Conservative Cabal

Okay, yeah, we’re conservative. BUT even we can appreciate the historic moment (though we were forced to watch it on CBS — Katie Couric — ugh!).  I’m very very happy that America has achieved the colorblindness — at least in part– of whic MLK, Jr. dreamed. And I’m especially grateful to live in a nation that can have such peaceful transfers of power.

Obama’s speech was not terribly inspirational, and when he said we must get past the idea that it’s not about whether government is too small or too large, but about whether it works, well — we believe smaller government works better.

But all in all, I can quibble little with his serious approach or his outline of the dangers that we face.  Or even his call to responsibility.  He sometimes reminds me of a preacher — I think he would have made a very effective one.

So with all good will, may we say …  congratulations, and good luck, Mr. President.

We hear there’s something going on tomorrow — oh yeah, the peaceful transfer of power that we in the USA are blessed to have every four or eight years.

Will there be protests, as there were in 2000 or 2004? No — we all (well most of us) on the right recognize that that would be politically stupid, and infelicitous — and unnecessary. Obama won …mostly fair and square. Will we be better off? Doubtful. Would there be as much excitement for a black person to be president if he or she were Republican — Michael Steele, say? Or Condi Rice? Very sadly, no. They would not be recognized as such, though both of their histories are much more in line with that of most African Americans than Obama’s is. But it matters not.

What will happen after tomorrow?

• The Fairness Doctrine will probably be renewed, in an effort to squelch “right-wing” radio.  Dissent is, after all, dangerous. Very dangerous.
• More federal monies will be given to embryonic stem cell research, even though recent research has made that rather unnecessary. But certain parties have a vested interest there.
• The Defense of Marriage Act could be overturned, thus forcing a redefinition of “marriage” that most people don’t want.
• Bush’s tax cuts will expire.
• We will be less safe, as the reaction to crises will be to talk first –  a reversion to September 10th thinking. We will never hear the words “war on terror”.

All this, and more, starting tomorrow. No one said the US would last forever. And it seems rather clear to me that we are on the downward slope, letting the wind slap our face, enjoying how “fresh” it all feels. Until we slap right into the mountain.

But perhaps I am being a bit pessimistic.  And on the eve of a President Obama, I think it would do us all well to remember what Calvin Coolidge said in his inauguration in 1923 — very different times indeed, but these truths are, as they say, timeless:

It is necessary to keep the former experiences of our country both at home and abroad continually before us, if we are to have any science of government. If we wish to erect new structures, we must have a definite knowledge of the old foundations. We must realize that human nature is about the most constant thing in the universe and that the essentials of human relationship do not change. We must frequently take our bearings from these fixed stars of our political firmament if we expect to hold a true course. If we examine carefully what we have done, we can determine the more accurately what we can do.

Gateway Pundit: Angry Islamists CHUCK SHOES at Obama Posters– Torch ‘Em (Video)

Of course, those who favor Obama will argue, and probably already have, that the protesters don’t understand that Obama is different, but they will, that the shoe-chucking of Obama posters was more a sign of disgust with US policy over the last 8 years, etc. etc.

Well, we’ll just see. Now that Obama has been getting daily national security briefings, he’s been relatively quiet, because as we all know, there “can only be one president at a time”.

From Ace, there’s “Now He Tells Us” and “Osama’s Contained and that’s Good Enough“. Obama has told us many times that Afghanistan is the central front in the war on terror and that getting Osama is the most important task we have before us.

Of course, now that he’s going to be the one responsible for doing that, perhaps it’s not that important. The same reporters in the same papers that have lambasted Bush for seven years for not getting Osama and being distracted by Iraq are already laying the groundwork for letting Obama off the hook.

And, as Ace’s page points out again and again, he’s backtracking on just about everything else he promised too. Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell? That’ll have to wait.

Ahh, voters, get ready for some disappointment…

Well that didn’t take long.  After being named Obama’s nominee for commerce secretary less than a month ago, Richardson has withdrawn his name because of concerns about allegations of pay-to-play politics between his campaign for president and a California company who got a nifty contract (worth more than one BILLION dollars) in…New Mexico. But yes, yes, innocent until proven guilty, etc. etc. Richardson’s office says he did nothing wrong. As far as we can tell, the New Mexico state legislature is not meeting to consider (and then adjourn) impeachment. So, in our Illinois eyes, he’s golden.

But it does give one pause (or rather, it SHOULD), to consider that Obama named him, and he accepted, knowing full well (he had to) that this would come out. And why should they really care?  Democrat-controlled legislature? Republicans would probably save their unity and breath for matters that…matter. At least a little more. Not that commerce isn’t important. It’s ALL important, but politics is full of nothing but scarce resources, and reserves must be used wisely.

Where else can you get timely topical commentary one month late?

Where else but here? No where. It’s because we care.
Anyway, there were a couple of things from Obama’s acceptance speech that I wanted to touch on.

First, let us compare and contrast the Constitution and something from TheOne:

First from the Constitution (sing along, you know the words):

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And now Obama:

We can perfect this Union.

Obama’s statement makes a nice sound bite and calls to mind the Constitution’s phrasing, which it was obviously intended to do.  But the meaning is almost entirely opposed to what the Framers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution.

The Framers chose the phrase “more perfect Union” advisedly.  They understood that human things are necessarily imperfect.  There are conflicting goods in every human life and every human society, there is no such thing as perfect justice.  Tragedy is inevitable and inherent in the human condition.

Obama’s phrasing ignores this reality, dumbs down the content of the Constitution and in doing so perverts it’s meaning.  Either he doesn’t understand that, or he doesn’t care because he doesn’t agree with the Framers and the Constitution on this point.

The Framer’s understanding, the one shared by most conservatives, helps to engender humility in government.  If you understand that no matter what you do, the end result will just be better, maybe good, but certainly not “perfect”, you are less willing to pile up the sacrifices and the bodies to achieve your necessarily limited aims.

But, when perfection is the goal, the all-enduring Utopia the aim, no sacrifice is too great, no pile of corpses too high.  Witness France, Russia, China, Cambodia; all places where no atrocity was too horrible, because perfection was on the line.

Obama is either dagerously unaware of this history or too flip with his phrasing.  Either way, I don’t like it.

And another thing.

Yes We Can!

Is not an American Creed.  It is a socialist worker’s party’s rallying cry.  That manipulative piece of verbiage really pissed me off.

If Bush is a “lame duck” president at the end of his term, what will we get to call Obama at the end of his term? An asthmatic squirrel? A deaf pigeon? An arthritic butterfly?  

We need to decide on this right away, so we can continue the Kumbaya-singing and hand-holding that the libs keep whining about wanting. I’ll be happy to hold hands with an arthritic butterfly any day.

Who is surprised the Chicago Tribune endorsed Barack Obama? Umm, no one.

Was it just four short years ago that Barack Obama came to the national stage, wet behind the ears, after being handed the U.S. Senate seat on a silver platter by the Illinois GOP, with help from the Chicago Tribune and other media? Yes. Yes it was.

And how did that happen? People who don’t live in Illinois (or Chicago, really) probably didn’t pay much attention to this sad story, but I think it bears repeating. Know your history, they say.

In 2004, the Illinois GOP was in a bit of a pickle. A mess, actually.  A former governor, George Ryan, was facing corruption charges (and later was found guilty and sent to prison), the party held no state-wide offices except for Treasurer, and the state party’s central committee refused (and still refuses) to allow “rank-and-file” members to vote for members of the central committee. Intra-party feuding was and is common — often due to conflicting beliefs about principles (conservative vs. moderate), and power.

Incumbent Senator Peter Fitzgerald - R, who only served one  term,  would be given no support for a reelection that year (too conservative? I never really figured out the real reason),. Judy Baar Topinka, then State Treasurer, was the most powerful Republican in the state.

Continue reading ‘Obama’s previous election’ »

Our friend Angel asks around. Well done, Angel!

Some people’s minds are impenetrable to the obvious. Case in point. Edward, the doctor and Obama supporter:

Edward, 35, who declined to give his last name for fear it would damage his medical practice, said Obama and Palin are historic figures. But he also believed that Palin was a phenomenon destined to fade.

“The more she’s exposed, the less she’ll shine,” said Edward, who vowed that if McCain and Palin won, he and his friends would move to Canada.

“A lot of people left after 2004,” he said. If McCain and Palin win, “we’re all leaving.”

that’s from the Post. Describing an Obama march that drew less than 500 people. And they were all talking about Palin.

I don’t even know where to begin. Edward, the doctor , will be moving to Canada where he can trade in his private practice for the life of a government functionary in the DMV hospital system of Ontario. uh-huh.

Because Palin is “destined to fade”.  Edward is convinced Obama can’t lose, so convinced that he won’t give his name for fear that his patients will desert him.  Wait, walk with me here, Ed.  Can I call you Ed?

If everyone is going to be voting for Obama, as you expect, then why would you need to hide your identity from your patients?  Aren’t they voting for Obama?  Isn’t everyone voting for the One?  Even if your patients are some of the evil few who have not been enlightened, aren’t there plenty of minions who would fill the void in your waiting room?

Ed confuses me.  But then, they all do.