| |
Below is a list of topics. Clicking a topic will open a list of questions/comments on that topic. Clicking one of these will open my response to that question/comment.
Keep in mind that these can go back a few years.
Abortion
Global Warming
God - Christianity
Creation vs Evolution
History of the USA
Conservatives vs Liberals
| Q |
Republican politicians have been referring to voting by African Americans as “voter fraud” and attempting to make it as difficult as possible.
|
| A |
Conservatives want every living, legal citizen, regardless of race, to vote. Every one. Notice the words LIVING, LEGAL and CITIZEN. Show me even ONE case where a conservative has tried to deny voting to anyone meeting all three of those qualifications. Conversely, liberals want anyone who might vote Democrat to be able to vote, as often as possible, and for additional votes to be conjured up if enough are not available to get a democrat candidate elected honestly.
|
|
| A |
Absolutely not.
A movement is a set of shared ideals being championed by a group of like-minded people for the benefit of all, and people are never encouraged to give up current relationships.
A cult is a closed group where everyone but the leader must give up everything they own for the sole benefit of the leader, and people are encouraged to sever ties with all those who they knew before joining the cult.
|
|
| Q |
Answer to a question about wealth re-distribution.
|
| A |
If you consider the number of lottery winners that are broke in a couple years, and compare this to the number of folks that start from nothing and build businesses that provide thousands of jobs and provide products or services for tens or hundreds of thousands of people, it is clear that taking from those who are willing to work and giving to those who aren’t is a losing proposition for everyone.
And yes, there must be programs for those who are elderly, infirm and disabled. Given the generosity of Americans in general, if things were handled correctly then providing these services to those who actually need them should not be a problem.
And social programs should be handled at state level, not federal level. Each state has different needs.
|
|
| Q |
Response to a statement that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives because more liberals have been to college.
|
| A |
Education does not equate to intelligence or even wisdom. I’ve known vice-presidents with masters degrees who can’t put together a proper English sentence, and I know very intelligent people with only HS diplomas. My experience tells me that while liberalism may tie to college education it has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. Colleges tend to function as ‘liberal thinking indoctrination centers’, and from what I’ve seen have little to do with either intelligence or wisdom anymore.
|
|
| Q |
What is the difference between conservative and liberal beliefs? If someone holds conservative beliefs, which political party in the United States would they be more likely to support?
|
| A |
Below are the core principles of conservatism, along with a comparison to liberalism.
A key here is that conservatives are loyal to the US Constitution over any individual. Anyone who tries to tell you that American conservatives worship people Just because we strongly support candidates who also honor the Constitution does not understand this concept. In contrast, there are at least a couple fairly recent Democrat presidents who have accused the US Constitution of ‘getting in their way’.
Regarding which political party a conservative would be more likely to support, that question is harder to answer now than at any other time in history. Politics is such a mess right now. Having said that, not all those who vote Republican are conservative, and not all those who vote Democrat are liberal - some actually have leanings contrary to their voting habits. I personally vote whichever way provides the best odds of getting a conservative into office. Currently that’s the Republican party. No independent has had a ghost of a chance yet, and I can’t support the current Democrat platform or objectives. Besides destroying what our founders created and eliminating so many of our individual liberties if they get their way, so much of their agenda is contrary to nature and the Bible. I keep thinking about how I’ll defend my actions one day when I stand before my Creator.
This is the core of conservative belief:
1. Individual Freedom
We are created equal and granted by God the same inherent freedoms, such as the natural and inalienable rights to life, liberty, free speech and the free exercise of religion, and the ability to pursue happiness, own property, build wealth and defend ourselves and our families.
Conservatives will NEVER encourage legislation that increases government control at the cost of personal freedoms, and will never restrict the rights of anyone to disagree with them. In contrast, most liberals propose legislation that encourages and protects the deviant activities of a tiny percentage of the population and makes control of what people can or can’t say about it their primary goal.
2. Limited Government
Our founders believed that legitimate government operates only by the consent of the governed, and is more efficient and less corrupt when it is limited in its size and scope - and conservatives agree. Liberals tend to like big government that controls many aspects of our lives.
3. The Rule of Law
This was so important to our founders that they based our laws on the Ten Commandments of the Bible. Justice must be administered equally and impartially to all. To ensure this, they declared that each branch of government must adhere to the Constitution, and the judicial branch must not be allowed to assume or exercise legislative or executive powers.
Which side of the aisle LOVES it when the courts rule in a way that changes written law - as long as it favors their agenda? (Hint - it’s not conservatives). And which side has complained about how the constitution limits their ability to reign…er…govern in the way they want? Again, it’s not conservatives.
The rule of law also includes how immigration is handled. Conservatives want an orderly, legal pathway for people to come to America to live, preferably without adversely affecting those who are already here, and with newcomers contributing to the economy as soon as possible, BEFORE trying to take from it. This is, after all, how this country was built in the first place. Liberals want to just open the floodgates with no controls - unless the immigrants come anywhere near them. Then they get angry.
4. Peace Through Strength
The federal government is to provide for the common defense of the United States by protecting our homeland and our strategic interests abroad. We must maintain adequate investments in our air, land, sea, nuclear, and cyber capabilities to deter foreign aggression.
Conservative leaders tend to promote a strong military, liberal leaders think the military is some kind of evil.
5. Fiscal Responsibility
Congress has a moral and constitutional duty to keep spending under control, balance the federal budget, reform and modernize entitlement programs, eliminate fraud, waste and abuse, pursue continued pro-growth tax reforms and permanent tax reductions, and restore regular order and accountability in the budget and appropriations processes.
Liberals LOVE to make people more and more dependent on the government, which demonstrates a tax-and-spend mentality. A true conservative pushes legislation that limits government spending.
6. Free Markets
Free markets and free trade agreements allow for innovation and economic expansion. Risk-takers, entrepreneurs and business owners should have the freedom to pursue the American dream and create more jobs and upward mobility for more people. Competition should be encouraged, and government intervention and regulation should be limited.
Conservatives see this as the key to a robust economy. Liberals see it as a wart on the behind of humanity, likely because it reduces the need for government control.
7. Human Dignity
Because all men are created equal and in the image of God, every human life has dignity and value, and every person should be measured only by the content of their character. A just government protects life (regardless of where it lives - this includes the unborn), honors marriage and family as the primary institutions of a healthy society, and embraces the vital cultural influences of religion and morality. Government handouts to able-bodied people does not provide human dignity. Providing human dignity means teaching them the virtue of hard work as a pathway out of poverty and limiting public assistance programs to those unable to do this entirely on their own.
Liberals took God out of their platform and cheered themselves for doing so, kill babies, trashed the institution of marriage, and cheer and celebrate styles of living that are abhorrent to the concepts of religion and morality.
|
|
| Q |
In a few sentences, why is your political philosophy, or why are your political answers, best for America?
|
| A |
My political philosophy pretty much follows our founding fathers, with a couple adjustments thrown in.
Small government; individual freedom over state-run everything; states govern citizens, feds govern states; qualification tests for those running for public office (cognitive ability, loyalty to America, adherence to America’s founding principles, etc.); term limits for all public offices; religious freedom; slow, well-thought-out change rather than knee-jerk acceptance of every idea or ideology.
EDIT
I was just reminded that I forgot to add the WHY to my answer.
Because our founders proved that this philosophy would build a strong and desirable place to live for anyone with dreams of independence. America was started by a ragtag bunch of farmers, dreamers and other ordinary people and built into the strongest nation on the planet, a place where anyone could build a life from nothing if they worked hard enough, a place that was so desirable that people would die in boats and boxcars just to get here.
|
|
| Q |
What joke best illustrates the difference between Democrats and Republicans?
|
| A |
A Republican and a Democrat decided to each form a team and have an automobile competition. Each team will design and build their own car and equip it, after which there will be a race between the two cars. The goal is to see whose methods will result in the best and fastest car. A cash prize is offered by a group of sponsors, the winning team getting the entire prize.
The Republicans each contributed funds to their project, those contributing more being assigned a bigger slice of the cash prize if they won. They then elected a leadership team based on management skills. Their leadership team determined who was the best at each skill that was required and assiged members accordingly, regardless of race, religious affiliation or background. Once the car was built they chose a driver and set up a pit crew, again assigning the most skilled in each role.
The Democrats decided that everyone should get the same amount of the cash prize if they won, no matter what each had contributed (so nobody's feelings would get hurt), so everyone contributed only an amount that the least wealthy could also afford, including the most wealthy - who would have contributed more, but why should they? They then elected a leadership team based on who had the nicest smile and made the most promises. Their leadership team sidelined religious people and grouped the rest by race and gender and assigned people to jobs based on using equal numbers from each group, including the driver and the pit crew. Skill level was not a factor.
While the Republicans went to work, the liberals formed a union and went on strike. By the time the Republicans had built their car and tested their engine, the Democrats hadn't even finished designing the body yet. The Democrats would not adjust job assignments, even if a more skilled person was identified, because this would effect 'equality'. When the race started, the Republicans had a working car and skilled crew. The Democrats didn't have an engine, so they had to push their car. Those on government assistance rode in the car and those who paid taxes pushed.
The Republicans won, attributing their success to the entire team. The Democrats lost, blaming their failure on the Republican team.
|
|
| Q |
What is the conservative view on tolerance, acceptance, open-mindedness, and love?
|
| A |
Most conservatives believe in all of those. But most conservatives are also intelligent enough to know that operating with no filters can be dangerous, even deadly under the right circumstances.
Accepting every idea that comes down the pike is not tolerance. It’s gullibility. Tolerance is being able to be friends with someone, even love them, even if you disagree with them on some level.
For example, person A says to person B: “We disagree on that, but I still like you”. Person B says to person A: “Unless you agree with everything I believe not only can we not be friends but I’ll disown you, try to get you fired, and harass you until you do agree with me.”
Now, which of these is more tolerant? And which is more common of liberals and which is more common of conservatives?
Having an open mind is good, again while using good judgement. Having a vacant one? - not so much. There is an old saying that goes “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything”. Wise words.
Finally, encouraging someone to do whatever they feel like, regardless of its effect on them or anyone else, is not love. Love is caring about someone long term and trying to steer them down a non-destructive path if possible.
Exhibiting any of these sometimes requires taking a stand. I personally would rather be chastised for trying to lift someone up spiritually than to be praised for patting someone approvingly on the back as they spiral down into oblivion.
|
|
| Q |
What is the saying "Republicans believe in pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Democrats believe a helping hand is better" referring to?
|
| A |
Actually, a combination of those is probably best, but with emphasis on 'bootstraps'.
Most dictionaries define "pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps" as meaning "To begin an enterprise or recover from a setback without any outside help; to succeed only by one's own efforts or abilities".
Republicans believe you shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY go for a handout, but should put whatever effort you are capable of into your goals. Assistance, especially assistance coming from money FORCED from the hands of hard-working people, should be used only as needed beyond that.
Democrats believe that the government is our mama, that people are OWED support by the government (which comes from those who work for a living - the government earning NOTHING on its own), and that everyone is ENTITLED to free everything from the government (without actually explaining where the money required to support this is going to come from).
|
|
| Q |
Why are conservatives so opposed to change?
|
| A |
Let’s say someone tells you that you must move out of your house into a cardboard box under a bridge so that someone else can use your house. If I then asked you why you are so opposed to change, how would you answer?
Obviously, the answer depends on the nature of the change. Conservatives are not opposed to change per se, but they do believe that not all change is good. Liberals, on the other hand, have no filter and tend to believe all change is good, regardless of its consequences.
|
|
| Q |
Are Republicans actually opposed to redistributing wealth?
|
| A |
You can only 'redistribute' something that has already been 'distributed' at least once already. Money based on a person's labor has not been 'distributed', it has been 'earned'. Even money that is inherited has been earned by someone. Most people with children want to leave something for them after they are gone, and this is their right.
Money that has been 'earned' should NEVER be taken forcibly and given to someone who could work but doesn’t want to. Public assistance is good only as far as it is used to supplement a person's income to the extent they need to survive. Only in the case of 100% disability should it be either permanent or a person's total income. THAT is what Republicans are for.
Consider also that it is the owners of businesses (representing the majority of rich people) that provide not only the goods and services that make everyone’s life better, but also employment to most working people. Rich people should never feel bad about spending their money. This is almost an obligation on their part because it not only means the purchase of goods and services from others but also putting money back into the economy where it can work for everybody.
Those with the ability, guts, and willingness to risk what they have to increase their wealth, and succeed, benefitting all of humanity in the process, are exactly who should have the world’s wealth. Because they can make that wealth work for everyone’s benefit. Someone not capable of doing this should NOT have wealth, because it will just be wasted. Consider many who have won the lottery over the years. Many of these folks just lose it within a year or two.
In other words, taking money from people capable of making it work productively and just literally giving it away is a big mistake. Nothing of any consequence gets built under those conditions.
So unless you plan to sell your house and 'distribute' the proceeds to people sitting on their sofas watching TV you have no right to require anyone else to give up their hard-earned money either.
The transfer of money from one person to another should ALWAYS be voluntary. No exceptions.
|
|
| Q |
In what ways are you conservative?
|
| A |
I’m conservative in almost every way.
I believe the only rights we have are the right to life, the right to freedom to make our own decisions, and the right to pursue our dreams. Everything else is a privilege and/or is earned. For example, I don’t have a right to free education, to free health care, to free food, or to free housing. I must earn those things or be given them VOLUNTARILY by someone else. I should NEVER be expected to gain any of these on the backs (or taxes) of other human beings.
I believe that there is something greater than us, in my case the God of the Bible, and that we will have to answer to Him at the end of this physical part of our life journey. I believe that physical death is not the end of life but only the beginning. I believe that those who accept Jesus will be reunited with their physically transformed and perfected bodies and have access to the entire universe and beyond for all of eternity.
I believe the government should not micro-manage its citizens. In the USA, the federal government should represent each state equally and all governing of citizens should be at state level, and I believe that the Electoral College was a stroke of genius by our founders to ensure that this would happen. Elected officials should have term limits (and then return to the job they had before they were elected - no career politicians), cognitive tests should be given to all candidates for office that are 70 or older, and there should be a better-defined process for citizens to recall elected officials who are not performing as they promised during their election campaign.
I believe that elected officials should get a stipend, not a CEO’s salary. They should not be able to vote themselves a raise, they should have no special insurance or pension plan (at least not paid out of our taxes), and they should have to follow whatever rules they pass for the rest of us.
I believe that since taxes are taken from citizens forcibly, under penalty of fines and/or imprisonment, that tax money should not be used for controversial purposes. NOBODY should be forced to pay for something that they abhor. Separate funds could be set up that are contributed to VOLUNTARILY by people supporting the causes those funds represent.
I believe that social security is not public assistance, but essentially retirement insurance paid for by taxpaying citizens and paid out based on what was paid in and the age of the recipient when first drawing from it.
I believe that schools should educate students and not indoctrinate them into some ideology. I believe that parents, even in public schools, have the right to know what their children are being taught and to have a say in all non-scholastic materials presented in the classroom. I believe that government funds for education should follow the student and not automatically be given to the local public school even if the student is home schooled or goes to a private school. And I believe that putting up a sign that reads ‘Gun-Free Zone’ at a school is an invitation for some maniac to shoot up the place.
I believe that everyone with at least 1 'y' chromosome is male and everybody else is female. I believe that if you were born with a male body that you should compete in sports only with other people who were born with a male body, regardless of what gender you believe yourself to be today. I believe that the body you were born with should also determine which facilities (locker rooms, public restrooms, etc.) you are allowed to use. Given that some stores and other locations are building up to as many as 8 unisex bathrooms (don’t laugh, I shop at one from time to time) to accommodate this ridiculousness, you could just build 3: Men, Women, and Other. Or 4: Men, Women, Family and Other. After all, many locations already have Men, Women, and Family.
I believe that a business should be allowed to decline the creating of something that is contrary to their religious beliefs without fear of losing their business for doing so. Notice I’m talking about declining THINGS here, not PEOPLE.
I believe that people should stop expecting the government (and by extension, their fellow citizens) to be their mama and should learn to take care of themselves. Public assistance and welfare programs are important, and there will be those who need them to survive, but this aid should require effort on the part of the recipient of that aid to whatever degree is possible for that recipient. It should NOT replace all efforts to hold a job in cases where the recipient is capable of working. I believe that public funds should not be increased for someone who has a child out of wedlock. Too many young ladies have more kids just for the additional money and then ignore the kids while spending the money on clothes, or a new smartphone, or whatever, for themselves. I’ve seen this for myself, so don’t say it doesn’t happen. Not sure what the solution should be, but rewarding someone for having more kids when they don’t take care of the ones they have just seems crazy to me.
I believe in welcoming people coming here to live or even to escape an untenable situation (after all, this is largely how America was built), but I also believe that this does not mean just walking across the border to avoid the proper procedures for immigration. Refugees looking for asylum should be cared for, but in an orderly manner. Just flooding the border is not good for either the country being entered or for the refugee. How can they be properly cared for this way? Also, if you cross one border in the prescribed manner you are a refugee. Trying to bypass the procedures in place for immigration to a country, or crossing additional borders, makes you an invader.
I believe that no gun on its own can hurt anyone, that guns are not the problem but rather the mentality of those few who misuse them. I believe that a person should be allowed to protect him/herself and their loved ones by any means necessary, even to (gasp!) owning a gun.
I believe attorneys should be held accountable for cases they file where it is determined that the case should never have been filed in the first place. Enough of these fishing expeditions for big settlements.
I believe that speech is speech and actions are actions. Burning the American flag in public is not ‘free speech’. It is an action by someone who should from that point on not receive anything from this country or its taxpayers. It seems contradictory to me that while some folks are risking their lives to get here there are others claiming we are a horrible place to live.
These views are what make me a conservative, but I also believe I am not the only one who holds them.
|
|
| Q |
What are the core beliefs of fascism? How does it differ from other ideologies like conservatism or liberalism?
|
| A |
Fascism generally follows these tenets:
- A dictatorial leader
- Centralized autocracy
- Forcible suppression of opposition
- Belief in a natural social hierarchy
- Government interests ALWAYS trump individual interests
- Strong regimentation of society and the economy
- Militarism focusing inward as much as outward
It shares nothing with conservatism.
Conservatism wants…
- Small government
- Citizens governed at state level, not federal, much as if we were 50 separate countries
- Freedom of speech, even if we disagree
- EVERYONE should have the opportunity to excel, regardless of race or background, and without government interference
- Individual interests generally trump government interests with few exceptions, one exception being in the case of national security
- Free markets benefit everyone
- A strong military is good (peace through strength), but the military is to protect the citizens not control them
In comparison, liberalism embraces many of the fascist tenets:
- They push for citizens to become more and more dependent on the government
- They want to abolish the Electoral College, which would remove control from the states, detract from the states’ ability to govern their own people, and move control of citizens to the federal government
- Liberals have proposed a ‘disinformation board’, and it has been shown that they have been policing some of the largest social media platforms to remove dissenting opinions
- Liberals discourage the desire to excel by trying to force ‘equality’ regardless of ability instead of encouraging ALL people to excel by hard work and perseverance (IE: They LOVE playing the race card)
- Liberals are more focused on specific groups rather than the individual, believing individuals should submit to government mandate without question
- Liberals (at least today’s liberals) tend to dislike capitalism and prefer something closer to socialism with whatever fascism is required to enforce it
- Liberals don’t typically like the military much, but so far nobody (at least that I know of) has proposed deliberately using the military to control law-abiding citizens.
|
|
| Q |
What is the difference between liberal democracy and western democracy?
|
| A |
The difference is not so much between 'liberal' and 'western'. Even a comparison between a 'liberal' democracy and a 'conservative' democracy would have a more clear answer. Because you used 'western' as a point of comparison I see it as more like the diffence between a 'pure' democracy and a democracy managed under a 'constitutional republic'.
Let’s first define democracy.
Description
A democracy is government by the people, representation is by free elections, and candidates for representation can be any citizen meeting the requirements established for that position. The people are the source of political authority.
Implementation
Democracy can be implemented in more than one way. If the entire body of citizens to be represented is a single group of people, with no other government entities, then a pure democracy can work. If the citizenry is separated into groups, each with its own governing sub-entity, then wrapping those sub-entities in a constitutional republic at top level protects the rights of both the governing sub-entities and the individual citizen. This allows for a very unevenly-distributed citizenry to have equal access and control at even the highest levels of representation.
For the rest of this, I’m going to consider 'western democracy' as referring to 'American democracy'. While America has democracy at state level, it is wrapped in a 'constitutional republic' at federal level.
American Governance
In America, we have governing entities at state level - 50 separate governments with 50 different legislative bodies, 50 different 'chief executives' (the governor is not directly subordinate to the federal authorities but is the political and ceremonial head of the state), and 50 different highest courts (not all states call theirs a ‘Supreme Court’).
In 27 states, the legislature is simply called the 'Legislature' or 'State Legislature'. In 19 states the legislature is called the 'General Assembly'. In Massachusetts and New Hampshire it is called the 'General Court', and in North Dakota and Oregon it is the 'Legislative Assembly'.
Every state except Nebraska has a bicameral (two separate chambers) legislature, an upper chamber and a lower chamber. The upper chamber is smaller and is the Senate, the lower chamber is larger and is sometimes called the House of Representatives (41 states), sometimes the Assembly (5 states), and sometimes the House of Delegates (3 states). Nebraska is unicameral, with only one chamber, called the Nebraska Legislature with its members called state senators.
You can see here the variation between states regarding how they are governed. Each state is truly a separate entity with separate governing bodies and each having their own 'head of state' and unique way of governing their people. Add to this the fact that each state has its own unique needs, economy, and contributions to America, and wildly differing populations, and you have something very much like 50 separate countries under one roof.
This is why American democracy is wrapped in our Constitutional Republic, why each state has only 2 senators at federal level, and why we have the Electoral College. Each state MUST have equal representation at federal level. Otherwise, larger states would essentially run the entire country. Those citizens living in the smaller states could be stampeded by those citizens in the larger states.
Consider 50 separate entities, each unique in a number of ways, not only managing their own individual affairs but also working together with common goals, every state so attractive to the rest of the world that people would risk their lives to get to ANY of the 50 states, seeing ANY of them as a haven compared to what they were leaving.
THIS is what makes America great - or used to. Not so sure about the future with so many trying to tear this all down.
|
|
| Q |
What is the conservative party's stance on voting rights in the United States of America?
|
| A |
True conservatives believe that if you are a legal citizen of voting age, and can verify your residency, you should vote. Once. Period.
It’s really that simple.
|
|
Covid
|
