Category Archives: Conservatism

Republicans I Can Admire

     Some members of the Republican National Committee have signed a resolution that attacks the bailouts of major industries.  The resolution rightly calls the use of bailouts and the nationalizing of industries socialism, or at least another step toward it.  I’m glad.

     I would like to see the Republican Party return to a platform of fiscal conservatism and support of free enterprise.  The idea that the bailouts were undesirable but necessary is like saying that a person should max out his credit cards to get cash for playing craps in the hopes of raising money to pay off a hospital bill.  It might be a huge temptation, but it’s a very bad idea.

     May the resolution pass!  May the Republican Party return to the principles that made it dominant in the 1980′s!

Conservatives vs Liberals on Race

     There has been an interesting discussion at World Magazine Blog on the song “Barack the Magic Negro.”  I can’t believe how stupid people can be.  The song is a parody of a column written by a liberal black man.  Nevertheless, people have said that the satirical song is racist.  Never mind that it was the liberal black man, David Ehrenstein, who called Barack Obama a “Magic Negro.”

     (It reminds me of the man who was offended by the word niggardly and the man who was offended by the phrase black hole.  I think somebody could write a song that said, “Don’t call people N—-r, because it’s not a nice name,” and people would object to it as racist because it contained the N-word.)

     It was a year-and-a-half before the election when Ehrenstein published the original column in the Los Angeles Times.  Hillary Clinton was considered a shoo-in.  I think that Al Sharpton might still have been in the running, and it is an imitation of his voice that is used in the song.  Politically speaking, Barack Obama was his (and Jesse Jackson’s) worst nightmare.  At that time it was acceptable for certain African Americans to question Obama’s blackness, but once he had locked up the nomination he became the icon that epitomized all the longings and hopes that African Americans had held for centuries.  Odd, no?

     I think that the reaction to the song reveals a lot of things that are mostly under the surface of our country’s psyche.  For liberals, life is encapsulated in words and symbols.  Because the song had the word “negro” in it, it was taken immediately as racist.  Never mind that the word is still part of the name of the United Negro College Fund.  Forget the fact that it was a black liberal who called Obama that.  Although it was okay to question Obama’s blackness in 2007 (after all he was raised by an Indonesian stepfather and a white American mother), he eventually became the ultimate and perfect symbol of African American culture, much to the chagrin of Jesse Jackson.  (I’m sure you remember that Jackson wanted to castrate Obama, and then he cried during his acceptance speech.  Words and symbols, words and symbols).

     In the meantime, conservatives were asking about each of the nominees, Clinton and Obama included:  Is this person qualified?  Are his stated positions good for our country?  Does his or her voting record show consistency and good judgment?  They were discounting race and sex as reasons for voting for a candidate.  They were making fun of people who either portrayed Obama as “The Magic Negro” or as a black secular Messiah.  Nobody–white, black, Asian, or Latino–should be portrayed in such absolute or burdensome terms.

     So who are the real racists?  In a column on this same topic, Larry Elder points out that the Democratic Party was the party of anti-black bigots while the Republican Party was supporting civil rights and desegregation.  He points out that the Republican Party platform would help black people, especially school choice and privatized retirement funds. 

     I would also like to point out that African Americans mostly oppose abortion and same-sex marriage, yet the Democratic Party is strongly in favor of those things.  Although they want law enforcement done in a just manner, they want their neighborhoods freed of drugs and violence.

     Why then do African Americans remain loyal to the Democratic Party?  Despite all evidence to the contrary, I think many of them are convinced that Republicans are mostly white bigots.  As Larry Elder points out, they have been fed that line over and over.  It’s no wonder that many people would believe it.  I agree with Elder that Republicans need to be more proactive in showing how their platform is more in line with their core values and more beneficial to them in the long run.  

     So who are the real racists?  Is it the black man who called Barack Obama a “Magic Negro” and said that white people would vote for him only out of guilt and only because he was perceived as “safe”?  Or is it the white people who can boldly ridicule that nonsense because they truly judge people on their merits and not on their skin color?

What’s Conservative About It?

     John McKinnon in the Wall Street Journal wrote an article called “Rescue Tests Bush’s Conservative Legacy.”

     My first reaction was:  Conservative?  What the. . .!   (No, I didn’t say a bad word.)

     The article goes on to point out that President Bush has been far from conservative.

     Dan Mitchell is quoted as mentioning that everything but the temporary tax breaks has been a “step toward staistm.”  It has.

     “Some lawmakers” are quoted as referring to the financial rescue as socialism.  It is.

     Grover Norquist is quoted as talking about President Bush’s “abandonment of conservative principles.”  Yes, he has abandoned them.

     So, please, my liberal friends, do not equate President Bush’s semi-conservative (mostly liberal) policies and procedures with true conservatism.  I might end up saying the word I omitted above.  And it takes a LOT to get me to say such things.

Tell Me It’s Not Socialism

     So are we now living in North Korea or Venezuela or some African dictatorship?  I read in horror that the national government is going to “rescue” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Some have used the word takeover, even.

     When a government controls some of the biggest investment and lending organizations in the country, what is that but socialism?  Call it progressive if you want, or call it liberal, but it is practically the definition of socialism.

     At least this article makes it clear that taxpayers are really the ones who are providing the money to bail out these mismanaged companies.  Honest, decent working people who did not choose to provide risky loans to people who could not pay them back will be  forced to pay for those mistakes.  It is a clear case of redistribution of capital and of the socialist principle that we all share equally in each other’s success or failure.  No thanks.

     Our controlled economy has not worked very well.  From the time of our Founding, America has prospered and grown economically.  But as it has done so, those in high office have gotten greedy.  In the name of “helping” people they have gradually increased taxes, created a gargantuan bureaucracy, and stifled economic growth and the formation of new businesses.  Couldn’t we at least try a free market system?

     If you look at the potential for growth that our country has had since the beginning, can you even imagine where we would be today if the government had let the economy grow unhindered?  It’s too bad that it is an unrealized dream.


     Some people think it is unfair that there are wealthy people and poor people.  They are using the word fair the way children do.

     Little Johnny thinks it is unfair that little Freddy has a bigger and better bicycle than he does.  He whines, “That’s not fair!”  If his mother has any moral sense, she answers, “Life isn’t fair!”  Johnny pouts but grows up to realize that he doesn’t have some birthright to have everything he ever wishes for. 

     Assuming that little Freddy’s parents bought him the bicycle with honestly earned money, there is nothing whatsoever unfair about Freddy’s having a better bike than Johnny has.  Johnny doesn’t like it.  In fact, he’s envious.  But there is nothing actually unfair about it.

     It is not the responsibility of Johnny’s parents (or his Uncle Sam) to take Freddy’s bike away and give it to Johnny so that he will feel better.  In the real world we call that theft. 

     It is not the duty of Freddy’s parents to make sure every child in the neighborhood has everything that Freddy has.  They are only obligated to provide for their own children.

     Fair doesn’t mean “getting everything I want” or “having exactly what everyone has.”  It really means that everyone’s rights are respected.  Everyone has equal opportunity to accumulate their own wealth–to get their own bicycle.

     That’s what Johnny’s parents should do.  They should teach him how to work and to save up his money to buy the things that he wants.  He can sell his bike and combine the proceeds with what he earns by working to buy a bigger, better bicycle.  Earning his own money and buying the bike for himself is practically the definition of fair.

Why I Listen to Black Conservatives

There are several reasons that I listen to black conservatives.


     I would not want to listen exclusively to Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton, or Jeremiah Wright.  While they have important things to say, they have very slanted views.  I would like to hear from Thomas Sowell, Ken Hamblin, LaShawn Barber and Walter E. Williams to get a view from the other end of the political spectrum.  For a long time, the media fed us only the views of liberal blacks, but thankfully the new media have provided platforms for conservative blacks to be heard. Continue reading

Moderation in All Things?

     Moderation has long been thought a positive approach to many things in life, but it is only good in certain aspects of life.  I think that we all agree that moderation should not be practiced in literally all things.

     When it comes to outward behavior that is not, in and of itself, immoral, moderation is usually the best policy.  We have to eat to live, but the Bible classifies gluttony as a sin.  I don’t find a total prohibition of drinking alcohol in the Bible, but there is a prohibition against getting drunk. 

     When it comes to moral or immoral behavior, however, moderation is a bad thing.  One should not steal moderately or murder moderately; one should simply not do either of those things at all.  One should not love one’s family moderately or respect the rights of other people moderately; one should do those things as freely and fully as possible.

     People claim that you can be moderate on the question of abortion.  Some of them say that they want to reduce the number of abortions while still allowing women the supposed right to choose.  That’s a strange position.  Why should you want to reduce the number of abortions, unless you realize that abortion is bad?  And if you realize that abortion is bad, then why don’t you want to eliminate the practice altogether?

     In what other arena do we say that something is wrong but should still be legal?  Do you hear anyone saying that we should reduce the number of murders or thefts but still allow people the right to choose to murder or to steal?  Do you hear people saying that they are “personally against” rape or fraud but support the rights of people to commit those acts if they so choose?

     If you want a moderate position on abortion, consider the approach that most conservatives take.  They are willing to exempt rape and incest victims, if it would mean that abortions for convenience would be banned.  Some are willing to accept, temporarily at least, abortions in the first trimester, if it would mean that partial-birth abortion and other late-term abortions would be banned.  Over and over, conservatives have been willing to accept a reduction in the number of abortions, but liberals insist on allowing women to choose to abort their babies for any reason at any time in their pregnancy.  If you challenge that assertion, tell me what legislation Democrats, as a group, have favored that would actually reduce the number of abortions, as many of them have said they want to do?

     Is the “liberal” position on abortion a moderate approach?  No, it is an extreme approach–and an extremely wrong one.

     Nobody has the right to do what is wrong.

Who Is Your Favorite Black Conservative?

      Please vote for your favorite among this list of black conservatives.  I have selected twenty people that I like and have listed them in alphabetical order.  I will announce my own favorite after others have voiced their opinion.  Feel free to select somebody not on the list if you like.

  1. La Shawn Barber, columnist and blogger
  2. Janice Rogers Brown, U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge
  3. Herman Cain, former chairman and CEO of Godfather’s Pizza
  4. Stephen L. Carter, professor at Yale Law School and Christianity Today columnist
  5. Larry Elder, the “Sage from South Central”
  6. Ezola B. Foster, former V. P. canddiate for the Reform Party
  7. Ken Hamblin, the “Black Avenger”
  8. Roy Innis, chairman of the Congress of Racial Equality
  9. Kay Coles James, member of the NASA advisory council
  10. Alan Keyes, former U.N. Ambassador
  11. Alveda King, Senior Fellow at the Alexis de Tocqueville Institute
  12. Angela McGlowan, former Miss D. C., USA and political analyst
  13. Star Parker, founder and president of the Coalition on Urban Renewel and Education
  14. Condoleeza Rice, U.S. Secretary of State
  15. Thomas Sowell, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute
  16. Shelby Steele, fellow at the Hoover Institute
  17. Clarence Thomas, U. S. Supreme Court Justice
  18. J. C. Watts, former Congressional Representative from Oklahoma
  19. Armstrong Williams, businessman and writer
  20. Walter E. Williams, professor at George Mason University

     Who’s your favorite?

Race and Gender in Politics

     I would like to believe that we have gotten beyond race and gender in our political discourse and our political activities.  I have watched the Democratic nomination process with a lot of amusement.  What is a liberal party to do when its two main choices are a white woman and a black man?  If they support the black man, then they must be sexist.  If they support the white woman, then they must be racist.  At least that’s what they say about Republicans whenever they support a white man–that they are both racist and sexist.

     They really need a black female candidate.  And it would be all the better if she were an acknowledged lesbian.

     Why can’t we just seek the best possible person to be President of the United States?  For me that person is Alan Keyes, a black man.  Some people have tried to draft Condoleeza Rice, a black woman.  I think she would make a fantastic President, although I’m not sure her I would like her platform completely.  What’s significant about my saying that I would support these two people as President, is that I am a very staunch Conservative (or Libertarian, according to “The Shortest Political Quiz in the World.”  I’m one of those white guys who supposedly would never vote for either a black person or a woman.  Yet, here I am saying in all sincerity that our black, female, unmarried Secretary of State would make a terrific president.

     But so would Fred Thompson, and he’s as white as white could be, and he’s also all man, as his romantic history shows.  Does the fact that I would support Mr. Thompson as President mean that I’m racist and sexist?  No, particulary in light of what I wrote above.

     So why are Obama backers accusing Clinton supporters of being racist?  And why are Clinton backers accusing Obama supporters of being sexist?  And where’s the unity and tolerance in that?

For further reading:

Race, Gender Permeate Presidential Race” by Bonnie Erbe

Obama, Clinton, Misogyny, Racism” by Doug Feaver

Women Supporters Blame Clinton’s Imminent Defeat on Sexism” by Tim Harper

In ’08, Place, As Well As Race, Is a Divide” by Chuck Raasch

What Is an Evangelical?

     Evangelicals figure prominently in the news, especially during an election year, but just what is an Evangelical?  I consider myself one, but unfortunately I cannot give you a simple, univerally accepted definition of the term.  The Religious Tolerance website has an excellent page that deals with the difficulty of defining it.  When I apply the term to myself, here’s what I mean:

     1.  I am Protestant rather than Catholic.

     2.  I do not belong to a mainline denomination.

     3  I am a conservative or traditionalist in my theological views rather than a liberal or modernist.

     4  I don’t identify myself as a Fundamentalist, although I subscribe to the so-called fundamentals.

Here’s what I want people to know about me as an Evangelical:

  • I don’t hate anyone.
  • I am just an ordinary family man and nice guy.
  • I don’t consider myself better than anyone else.
  • I care about people in need and help them with both time and money. 
  • I don’t want to force my views on anyone. 
  • I like science and want it taught well.
  • I don’t want a theocracy.
  • I don’t like Rush Limbaugh very much.
  • I like Ann Coulter but think she’s a bit naughty sometimes.
  • I haven’t blown up any abortion clinics.
  • I am pretty well educated and often read books with polysyllabic words.
  • I have never burned a cross on anyone’s lawn.
  • I don’t want to take away anyone’s right to free speech.
  • I want other people to respect my right to free speech.
  • I have never beaten up a homosexual.
  • I try to debate people civilly, although I’m sometimes too sarcastic.
  • I’m willing to have my opinions challenged and have been known to change them.