I pick my battles carefully
There were conservative critics of Bush even before his re-election but they knew that, even if Bush was not a real conservative, at least he took the WOT seriously unlike the alternative. It was also obvious that Bush was a more honest and decent man than Kerry. So conservatives re-elected him.
Then, last year, I started noticing increased criticism of Bush by conservatives. Even I was disappointed with his failure to curb Congressional spending and his own big-spending ways but I didn't carp because I don't expect perfection in a human being let alone a politician who has to do a constant balancing act. Not even my favorite Prez, Reagan, got everything right.
I even shocked some people by saying that Bush was not a real conservative. There was some discussion as to which recent Republican President was a real conservative. Reagan seemed to be the benchmark. At the time I pointed out that Reagan was an anomaly. The GOP establishment certainly didn't like him at first. He even called himself a "libertarian."
This led me to a discussion of all Republican Presidents and what was the definition of conservative. I pointed out that not too many Republicans were conservative in the way that it has come to be defined since Reagan - small government, low taxes, states rights. Lincoln certainly didn't fit the bill. Teddy Roosevelt called himself a Progressive. Eisenhower was the first to push for "Civil Rights" and send troops to the South to enforce it. Nixon was also a big-government guy. I concluded that Republicans were on the whole not conservative as it is understood nowadays.
None of this bothers me because I am first and foremost a Republican. My admiration and loyalty to the GOP goes back a long way; back to before I even came to the USA. My grandfather, Gustavus Adolphus Joubert, admired Teddy Roosevelt and adored Abraham Lincoln. He named his only son, my uncle, Abraham Lincoln Joubert. So I grew up with Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, as one of my main heroes closely followed by Teddy Roosevelt. When Eisenhower became President, I found another hero. By the time Nixon became President, I was long past hero-worship and found him terribly flawed. Still I admired his stubbornness and could not condemn him outright as so many of my generation did. Then came Reagan, who was President when I became a US citizen. To this day I treasure my form letter from him congratulating me on being naturalized. So yes, I am an extremely partisan Republican who believes firmly in Reagan's 11th commandment, "Thou shalt not criticize another Republican."
A couple of months ago I had a public falling out with someone who calls himself a "conservative" and who is a member of "Blogs for Bush." He started relentlessly bashing Bush and eventually fessed up that he was not a Republican but an independent who wanted a third party. Now, to me, anyone who calls for a third party is either unrealistic about American politics or is a shill for the Democrats because third parties are a for-sure way to hand elections to the Democrats.
In the months since then, more and more conservative bloggers started to criticize Bush. The illegal alien problem has finally shown how big a split there is in the GOP. That's fine by me but, when Republicans start calling for boycotting elections and handing Congress over to the Democrats, I draw the line. This is what I called "throwing a tantrum" - you know the way spoilt brats will squeal, "I won't play the game if I can't get my own way."
I know that conservatives never really were happy with Bush from the start but I think some are now using the immigration issue as an excuse to finally say what they really thought about Bush all along: "He's not a real conservative."
I've known that all along and it doesn't bother me for several reasons: both parties in the USA are "big tent" parties. In Europe and Canada they would be split into many parties. There are plenty of things I don't like about the GOP. My ideal GOP would be one which adhered to Reagan's libertarian (actually classical liberal Whig like our Founders) philosophy but I'm content with a party that puts business before welfarism.
The GOP has been the party of big business since Lincoln first split from the Whigs and is to this day the party of the plutocracy. That suits me fine. I think like a businessman. I trust other businessmen. I trust capitalism. It isn't perfect but the alternative is anathema to me. Egalitarianism and socialism isn't natural to the human race. It must always be enforced by totalitarian governments. Capitalism is the only system that allows for individual freedom. Anything else is not freedom.
Yes, I agree with Bush on the immigration problem. Bush is dealing with it like a businessman. I do understand that a Mexican invasion could destroy our Republic if it is allowed to continue uncontrolled but, to me, our own home-grown socialists are more dangerous than the Mexicans. We can absorb controlled immigration and insist on assimilation if we can shut the commies up and tell them to stuff their multiculturalism. Some people are going to fight the immigration battle but I'll keep fighting the fight I've been fighting for 40 years - against western commies. They're our most dangerous enemies - not Mexicans or even Muslims.
I also know that Bush and the plutocrats have seen the future and it probably isn't what any of us want. The future is brown and it is probably a lot more socialist than any of us would like. Bush thinks like all modern plutocrats do - globally. He is also dealing with this issue the way his rich cronies want. They want cheap labor both here and abroad. They can build their factories in India and China but how do they staff their service industries here? With cheap imported labor.
Some people think that we do not have to import cheap labor to do jobs that Americans won't do if we paid decent wages. Maybe a few Americans will line up to get paid $20 an hour to pick lettuce but are we willing to pay $10 for a head of lettuce and $50 for a plate of food in a restaurant? I still doubt that most Americans would consider picking lettuce from what I've seen. They prefer having meetings to doing heavy lifting.
And yes, we could automate agriculture but not the service industry which now employs more migrants than agriculture which is already largely automated. I don't know too many Americans who would like to wash dishes or clean hotel rooms for the rest of their lives.
I'll end by saying that, like Bush, I'm a Republican and a businessman first, and a conservative second. To be a businessman, you must adapt or die. We are not going to be able to turn back the clock to some imagined conservative Utopia. Whites are in the minority. Most of the world's population is brown. Conservative whites are in the minority even among whites. Most whites in the west are liberals/socialists.
I pick my battles carefully and my battle is against the rising tide of socialism/communism. I'll stick to defending the American Revolution and our Constituion. It's already been eroded considerably and will be eroded even more but I hope that I can try to educate youngsters into understanding freedom and individual sovereignty. I'll die contented if I've inspired just one other person to keep our American dream alive.
Then, last year, I started noticing increased criticism of Bush by conservatives. Even I was disappointed with his failure to curb Congressional spending and his own big-spending ways but I didn't carp because I don't expect perfection in a human being let alone a politician who has to do a constant balancing act. Not even my favorite Prez, Reagan, got everything right.
I even shocked some people by saying that Bush was not a real conservative. There was some discussion as to which recent Republican President was a real conservative. Reagan seemed to be the benchmark. At the time I pointed out that Reagan was an anomaly. The GOP establishment certainly didn't like him at first. He even called himself a "libertarian."
This led me to a discussion of all Republican Presidents and what was the definition of conservative. I pointed out that not too many Republicans were conservative in the way that it has come to be defined since Reagan - small government, low taxes, states rights. Lincoln certainly didn't fit the bill. Teddy Roosevelt called himself a Progressive. Eisenhower was the first to push for "Civil Rights" and send troops to the South to enforce it. Nixon was also a big-government guy. I concluded that Republicans were on the whole not conservative as it is understood nowadays.
None of this bothers me because I am first and foremost a Republican. My admiration and loyalty to the GOP goes back a long way; back to before I even came to the USA. My grandfather, Gustavus Adolphus Joubert, admired Teddy Roosevelt and adored Abraham Lincoln. He named his only son, my uncle, Abraham Lincoln Joubert. So I grew up with Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, as one of my main heroes closely followed by Teddy Roosevelt. When Eisenhower became President, I found another hero. By the time Nixon became President, I was long past hero-worship and found him terribly flawed. Still I admired his stubbornness and could not condemn him outright as so many of my generation did. Then came Reagan, who was President when I became a US citizen. To this day I treasure my form letter from him congratulating me on being naturalized. So yes, I am an extremely partisan Republican who believes firmly in Reagan's 11th commandment, "Thou shalt not criticize another Republican."
A couple of months ago I had a public falling out with someone who calls himself a "conservative" and who is a member of "Blogs for Bush." He started relentlessly bashing Bush and eventually fessed up that he was not a Republican but an independent who wanted a third party. Now, to me, anyone who calls for a third party is either unrealistic about American politics or is a shill for the Democrats because third parties are a for-sure way to hand elections to the Democrats.
In the months since then, more and more conservative bloggers started to criticize Bush. The illegal alien problem has finally shown how big a split there is in the GOP. That's fine by me but, when Republicans start calling for boycotting elections and handing Congress over to the Democrats, I draw the line. This is what I called "throwing a tantrum" - you know the way spoilt brats will squeal, "I won't play the game if I can't get my own way."
I know that conservatives never really were happy with Bush from the start but I think some are now using the immigration issue as an excuse to finally say what they really thought about Bush all along: "He's not a real conservative."
I've known that all along and it doesn't bother me for several reasons: both parties in the USA are "big tent" parties. In Europe and Canada they would be split into many parties. There are plenty of things I don't like about the GOP. My ideal GOP would be one which adhered to Reagan's libertarian (actually classical liberal Whig like our Founders) philosophy but I'm content with a party that puts business before welfarism.
The GOP has been the party of big business since Lincoln first split from the Whigs and is to this day the party of the plutocracy. That suits me fine. I think like a businessman. I trust other businessmen. I trust capitalism. It isn't perfect but the alternative is anathema to me. Egalitarianism and socialism isn't natural to the human race. It must always be enforced by totalitarian governments. Capitalism is the only system that allows for individual freedom. Anything else is not freedom.
Yes, I agree with Bush on the immigration problem. Bush is dealing with it like a businessman. I do understand that a Mexican invasion could destroy our Republic if it is allowed to continue uncontrolled but, to me, our own home-grown socialists are more dangerous than the Mexicans. We can absorb controlled immigration and insist on assimilation if we can shut the commies up and tell them to stuff their multiculturalism. Some people are going to fight the immigration battle but I'll keep fighting the fight I've been fighting for 40 years - against western commies. They're our most dangerous enemies - not Mexicans or even Muslims.
I also know that Bush and the plutocrats have seen the future and it probably isn't what any of us want. The future is brown and it is probably a lot more socialist than any of us would like. Bush thinks like all modern plutocrats do - globally. He is also dealing with this issue the way his rich cronies want. They want cheap labor both here and abroad. They can build their factories in India and China but how do they staff their service industries here? With cheap imported labor.
Some people think that we do not have to import cheap labor to do jobs that Americans won't do if we paid decent wages. Maybe a few Americans will line up to get paid $20 an hour to pick lettuce but are we willing to pay $10 for a head of lettuce and $50 for a plate of food in a restaurant? I still doubt that most Americans would consider picking lettuce from what I've seen. They prefer having meetings to doing heavy lifting.
And yes, we could automate agriculture but not the service industry which now employs more migrants than agriculture which is already largely automated. I don't know too many Americans who would like to wash dishes or clean hotel rooms for the rest of their lives.
I'll end by saying that, like Bush, I'm a Republican and a businessman first, and a conservative second. To be a businessman, you must adapt or die. We are not going to be able to turn back the clock to some imagined conservative Utopia. Whites are in the minority. Most of the world's population is brown. Conservative whites are in the minority even among whites. Most whites in the west are liberals/socialists.
I pick my battles carefully and my battle is against the rising tide of socialism/communism. I'll stick to defending the American Revolution and our Constituion. It's already been eroded considerably and will be eroded even more but I hope that I can try to educate youngsters into understanding freedom and individual sovereignty. I'll die contented if I've inspired just one other person to keep our American dream alive.
posted by Joubert at 9:15 AM
The Alliance
<< Home