Constitution. America, the choice is yours.

George W. Bush Introduces Presidential Library!

Boy, do I miss this great man! Take 20 minutes to listen to President George W. Bush's first speech since leaving office introducing his Presidential library.

Thank you

From the nearly 4,500 soldiers who died fighting to establish our great nation, to over 600,000 who died in the struggle to preserve our Union, to the hundreds of thousands who have fought and died to establish freedom and democracy around the world... and to the millions who have served and returned home to their families... on behalf of my self, my family, my home, and my country, I say thank you.

We do not often remember you. In moments of tragedy when you deserve to be comforted, we sometimes shun you. Rarely do we think of your sacrifices. Your families do not regularly pass through our minds.

Yet every day, we live, grow, work and play in a free country because of your sacrifices. Forgive us for our ingratitude.

We should be saying thank you.

The tragic events at Fort Hood a few mere days ago again brought you to our minds. And how did we respond? Our President had previously scheduled to address the nation. His speech kept its regularly scheduled time, but rather than begin with remarks on this tragic act of terrorism, niceties and introdoctury remarks preceded any mention of what you went through, or the heroism which conquered that terrorism.

We should have been saying thank you.

Thank you for living, fighting, and dying for us. Thank you for putting yourselves voluntarily in harms way to defend our great nation and all that it stands for. Thank you for standing for the good, for being strong in the face of evil and terrorism. Thank you for being you.

Since our founding, more than 43,000,000 brave men and women have served in the Armed Forces of these United States, protecting our liberties at home while fighting for freedom abroad.

Thank you. May God bless you, and may God continue to bless America.

Here is a tribute from one of my greatest heroes, President George W. Bush

Conservatives Conquer!

This past Tuesday was a great day for conservativism in America!! True, the conservative "agenda" did not triumph in every race in every state across the entire nation, but overall, though we may have lost some battles, we won the Election Day war.

Of course, our greatest victories were the triumphs of conservative candidates Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell as the Governors Elect of New Jersey and Virginia, respectively. New Jersey, a hard-core "blue" state, is a real prize for the Republican party, while Virginia, a "purple" state which sets pace for other swing states, gives us hope that similar states (including our own great Pennsylvania) may swing back into the Republican coloumn for next year's mid-term elections.

Speaking of Pennsylvania, 7 of our 8 elected statewide judicial candidates were conservative Republicans! This will have a huge effect on the direction of our Commonwealth over (at least) the next 10 years. Congratulations, conservative Pennsylvania!

However, the less publicized, but perhaps most significant of our accomplishments this past Tuesday was our loss in the New York 23rd district. Doug Hoffman, a conservative first, in a mere three weeks garnered the support of an entire nation, ousted the liberal "Republican" candidate, and captured 45% of the vote!! While Hoffman lost to the Democratic candidate Bill Owens (who captured 49% of votes), the mere fact that a New York conservative could capture 45%, even when Republican Committee people in the district felt the only way to retain the seat was by nominating a liberal, is astonishing! As Reagan said, what we need is not a third party, but a revitalized Republican party... and as we return to our conservative roots, we are being revitalized, and we will continue to take back our government!


In other news... President Barack Obama has golfed more in his first eleven months in office than George W. Bush did his entire term.

Sorry it's been so long since my last update, I've been living in and travelling back and forth to Georgia the past two weeks... I'm headed back south on Monday for a while longer, but postings should be back to normal in a few more weeks. Thank you for your patience.

Lastly, Sean Hannity has posted a version of Lynyrd Skynyrd's "That Ain't My America" to youtube. While I do not recommend this band and some language used in the song is crude, it is a creative, moving compiliation which makes an excellent point: THAT AIN'T MY AMERICA. Enjoy.

"That Ain't My America" (Sean Hannity version)

Elections have consequences

While campaigning in 2004, then President George W. Bush said, "Elections have consequences."

Less than two weeks after taking office as President of these great United States, Barack Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. During his acceptance speech, President Obama said, "I do not view it as a recognition of my accomplishments."

There's been a whole lot of hoop-la from every corner of the media as to whether Barack Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. However, we must consider some of its past recipients. Jimmy Carter, Yassir Arafat, and Al Gore have all also received this distinguished award. I understand their reception of this award about as much as President Obama's.

One consequence of this past election? The Nobel Peace Prize.

(Cartoon by Joe Heller - http://www.hellertoon.com/main.html)

Now to change the topic just a bit... calling all Pennsylvanians!! We may not have a Gubernatiorial or Presidential race this year, but we do have one of the most crucial elections in our lifetime.

Right now, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is evenly divided with 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans with one seat open. The election on November 3rd will determine which party holds the majority on the bench.

Regardless of your party affiliation, I ask you to consider which party you want holding the majority on the highest Court in our Commonwealth. It will either be Republican or it will be Democrat. The results of this election will affect us for a decade and possibly a generation. A Democratic majority on our high court will undoubtedly lead to a liberal majority and liberal decisions from the bench. Do you want a court that interprets the Constitution or one that legislates from the bench?

Judge Joan Orie Melvin is the Republican candidate. But she is a conservative first. Please do your research and vote for her on November 3rd. We must keep a conservative majority who will interpret the Constitution on our Supreme Court!

Further, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will undergo redistricting after next years census. Our General Assembly is in charge of re-drawing our districts via a 5 member Legislative Reapportionment Commission. This Commission will consist of 2 D's and 2 R's. If these 4 individuals cannot agree on a 5th individual to complete the committee, this individual is appointed by our Supreme Court.

Guess what? The party controlling the Supreme Court will be the party who will have the majority on this Commission. If Democrats control the Commission, they will be able to effectively "erase" multiple consistently Republican districts from our map, leading to an even greater Democratic delegation from Pennsylvania representing us in Washington.

Elections have consequences. Think about it. Vote on November 3rd...

Oh, and by the way, our Superior Court hears more cases each year than any other appelate court in the country... I encourage you to research these Conservative Republican candidates for Superior Court of Pennsylvania: Sallie Mundy, Temp Smith, Judy Olson, and Paula Ott.

Operation Enduring Freedom

Eight years ago today, President George W. Bush addressed the nation from the Treaty Room of the White House.

Operation Enduring Freedom had begun. Our B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers, F-14 Tomcats, F/A-18 Hornets, and Tomahawk cruise missiles led the offensive against Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the terrorist network harbored in Afghanistan.

Today, General Stanley McChrystal leads our operations in Afghanistan, commanding our 68,000 troops (plus 100,000 Nato forces). He has requested an additional 40,000 troops from our current administration in order to win this fight against terrorism.

However, his request has been stalled for over a month as the White House studies our current strategy.

Our Vice President supports a new strategy calling for the use of drone missile strikes and special forces ops as our primary offensive. Gen. McChrystal has stated he will reject this strategy, saying it would lead to "Chaos-istan."

774 American soldiers have given their lives thus far in Afghanistan. This number includes 8 US troops killed last weekend (while we discussed strategy) in an Al Qaeda attack against a military outpost near Pakistan. This was the deadliest attack in more than a year... and of President Obama's term.


For a President who campaigned on the need for us to focus our military efforts in Afghanistan, I for one don't understand the delay.

Could it be that we have forgotten why we are in Afghanistan? Just in case, here are some highlights of the speech that introduced this conflict to the world.

President George W. Bush, October 7, 2001:

More than two weeks ago, I gave Taliban leaders a series of clear and specific demands: Close terrorist training camps; hand over leaders of the al Qaeda network; and return all foreign nationals, including American citizens, unjustly detained in your country. None of these demands were met. And now the Taliban will pay a price. By destroying camps and disrupting communications, we will make it more difficult for the terror network to train new recruits and coordinate their evil plans.

Initially, the terrorists may burrow deeper into caves and other entrenched hiding places. Our military action is also designed to clear the way for sustained, comprehensive and relentless operations to drive them out and bring them to justice.

We did not ask for this mission, but we will fulfill it. The name of today's military operation is Enduring Freedom. We defend not only our precious freedoms, but also the freedom of people everywhere to live and raise their children free from fear.

In the months ahead, our patience will be one of our strengths -- patience with the long waits that will result from tighter security; patience and understanding that it will take time to achieve our goals; patience in all the sacrifices that may come.

Today, those sacrifices are being made by members of our Armed Forces who now defend us so far from home, and by their proud and worried families. A Commander-in-Chief sends America's sons and daughters into a battle in a foreign land only after the greatest care and a lot of prayer. We ask a lot of those who wear our uniform. We ask them to leave their loved ones, to travel great distances, to risk injury, even to be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice of their lives. They are dedicated, they are honorable; they represent the best of our country. And we are grateful.

To all the men and women in our military -- every sailor, every soldier, every airman, every coastguardsman, every Marine -- I say this: Your mission is defined; your objectives are clear; your goal is just. You have my full confidence, and you will have every tool you need to carry out your duty.

The battle is now joined on many fronts. We will not waver; we will not tire; we will not falter; and we will not fail. Peace and freedom will prevail.


Gen. McChrystal has said that failure to engage in a troop surge will lead to failure in Afghanistan. So as our government wavers, tires, and falters, it leads one to wonder, will peace and freedom prevail?

You can listen to this speech here: http://fallen.wingslikeaneagle.com/mfiles/20011007-8.a.ram

Some history on nationalized healthcare

When I was younger, I remember hearing people talk about euthanasia and thinking, "How do youth in Asia fit into that sentence? That makes absolutely no sense." Today I know that euthanasia makes just about as much sense now as it sounded to me then. Yet, it is part of the history of nationalized healthcare.

The debate over a nationalized health care program seems to have overrun every aspect of society. Every news outlet is talking about it, every office is talking about it, every family is talking about it. Sometimes I wonder if there is anything else going on in our nation or the world? Yet, just for the record, I will weigh in on this overwhelming subject.

There are definitely improvements that could be made to our current health care system. Choice and competition seem to have become the mantra of the battle cry of liberals fighting for what many affectionately call, "ObamaCare." I agree with them. We do need choice and competition. Allow us to buy health insurance across state lines. Surely that would breed the best form of choice and competition this debate could offer?

Instead, the choice and competition we're being offered will cover illegals, pay for abortions (yesterday afternoon the Senate Finance Committee voted down an amendment to the health care bill proposed by Sen. Orrin Hatch ensuring federal funding would not be used for abortions), and force you to buy your own insurance, get on ObamaCare, or be fined. There are your choices and I don't like that competition.

European and other nations with socialized medicine have been hailed by the Obama administration and the main stream media for their effectiveness. I've heard the names of a lot of countries thrown out there, but there's one that, strangely, I haven't heard anyone mention yet.

Before I explain, allow me to quote a paragraph from an article published in the Chicago Tribune yesterday.

• "When an entire major party has excused itself from meaningful debate and a thoughtful U.S. senator like Orrin Hatch no longer finds it important to make sense and an up-and-comer like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty attacks the president for giving a speech telling schoolchildren to work hard in school and get good grades, one starts to wonder if the country wouldn't be better off without them and if Republicans should be cut out of the health-care system entirely and simply provided with aspirin and hand sanitizer. Thirty-two percent of the population identifies with the GOP, and if we cut off health care to them, we could probably pay off the deficit in short order."

If the government controls health care, the government controls the health care you receive. God forbid the day would come, but if liberals are already suggesting Republicans be "cut out," think of where government run health care could lead...

Religious profiling, you're a Christian, oh, you just get aspirin and hand sanitizer.

Ethnic profiling, you're a Jew, oh, sorry, you just get aspirin and hand sanitizer.

Political profiling, you're a Republican, oh, sorry, you just get aspirin and hand sanitizer.

Age profiling, you're 76, oh, sorry, you're no longer useful to society, you just get aspirin and hand sanitizer.

Which brings me to the country whose nationalized healthcare we haven't been hearing about.

In 1880, this people group accepted socialized medicine as part of an "anti socialization" plan which promoted the thought that a little socialization would prohibit complete socialization of their society. Doctors were no longer employed by individuals, they were employed by their government.

In 1935, this government passed a law calling for forced sterilization which allowed for abortion up to the sixth month of pregnancy. Shortly thereafter, a euthanasia program was implemented in an attempt to remove the remainder of the government's unwanted citizens. This led to experimentation in lethal altitude and ice baths (to name a very few).

You probably know by now that this nation was Nazi Germany.

The ultimate result of nationalized healthcare in Germany: "justified" torture and euthanasia.

To say that this is an extreme example is erroneous. Do you really think that the generation who allowed socialized medicine in 1880 thought that it would be used to justify scientific experimentation with the lives of those it deemed unworthy of life? Do you really think they thought it would turn into a license to kill? I don't.

We are people, just as they were. We are capable of the same evil. Maybe not in the US today, but what about 50 years from now? Are we willing to gamble with the government running health care?

When men like Garrison Keillor, the popular host of a show many of us enjoy (or used to enjoy), Prarie Home Companion, "Where women are strong and men are beautiful," are already suggesting cutting Republicans out, where do you think it will lead?

If government runs our healthcare system, they will have the ultimate choice in the care you receive. Is that the choice and competition you want?

Even if Mr. Keillor was joking, I don't think this is a laughing matter. But in fairness to him, here's the rest of his article:

• "It's time to dump the dead-end issues that have wasted too much time already. Old men shouldn't be allowed to doze off at the switch and muck up the works for the young who will have to repair the damage. Get over yourselves. Your replacements have arrived, and you should think about them now and then. Enough with the shrieking. Pass health-care reform."

By the way, those "dead-end issues" he mentions? "Abortion and prayer in the schools and pornography and gays." Still like the prospect of nationalized healthcare? You can read the rest of his article here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0930keillorsep30,0,1198390.column.

Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. The next time you hear some country lauded for its nationalized (socialized) medicine, ask yourself why they don't talk about its "success" in Nazi Germany.

(For a more detailed look at socialized medicine and its rise in Germany, this is an excellent article on the subject: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/national-health-care-medicine-in-germany-1918-1945/)

Global warming to refugees

Keeping up with the news is like trying to put toothpaste back in the bottle... not impossible, but highly improbable. I discovered this the past few days and have decided to do a summary of some recent news...

• Global warming: it's official. The planet has actually been maintaining steady temps for the past TEN years. In fact, some scientists are now predicting a mini ice age due to recent activity in our solar system. Hopefully this news will reach Obama administration officials who recommend we paint our roofs and roads white to prevent additional heat in the atmosphere... maybe they'll even let us keep them black to fight the ice age!
• It's time we put those plaques with "Thou shalt not kill" back in our courtrooms. Two gangs in Chicago beat an honor student to death who intervened in a fight trying to help a friend. While he lie on the ground, they repeated kicked him and killed him by hitting him on the head with a railroad tie. Our President is travelling to Copenhagen to petition for the Olympics to be hosted in this great town... Chicago.
• General McChrystal has requested additional troops in Afghanistan, "Or America may fail." The General also stated that he has had all of one meeting with our President since he took office. Today, one day after making that statement, the White House scheduled an appointment for the General to finally meet again with our Commander in Chief.
• Iran is test blasting nuclear missiles capable of destroying Israel. In a recent interview with NBC (which they did not air), Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claimed to have direct access to and dialogue with the Muslim Messiah. Anihilating the US and Israel seems to be on the top of their agenda... and why did we not see this interview?
• Twenty House Democrats are now openly stating that they want healthcare for illegal immigrants. Supposedly this will save us money by keeping them out of our emergency rooms... my question, how can we be capable of providing them with healthcare but not capable of deporting them? Apparently we can find them if we are going to give them healthcare, we just can't find them if we want to help them get home.
• President Obama is calling for longer school days and shorter summers. This will supposedly help us to keep up with foreign nations who continually outscore us on testing... even though Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, and Hong Kong actually have FEWER instructional hours than children in the US. Maybe we should look at revising the content of our curriculum rather than petitioning for more time in our public schools?
• And lastly... the terrorists housed at Guantanamo were referred to today by a White House official as "refugees."

Is President Obama better for our nation than John McCain would have been?

Glenn Beck is at it again. Last week, he stirred up the liberal media and elitist activist groups by throwing a frog into a pot of boiling water. Literally.

Even though it was made clear that the frog was plastic, animal rights groups used the incident to label Glenn Beck with "cruelty to animals."

Now while I agree that kindness to animals is an indication of righteousness, this is extreme. It was a plastic frog. People pull legs off these creatures to eat... not to mention that if these groups ever see chickens come out of killing cone, it's likely we'll never be allowed to eat chicken in the US and chicken farmers will be fined and jailed.

But frogs didn't stay in the limelight for long. During a network TV interview, Beck said he thought Obama is actually better for our country than McCain would have been. I nearly fell out of my chair. While we all agree that McCain was hardly a viable Conservative candidate, this came from a man who agrees with absolutely nothing our current President does, yet who unashamedly states that John McCain would have us whoopin' the terrorists and have kept our national security strong.

Later, he was interviewed by Sean Hannity and asked about this incredible remark... and I realized he had an amazing point.

If Senator John McCain had been elected, the politics of 2009 would be about Republicans vs. Democrats, what we want, what they want, if McCain was reaching across the aisle and working with the Dems... same old, same old.

But with Barack Obama as our President, the argument isn't about Republicans and Democrats in Congress. There's no easy way out, no doing the Republican thing because I'm a Republican or the Democrat thing because I'm a Democrat. Politicians are now being forced to choose if they will stand by conservative principles or cave to liberal pressure.

Because of President Barack Obama, DC politics are now about if you're a Conservative or a Liberal... you have to choose, there can be no middle road, no moderates, and when the next election comes around, we will know where our leaders truly stand... and it's an incredible thing to have happened to our great country.

Welcome to Conservative First, Republican Second

Over the past few months, I have noticed several increasing trends:

• Average Americans are becoming more interested in politics.
• The longer I am away from the political world, the more I miss it.
• Friends have asked me to keep them up to date on relevant news and politics.
• Other friends have questioned why I am a Republican.
• Still other friends have questioned why I am conservative.

So, I started thinking, and have decided to blog... a blog on current news, politics, and policies from a Christian, conservative, Republican perspective and in that order.

But why Conservative first, Republican second? Because I am a Republican and proud to be such, but I am a conservative first.

I do not support Republicans who are not conservative. I am a conservative because I believe in the Constitution, I believe in our Republic, and I believe in the inerrant Word of God as absolute truth.

I am a Republican because I, like our great President Ronald Reagan, do not believe the best way to promote conservative values is to abandon the Republican party or even the two party system. Rather, I, like he, believe in the revitalization of the Republican Party through Conservatism. Therefore, I remain a Republican fighting within the party for a return to our conservative values.

In 1977, President Reagan gave a speech on conservatism and the Republican party. I have quoted a small portion below, and encourage you to visit http://www.lanlamphere.com/public/2009/09/24/ronald-reagan-cpac-1977/ to read his entire, amazing speech.

"Despite what some in the press may say, we who are proud to call ourselves “conservative” are not a minority of a minority party; we are part of the great majority of Americans of both major parties and of most of the independents as well...

The principles of conservatism are sound because they are based on what men and women have discovered through experience in not just one generation or a dozen, but in all the combined experience of mankind. When we conservatives say that we know something about political affairs, and that we know can be stated as principles, we are saying that the principles we hold dear are those that have been found, through experience, to be ultimately beneficial for individuals, for families, for communities and for nations—found through the often bitter testing of pain, or sacrifice and sorrow.

One thing that must be made clear in post-Watergate is this: The American new conservative majority we represent is not based on abstract theorizing of the kind that turns off the American people, but on common sense, intelligence, reason, hard work, faith in God, and the guts to say: “Yes, there are things we do strongly believe in, that we are willing to live for, and yes, if necessary, to die for.” That is not “ideological purity.” It is simply what built this country and kept it great.

Let us lay to rest, once and for all, the myth of a small group of ideological purists trying to capture a majority. Replace it with the reality of a majority trying to assert its rights against the tyranny of powerful academics, fashionable left-revolutionaries, some economic illiterates who happen to hold elective office and the social engineers who dominate the dialogue and set the format in political and social affairs. If there is any ideological fanaticism in American political life, it is to be found among the enemies of freedom on the left or right—those who would sacrifice principle to theory, those who worship only the god of political, social and economic abstractions, ignoring the realities of everyday life. They are not conservatives...

Once we have established this, the next question is: What will be the political vehicle by which the majority can assert its rights?

I have to say I cannot agree with some of my friends—perhaps including some of you here tonight—who have answered that question by saying this nation needs a new political party.

I respect that view and I know that those who have reached it have done so after long hours of study. But I believe that political success of the principles we believe in can best be achieved in the Republican Party. I believe the Republican Party can hold and should provide the political mechanism through which the goals of the majority of Americans can be achieved. For one thing, the biggest single grouping of conservatives is to be found in that party. It makes more sense to build on that grouping than to break it up and start over.Rather than a third party, we can have a new first party made up of people who share our principles. I have said before that if a formal change in name proves desirable, then so be it. But tonight, for purpose of discussion, I’m going to refer to it simply as the New Republican Party.

And let me say so there can be no mistakes as to what I mean: The New Republican Party I envision will not be, and cannot, be one limited to the country club-big business image that, for reasons both fair and unfair, it is burdened with today. The New Republican Party I am speaking about is going to have room for the man and the woman in the factories, for the farmer, for the cop on the beat and the millions of Americans who may never have thought of joining our party before, but whose interests coincide with those represented by principled Republicanism. If we are to attract more working men and women of this country, we will do so not by simply “making room” for them, but by making certain they have a say in what goes on in the party. The Democratic Party turned its back on the majority of social conservatives during the 1960s. The New Republican Party of the late ’70s and ’80s must welcome them, seek them out, enlist them, not only as rank-and-file members but as leaders and as candidates.

The New Republican Party I envision is one that will energetically seek out the best candidates for every elective office, candidates who not only agree with, but understand, and are willing to fight for a sound, honest economy, for the interests of American families and neighborhoods and communities and a strong national defense. And these candidates must be able to communicate those principles to the American people in language they understand. Inflation isn’t a textbook problem. Unemployment isn’t a textbook problem.They should be discussed in human terms.

Our candidates must be willing to communicate with every level of society, because the principles we espouse are universal and cut across traditional lines. In every Congressional district there should be a search made for young men and women who share these principles and they should be brought into positions of leadership in the local Republican Party groups. We can find attractive, articulate candidates if we look, and when we find them, we will begin to change the sorry state of affairs that has led to a Democratic-controlled Congress for more than 40 years. I need not remind you that you can have the soundest principles in the world, but if you don’t have candidates who can communicate those principles, candidates who are articulate as well as principled, you are going to lose election after election. I refuse to believe that the good Lord divided this world into Republicans who defend basic values and Democrats who win elections. We have to find tough, bright young men and women who are sick and tired of cliches and the pomposity and the mind-numbing economic idiocy of the liberals in Washington.

It is at this point, however, that we come across a question that is really the essential one: What will be the basis of this New Republican Party? To what set of values and principles can our candidates appeal? Where can Americans who want to know where we stand look for guidance?

...We, the members of the New Republican Party, believe that the preservation and enhancement of the values that strengthen and protect individual freedom, family life, communities and neighborhoods and the liberty of our beloved nation should be at the heart of any legislative or political program presented to the American people. Toward that end, we, therefore, commit ourselves to the following propositions and offer them to each American believing that the New Republican Party, based on such principles, will serve the interest of all the American people...

Families must continue to be the foundation of our nation.

Families—not government programs—are the best way to make sure our children are properly nurtured, our elderly are cared for, our cultural and spiritual heritages are perpetuated, our laws are observed and our values are preserved.

Thus it is imperative that our government’s programs, actions, officials and social welfare institutions never be allowed to jeopardize the family. We fear the government may be powerful enough to destroy our families; we know that it is not powerful enough to replace them. The New Republican Party must be committed to working always in the interest of the American family.

Every dollar spent by government is a dollar earned by individuals. Government must always ask: Are your dollars being wisely spent? Can we afford it? Is it not better for the country to leave your dollars in your pocket?

Elected officials, their appointees, and government workers are expected to perform their public acts with honesty, openness, diligence, and special integrity...

Our party must be based on the kind of leadership that grows and takes its strength from the people. Any organization is in actuality only the lengthened shadow of its members. A political party is a mechanical structure created to further a cause. The cause, not the mechanism, brings and holds the members together. And our cause must be to rediscover, reassert and reapply America’s spiritual heritage to our national affairs.

Then with God’s help we shall indeed be as a city upon a hill with the eyes of all people upon us." ~President Ronald Reagan

CONSTRUCTION!!

Blog under construction! Check back soon!