Thursday, October 26, 2006
I'm a moonbat.
And proud of it.
You see, the Republican Party and its so-called "conservatives" have devolved to two principles: a) winning isn't everything, it's the only thing. and b) facts are irrelevant, it's only your beliefs that count. And I'm proud that I'm not one of them, and by the demented standards of redstate.org and etc., am thus a "moonbat".
I'm somewhat of a Goldwater small-government Republican. I voted for George H.W. Bush (twice), and voted for Clinton the second time only because I wanted to ensure continued divided government and thus less government (hopefully!). My view of government is that it has its place, but its place is limited to only those things where facts have shown the free market doesn't work, things like, for example, building roads and providing fire protection. If there are other things that we as a society want our government (OUR government, not some foreign imposition, OUR government, that we ourselves vote for and elect) to do, fine, but it should only be done if there is a clear consensus that this is what needs doing. By "clear consensus", I don't mean majority vote. I mean "almost everybody agrees". Such as, "almost everybody agrees that older men should not be having sex with young boys" (i.e. everybody but NAMBLA and Mark Foley agrees with this statement). If you can't get buy-in from virtually everybody, it doesn't need to be done by government, it needs to be done by the smaller groups that want it.
One of the things I most dislike about the current American system is that it is too easy to pass a law. Laws should be things that are hard to pass, that require the agreement of pretty much everybody to pass, because once government is given a power by a law, it rarely gives up that power. The current behavior of the Republicans in power sickens me in that regard. They've managed to expand government more than any President since LBJ, mostly by simply passing laws whenever they feel like it, rather than passing only those laws that pass bipartisan muster. As a result, you get bloated government. As a result, you get the Republicans in Congress ignoring the concerns of the Democrats regarding the course of the war in Iraq and ignoring little facts like the difference between Shia and Sunni that make it hard to find a suitable course for stabilizing Iraq. As a result, you have Osama bin Laden attacking America, and getting away with it, because Bush decided to attack Iraq instead of putting the whole military into Afghanistan and Pakistan to track down and kill the men who attacked America, a strategic mistake that is the equivalent of declaring war upon Mexico because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. These are facts. But these facts don't count for today's Republicans, because doing all this was what Karl Rove needed to do in order to win elections for Republicans, and in today's Republican Party, only winning counts. Only winning, and belief. By stating belief loudly enough and ignoring those little "fact" things, you win. And winning the only principle -- the *ONLY* principle -- that today's Republican Party has.
If these beliefs make me a "moonbat", fine. Better a "moonbat" than someone without morals, without principles, and without shame. I want a party of principle and small government to be in charge in Washington. That party, unfortunately, is not the Republicans, and will not be as long as winning, not principles, is the most important thing for the Republican Party.
-- Badtux the Conservative Penguin
Posted by: BadTux / 10/26/2006 05:32:00 PM
This is a good post.
One of the things I most dislike about the current American system is that it is too easy to pass a law. Laws should be things that are hard to pass, that require the agreement of pretty much everybody to pass, because once government is given a power by a law, it rarely gives up that power.
I have thought that too. The rate at which laws are being passed is very scary. One of the problems with it (in Oregon, anyway) has to do with all the measures we have to put up with when we vote. This time out of (only)10 measures 4 of them are to amend our State Constitution. Serious stuff, I think. But, It's all so damn complicated.
# posted by L>T : 26/10/06 6:10 PM
Wow.... I can't believe you voted for G.W. two times when I didn't even come close to voting for him once. You just blew me away Tux, what in the hell were you thinking?
As for passing laws, or approving things, it's the things they can add to them that bother me the most.
And like Lusty says, it's all too damn complicated these days.
# posted by BBC : 26/10/06 7:22 PM
George Herbert Walker Bush, BBC. Daddy Bush. The one with sense. The one who, when given the chance to send the troops into Baghdad and topple Saddam, turned them around and had them drive right back to Kuwait because he saw that Iraq was a tarpit waiting to happen.
I voted for him because he was a war hero, because he was competent and knew his stuff, and because he could keep the Democratic Congress in check and keep them from going out of control with the spending and stuff. Most of what Clinton is blamed or credited for originated in Poppy Bush's administration. For example, the commercialization of the Internet began during Poppy Bush's administration, the taxes that allowed Clinton to build a surplus were passed during Poppy's administration, the drawdown of American forces as the Soviet Union collapsed began under Poppy Bush's administration (indeed, two of the divisions that fought in Desert Storm left their equipment in Kuwait, and rode home straight to the unemployment line, as did all of the B-52's that were used for bombing missions in Desert Storm). And for better or worse, NAFTA was negotiated by Poppy Bush, though it took Clinton to get the Senate to ratify it. Yeah, he could be ruthless, but he had good sense, and good people working under him. I have no shame at all about voting for Poppy Bush twice.
As for Sonny Bush, I voted for the man who served in Vietnam both times, not the callow cocaine-snorting draft dodger. Poppy Bush bailed out of a burning plane over the Pacific. Al Gore and John Kerry volunteered for combat duty in Vietnam (though only Kerry actually saw combat). Sonny Bush volunteered to defend the beaches of Galveston Bay via all-day beach keggers and sand volleyball matches (but oh, that sunburn can be nasty stuff, y'know?!). I know a real man when I see one, and Sonny Bush never was one, and never will be -- he'll always be callow and immature no matter how old he is in physical years.
- Badtux the Conservative Penguin
# posted by BadTux : 26/10/06 11:07 PM
While military service should not be your only criteria in this type of decision, I think I would opt for the guy that served rather than the cokehead playboy scion that didn't.
# posted by NewsBlog 5000 : 27/10/06 4:33 AM
Oh, Daddy Bush, okay. He wasn't to bad.
# posted by BBC : 27/10/06 5:34 AM
- Name: BadTux
- Location: Some iceberg, South Pacific, Antarctica
I am a black and white and yellow multicolored penguin making his way as best he can in a world of monochromic monkeys.
View my complete profile
April 2004 / December 2004 / January 2005 / February 2005 / March 2005 / April 2005 / May 2005 / June 2005 / July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / January 2006 / February 2006 / March 2006 / April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 /
Bill Richardson: Because what America needs is a competent fat man with bad hair as President (haven't we had enough incompetent pretty faces?)
Cost of the War in Iraq