The Complainer!

One of the Republican friends I met during this last election cycle, made a point of reading my blog. He later confided that he understands my positions, but is convinced that I complain too much. He instructed me, that I would have a better chance of winning people over, if I did not complain about them. “You should talk about your ideas, but not criticize others. If you complain about a particular person, or persons’ position, they will not listen to you, associate with you, or have you to dinner.”

My response was, that maybe that is what is wrong with the Republican Party. Maybe everyone is so intent on going along, to get along, they forgot how to complain. They forgot to complain when a Republican justifies war, to create “a beachhead for democracy”. They forgot to complain when Bush pushes through a bill that creates a DNA bank for newborns in the U.S., or when Posse Comitatus was violated, or when Ron Paul supporters were hassled by the security at the GOP Convention, or when the supposed facts of 9-11 are so unbelievable, that pilots, engineers and architects, and some clergy are demanding the truth.

And then there is the Gaza War; dare I complain?

Neo-Conservative Steele

We here in Maryland are supposed to be all excited that one of our own, Michael Steele, is in the running for the Chairman of the R.N.C. I am still awaiting a reply from Mr. Steele to my inquiry concerning his apparent cave-in on ESCR.

His chummy relationship with FOX news, also concerns me. FOX would not allow Ron Paul in the New Hampshire primary debate, and in a later debate, they showed their true Neoconservative color, when they tried to embarass Dr. Paul, by insinuating that he didn't belong on the stage.

As a Ron Paul Republican, looking for a humble foreign policy, I find Mr. Steele's Iraq position unconstitutional. We go to war to "establish a beachhead of democracy"? I hope the nearly one million civillians who have been murdered in the anarchy we created feel the same. Oh, they're dead.

Q: Do you believe the war has been worth the price we've paid in lives and costs?
Steele: I think the war has been worth it to the extent that what we're trying to establish there is a beachhead of democracy. When we walk out of Iraq, what do we want? Do we want an Iraq that's an ally of the US, or do we want an Iraq that is an enemy of the US? We want an ally, so it's been worth it to us to establish this beachhead of democracy and an ally in an area where we've had some trouble in the past.
Source: 2006 Maryland Senate debate on Meet the Press Oct 29, 2006

And, I thought the former seminarian, Steele, would use the constitution to attempt to save some babies. Dr. Paul suggested that we, through the Congress, through the constitution (Article 3 section 2), tell the federal courts to stay out of questions related to the life of the unborn, and let the states decide. Steele is fine with Roe v. Wade. I hope the thousands of babies that are aborted are also fine. Oh, they're dead.

Q: Would you hope the US Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade?
Steele: My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point.
Source: 2006 Maryland Senate debate on Meet the Press Oct 29, 2006

Levels of Disagreement?

Last night about thirty politically concerned citizens met in Annapolis at the Maryland Republican Headquarters, to discuss formation of a chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus.
Del Joe Boteler and Del Rick Impallaria spoke about: building the Republican Party, “all politics is local”, Churchill’s quote: “never, never, never give-up”, foreign entanglements, and the frustrations of being in the minority in a big spending liberal state. They spoke fondly of our Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Steve Wright, Harford County Central Committee and Rt. 40 Republican Club, mentioned that most patriotic statesmen and women would disagree on something.

He is correct. I disagree with the State Party’s inability to criticize the national leaders, attack their policies, and to make a clear statement that reflects the obvious sellout of our nation by both national parties, and the media.

I may have missed it but:
Has McCain been properly discarded by the Maryland Republican Party for his support of the $700 billion bailout?
Has the Maryland Republican Party publicly complained that President Bush has violated Posse Comitatus?
Has the Maryland Republican Party made a public statement about our loss of personal liberties, our foreign entanglements, and the constitutional problems with the Federal Reserve?

During our second round of introductions, I shared that three of my grown children came home to work the polls during the election. Each one confessed that the “Republican” label was a negative, and immediately ended most conversations. We need to converse, and talk about liberty is long overdue. “Politics may be local”, but when our national party: is supporting measures that contradict our principles, is not protecting your rights, and is damaging the good name of the state parties, where is the outrage?

Ultimately, the question for Ron Paul supporters, is how much disagreement can one withstand amidst the levels of one’s “own” party: national, state, caucus, and local?

Neo-conservatism?

A friend of mine, who is definitely conservative, and leaning toward our liberty movement, asked me to define "neo-conservatism"?
I started by explaining that it is when one professes to live by conservative principles, but in fact does not. He asked for a for-instance? So, I suggested to him a conservative's support of our foreign policy of empire building, vs. a humble foreign policy. He questioned Korea? Japan? I injected Iraq. He countered Afghanistan?
Then I suggested a conservatives support of "Foreign Aid": Redistribution of our wealth to a foreign entity.

Is there a clear definition of what a neo-conservative is, or how one thinks?