Month: October 2016

Should conservatives stay in the GOP or should they go?

A song from the Clash has been echoing in my head since Donald Trump won the Indiana Republican Primary six months ago and effectively seized my party's nomination for president: Should I stay or should I go? I joined the Grand Old Party, as it's affectionately known, shortly after graduating high school and have voted a straight ticket since I was 20-years old. Like many of my fellow conservatives, I've given the GOP both time and money, and have faithfully advocated for its candidates and argued against the opposition whenever and wherever possible. Conservatives like me have been loyal members of the Republican Party for decades, but the fruits of that loyalty have been a mixed bag. We've only managed to slow, not halt, the growth of the insatiable Leviathan, and we've barely managed to prevent the Democrats from achieving their desired levels of taxation, regulation, and social control. We've gotten a couple of Supreme Court picks at least partially right, though, and seem to be doing well on the state and local level. That's a roundabout way saying things could be worse. Meanwhile, our opposition, and even some moderates within our party, rush to be among the first to sanction the latest entrant into what's become a parade of big government schemes and countercultural extremes, regardless of their unknown impact on a free, healthy, and prosperous society. Those who speak against the wisdom of all this radical, unchecked, unproven, and oftentimes undemocratic change are called ignorant, uncaring, bigots, racists,…

Millions of unborn children could die under a Clinton-picked Supreme Court

Prolife voters in both parties should seriously reflect upon the following number before voting – or not voting – in the presidential election next month. 14,395,482. If Hillary Clinton wins, that's approximately how many unborn children could become victims of abortion before conservatives have another opportunity in the mid 2030s to tilt the balance of the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. How so? It's all a matter of the court's current composition, existing and potential vacancies, average tenures, and their individual judicial philosophies. The names, dates, and numbers can get a little messy, so bear with me for a moment. The first thing you need to know is the average tenure of a justice nowadays is about 26-years.The second is that the Centers for Disease Control reports that an average of 799,749 abortions occurred annually in the United States from 2002-2012. A partial survey from the Associated Press showed a 12-percent drop in abortions from 2010-2014, but it's uncertain if that downward trend will continue. And the third is the ever-changing membership of the nine-member court. Based on their past votes and written opinions, five of the current justices comprise a solid prochoice voting bloc: Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Three of the nine justices on the court are likely prolife: Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. The winner of next…

Hillary Clinton’s ‘dream’ is a dystopian nightmare

Your local public library's fiction shelves are likely stocked with many dystopian novels whose settings include a massive North American super-state comprised of the remnants of what use to be the United States, Canada, Mexico, and other nations. Authors frequently use this common setting as a character of sorts, something like a giant bureaucratic monster who gobbles up the boundaries, culture, and even history of once sovereign nations. Suzanne Collins (a graduate of the Alabama School of Fine Arts, by the way) called the nation "Panem" in her bestselling Hunger Games series. The late David Foster Wallace dubbed the continental union the "Organization of North American Nations" in his Infinite Jest. It was known as "Oceania" in George Orwell's landmark novel 1984, although he expanded its territory a bit. And the current Democratic nominee for President of the United States calls this hemispheric super-state her "dream." Wait ... what? Indeed. While our nation was preoccupied with the vulgar things some reprehensible men say when they think nobody is listening, Wikileaks released the secret transcripts of a speech Hillary Clinton delivered to a bunch of Brazilian bankers a few years ago when she described this rather dystopian vision. "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere," Clinton told the bankers. A hemisphere without borders? Such talk use to…

Win or lose, Trump must not be linked to conservatism

During the modern conservative movement's delicate beginnings – when a tactical blunder could have had massive strategic implications – writer William F. Buckley drummed the heresies of Objectivism and Bircherism from our movement's ranks. Disciples of Ayn Rand and Robert Welch were effectively banished to the margins and Americans began to slowly associate our political philosophy – and to an extent the Republican Party – with the principles of limited government, individual rights, free markets and a strong national defense. Americans liked those ideas, and the energetic advocacy of conservatism led to the largest landslide in modern electoral history (every state went red in 1984, except Minnesota), while the consistent application of conservatism led to the largest expansion of prosperity and freedom in history. There's no question about it: conservatism wins when it's on the ballot, and is effective when it's in office. Too bad it isn't tried very often. True, we may have lost a few races since the Reagan era, and some of us feel that we're in the political wilderness, but we're in real danger of losing our entire movement if the stink and stain of Trumpism isn't thoroughly washed from our hands, regardless of what happens in November. Because if Trump wins, the conservative brand will be further weakened, and if he loses, the conservative brand will be further weakened. Either way, to modify the maritime saying; the ship doesn't need to go down with its captain. So can we cut him loose? Buckley has been…