Further Updating

As an avid reader of webcomics, I know the frustration and disappointment that can accompany a lack of updates.  So when I give my latest excuse, know that I sympathize with those of who are awaiting the Second Amendment post.

I won't have internet in my house until Monday, and while I do have an Air Card that allows me to do basic surfing, it makes for difficult and slow multi-page research.  Most importantly, I haven't had the chance to sit down with one of my most knowledgeable informants on Second Amendment and general American gun law.  They have stated that they are more than happy to be interviewed, but I haven't had the time lately with my work schedule.

Seeing as this topic is a request, I want to take extra time and caution with this upcoming blog, just as I did with the Health Care topic.  So, I will do my utmost to bring the entry next Sunday.  I thank all of you for your patience and support, and I apologize for not sticking to my weekly schedule.

-Chris

Preview

Hey everyone,

Due to my lack of internet, I won't be able to post this week.  However, from this phone I can afford you a small preview.  The topic will be on the second amendment.  So arm your perspectives and polish your views for this very touchy subject.

Update 3-11-2012

Alienation Through Ideology

This week I will approach a topic that has been wearing on me for quite some time.  That topic is, as the title suggests, ideology.  In particular, the ideology of the "True Conservative".  I will make the note now that I will not be analysing "True Liberalism" for the following reasons:

1. I am not aware of any party or entity that espouses themselves as true liberals or think it necessary to broadcast it to the world.

2. There aren't any candidates, including Obama, that have asserted themselves as true liberals in reaction to "True Conservatives".

3. The infighting caused by the implication of a "True Conservative" candidate is not seen anywhere else other than the Republican Party at this moment in time.

Thus, there is no real reason for me speak on the imaginary counterpart of the "True Conservative".  If such an opportunity and situation presents itself, I would be happy to make a follow-up post.

To begin, I will attempt to define what a "True Conservative" candidate is.  According to the Tea Party Patriots website, this ultra-conservative grass roots entity wants fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free market economics.  At the outset, these proponents of conservatism don't appear very extreme.  However, things get more muddled as the associated GOP candidates (Romney, Gingrich, Paul, and Santorum) start asserting themselves as the best and "True Conservative" to take down Obama.  The goal of getting Obama out of office is another goal of the Tea Party, although sometimes unofficial.  It isn't stated in the goals, but can be seen all over the blog posts and news updates that the Tea Party hosts.  It also is a favourite one-liner you hear all too often from the TV debates.

While a true conservative's basis may lie in fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free market, so much other ideological fervour is attracted to the conservative message.  Positions against gay-marriage, allowing more prayer in schools, disgust at the elimination of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", contraception and abortion, and other minutia have become commonplace.  Perhaps it is because the three Tea Party goals are, in fact, umbrella terms that are all too magnetic for right-wing sensibilities.  Perhaps it is because the GOP attracts very right-wing candidates.  Whatever the reason, the Republican candidate, and the contest for who can be a "True Conservative", has become overloaded with baggage that has alienated many a moderate voter.

I've already spoken on how I dislike how the political climate is ruled by two parties and others can't manage the funding for equal representation.  This is another example of how damaging extremism can be.  Before writing this post, a registered-Republican voter was speaking to me on how she can't recognize the Republican party.  When she joined up originally, there was less talk about legislating morality, less posturing about prayer in schools, and more sensible talk about the economy.  Nowadays, she can't identify with any of the candidates because of how extreme they all are and how extreme one has to be to be a true Republican.

Whatever happened to being fiscally conservative yet having liberal views on social issues at the same time?  How and why is that a crime?  It is my understanding that many people sit in that position and don't know what to do.  They could care less about gay marriage, or may even support it, but they want less taxes.  They are Christian but agree that school-supported prayer is a bad thing that infringes on the rights of different religions and those without religion.  The emerging attitudes towards church and state, economy and environment, and a great deal of other issues are changing.  People no longer fit into the extreme mould the GOP has become, nor do they fully support the Democratic party.  Yet, all they are given are those two candidates and some fringe contestants who can't get a commercial on the air because of how political funding works in this country.

My final point is about how the Republican candidates have handled themselves in light of this "True Conservative" pissing contest.  Each candidate, including some of those who have dropped out, claim to be the only true conservative and list attacks against their opponents to disqualify them.  This infighting, which only makes each of them look less appealing, turns to excuse-making.  Each candidate has responded to attacks by either denying the allegation, or spinning to sound like it wasn't as bad as it sounds, or making it seem as though it is, in fact, a truly conservative choice.  Thus, you have (at the moment) four grown men yelling at one another about who has the cleanest record and trying desperately to alter their past to appease some high-handed ideal that much of the country doesn't seem to like in the first place.  This doesn't even benefit the extremists; as they are content to henpeck everyone's conservative credentials in a McCarthy-esque witch-hunt, until the prerequisites are so impossible to achieve that they distance themselves from everyone.

Take Gingrich, for example.  He actually came out to say that it was a mistake for him to join forces with Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi on combating global warming in an ad years ago.  He has been constantly attacked for it, and now directs his counter-attack to taking out the Environmental Protection Agency ( he called it a complete failure at a recent conservative conference).  I was impressed that he admitted to his mistake, it was mature of him and he gave reasons why he changed his mind.  I disagree with him on his current stance towards man-made climate change, but I respect his position.  What I find baffling is that he believes the EPA should be eliminated in its entirety because of some bad regulations it has put forth.  Sure, the EPA should get an overhaul and certain regulations have done some damage to the economy, but to leave potentially dangerous business practices unchecked is just utter folly.  Gingrich, I think, was hoping to score conservative points by appearing anti-regulation, making up for his past faux pas with Gore and Pelosi.  Once again, a conservative candidate took one step-forward, and then ran back inside the closet three miles back at the Tea Party HQ.

Another example is Rick Santorum.  Santorum's Christianity is something that should remain personal to him, and should not affect his views or action in office.  That is the law, that is the CONSTITUTIONAL law.  Yet,  every time he opens his mouth about religion, he comes on as this budding theocrat, claiming that Satan has invaded government and academic institutions (I'm not making that up, http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/feb/22/context-santorum-satan/, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n4jopm7hYFk#!).  Santorum allows far too much of his religious beliefs to rule  his political decisions, and having someone like that in office at any level of government scares me, and I hope it as least concerns all of you.

To conclude, the race for an Obama-beating, Christo-fascist, anti-gay marriage, anti-regulation, limited government, free-market sycophant, Tea Party groupie is harming the political nature of this country.  It is alienating moderates of both sides, it is setting up the GOP candidate to be irrational and unstable, and it is pretty much handing the vote to Obama at this point.  I won't make any predictions, but I will sorely hope for at least a moderate candidate to take the stage against Obama.  If I don't see one, I will be forced to choose Obama once more, and I hope I don't have to do so out of regret and spite.

What do you all think of the current state of the republican party?  To all my UK viewers, don't be afraid to comment, we need some outside perspective.

Update 3-4-2012