All things, naturally drift "left". It is an inescapable result of the fallen nature of mankind. In the history of the two-party system, (which isn't constitutional, but is an inevitable result) the only way what we call "conservative values" reappear is when the populace gets fed up enough with having a false choice between two "leftist" parties. Then, when they have enough following for the two major parties to feel threatened, one or both of the parties shifts their stance to attempt to co-opt the movement. Or the third party becomes larger until it replaces one of the two major parties and the old party fades out of existence.
Ross Perot's Party was co-opted by the major parties, which resulted in Washington almost becoming fiscally responsible for a few years. And now, with a Socialist on the the throne, as it were, pushing policies that inflame a very large segment of the country, it might finally be time for a third party to rise up and take the place of one of the two parties. The Democratic leadership has painted itself into a very far left corner, and the Republican Party leadership is hot on their heels! There is a wide band of conservative through moderate liberal voters who feel disenfranchised by both parties. Basically anyone who was (or would have been) a Reagan Democrat and to the right are at some level of discontent.
Reagan was successful because he promised to "stand for those common values that made us great" and "would make us great once again". In the aftermath of the failed Ford-Carter Socialist regimes, (which were a response to the disaster of Nixon demolishing the public trust) the American Spirit was at a deep low. The people were largely despondent with mistrust of government; both parties had mishandled the management of the Federal government. Out of that crisis arose a man who promised hope and change. Hope that was born of empowering the common American to lift himself up by his own hard work by removing the excessive tax burden. And change by promising to turn the economic model on its head by raising revenue by growing the economy, instead of taxing it into oblivion to pay for ever increasing social programs.
Obama was successful in his campaign because he said the words that many Americans wanted to hear; "There is Hope" "We need Change" without being specific about what that "Hope and Change" really meant. His "Hope" is the hope you have that you can go buy some food when the government gives you a check. His "Change" is to nationalize the largest part of the economy so that the political elites can protect us from the excesses of companies seeking to make a profit for their employees and stock holders.
What the successful Third Party candidate will do, which will separate him or her from the other minor party contenders, is make a stand on the basic "conservative values" that even most liberals believe in in their heart, even if they choose to vote for "progressive" social issues. To stand for the Reagan-style of "Hope and Change" and kick the Obama-esque "Hope and Change" back to the third world abyss from which it has arisen.
JFK - BHO, Visions for America
In 1961, John Fitzgerald Kennedy shared a Vision for America. In his vision, self-sufficient American Citizens empowered their country to reach loft new heights. As an example, he set us to the seemingly impossible dream of placing a man on the moon.
In 2010, Barrack Hussein Obama shared a Vision for America. In his vision, Americans depend on the largess of their Federal Government for everything. As an example, he canceled funding for the space program, which was to return us to the moon and establish a permanent base there.
In the past month, the President of the United States sent his budget to Congress. In this massive spending conflagration, he proposes a few key cuts. One of these very few cuts is NASA's Constellation Project.
In September of this year, the aging Space Shuttle Fleet, is scheduled to retire. The Shuttles have been pressed far beyond their expected service life in order to see to the completion of the International Space Station. There simply is no other means currently available, anywhere in the world, to lift the heavy components into low Earth orbit. However, with the last heavy pieces lifted, the price per flight of this antiquated technological wonder is becoming too much, and a reasonable amount of safety is increasingly more difficult to maintain.
The Constellation Project was to be both a replacement for the heavy lift capability of the space shuttle, a return to high orbit, and a scheduled manned return to the moon. With its de facto cancellation due to funding withdrawal, America will have only very limited, and no manned, space flight capabilities. We will be bumming rides to the International Space Station, if the European Space Agency and/or the Russian Space Agency will allow us, that is.
At the same time, India and China, are each planning separate manned expeditions to the moon, with an eye to establishing permanent manned stations. NASA too, had some keen insight into establishing a manned base, as we are the only ones who have been there before. But we cannot fund the both the President's socialist agenda and expensive NASA programs. Actually, we cannot currently fund either!
In 1961, John Fitzgerald Kennedy shared his amazing vision self-sufficient Americans being the source of strength for our country (ask not what your country can do for you...) and of placing a man on the moon; a goal of fulfilling the dream of the first man, and every man since who has ever looked up and saw it. It was amazingly accomplished. And now, some 40 years after the fact, we will shortly lack the ability to place a man in orbit.
In 2010, Barack Hussein Obama has also shared a vision. A vision where Americans rely on their government for hand outs, and our astronauts hitch rides into space.
In 2010, Barrack Hussein Obama shared a Vision for America. In his vision, Americans depend on the largess of their Federal Government for everything. As an example, he canceled funding for the space program, which was to return us to the moon and establish a permanent base there.
In the past month, the President of the United States sent his budget to Congress. In this massive spending conflagration, he proposes a few key cuts. One of these very few cuts is NASA's Constellation Project.
In September of this year, the aging Space Shuttle Fleet, is scheduled to retire. The Shuttles have been pressed far beyond their expected service life in order to see to the completion of the International Space Station. There simply is no other means currently available, anywhere in the world, to lift the heavy components into low Earth orbit. However, with the last heavy pieces lifted, the price per flight of this antiquated technological wonder is becoming too much, and a reasonable amount of safety is increasingly more difficult to maintain.
The Constellation Project was to be both a replacement for the heavy lift capability of the space shuttle, a return to high orbit, and a scheduled manned return to the moon. With its de facto cancellation due to funding withdrawal, America will have only very limited, and no manned, space flight capabilities. We will be bumming rides to the International Space Station, if the European Space Agency and/or the Russian Space Agency will allow us, that is.
At the same time, India and China, are each planning separate manned expeditions to the moon, with an eye to establishing permanent manned stations. NASA too, had some keen insight into establishing a manned base, as we are the only ones who have been there before. But we cannot fund the both the President's socialist agenda and expensive NASA programs. Actually, we cannot currently fund either!
In 1961, John Fitzgerald Kennedy shared his amazing vision self-sufficient Americans being the source of strength for our country (ask not what your country can do for you...) and of placing a man on the moon; a goal of fulfilling the dream of the first man, and every man since who has ever looked up and saw it. It was amazingly accomplished. And now, some 40 years after the fact, we will shortly lack the ability to place a man in orbit.
In 2010, Barack Hussein Obama has also shared a vision. A vision where Americans rely on their government for hand outs, and our astronauts hitch rides into space.
Free Americans Should Vote Independent
We like things to be simple and easy. I like things to be simple and easy. It used to seem like, when it came to elections, the simple easy thing was to look at the end of the name and choose a candidate based on the (D) or (R) at the end of the name. If your prime concerns were social justice and social welfare over handouts to big corporations, you chose the (D). Likewise if you were driven by individual liberty and less government interference, you chose the (R). However, time and again, it has turned out that no matter whether we have collectively chosen (D) or (R), the results turned out the same; big corporations get their handouts, government grows larger, and the liberties and freedoms of the people get trampled.
The problem, it seems to me, is that the two major party machines have outlived their usefulness. These massive organizations have quit representing the people, and are instead only interested in maintaining power for themselves. The (D) or (R) at the end of a candidates name ought to be a warning sign to voters. These candidates are beholden to their party masters in Washington, and their party masters in their State capitols, before they are beholden to their lawful constituents. A candidate with an (I) after his or her name has only the American voter to answer to, and to seek support from!
The major parties have twisted the words of an American patriot, making it out to seem like the idea of voting for the (I) of your choice is tantamount to "wasting your vote" because the (I) you may truly prefer cannot win, and this splitting of the vote would cause the lesser evil between the (D) or (R) to loose to the greater. It is a self fulfilling prophecy! If enough of us would stop letting the (D) or (R) from splitting our votes from the (I) of our choice, the (I) would win!
The problem, it seems to me, is that the two major party machines have outlived their usefulness. These massive organizations have quit representing the people, and are instead only interested in maintaining power for themselves. The (D) or (R) at the end of a candidates name ought to be a warning sign to voters. These candidates are beholden to their party masters in Washington, and their party masters in their State capitols, before they are beholden to their lawful constituents. A candidate with an (I) after his or her name has only the American voter to answer to, and to seek support from!
The major parties have twisted the words of an American patriot, making it out to seem like the idea of voting for the (I) of your choice is tantamount to "wasting your vote" because the (I) you may truly prefer cannot win, and this splitting of the vote would cause the lesser evil between the (D) or (R) to loose to the greater. It is a self fulfilling prophecy! If enough of us would stop letting the (D) or (R) from splitting our votes from the (I) of our choice, the (I) would win!
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."If you choose to vote for the "lesser of the two evils", then your vote is already lost, whether that candidate wins or loses! The machines of the major parties stand between America, and true candidates of conscience! It is time for us to break these major party machines. And the way for free Americans to break the bonds of the party machines is for us to look for the (I) at the end of the names of the candidates first, then vote according to conscience, and not major party affiliation.
-John Quincy Adams
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)