The First Debate

I Had some friends over to watch the Debate. Romney did so well. Later out of curiosity I turned to CNN, and was surprised to see they watched the same debate I did!

CNN Flash poll of likely voters believe Romney won the debate 67% to 25%.

-Lynnae

Conservative Side of the Conversation

The conversation continues. My friend asked me to explain a little more about conservatism from my point of view. How do you think I did at answering her question?

“What are the guiding principles and applications conservatives use with regards to taxation, foreign policy, education, and representation at the Federal and State level? Please go beyond the typical phrases like "limited government." I get that sentiment...I'm interested in knowing what "limited" looks like to a Conservative, as an example. What do you support (compared to what you oppose)?”

To answer your earlier question- and keep in mind that conservative ideas vary from person to person just like liberal or progressives would, and many Republicans, especially old timer Washington types, are not conservative at all. I definitely refer to myself as a C and not an R, - but I will do my best.

Taxation-low taxes, fair taxes such as the flat tax are more desirable. A sales tax only would probably be the most fair of all but it would require such a high level of involvement and observation that most conservatives wouldn’t desire it. Personally I would like a flat tax with little or no gradations, just everyone paying the same percent, which is the fairest way to do it, even welfare recipients, because then they have skin in the game. We are nearing a point where only half of Americans pay taxes, and once we cross the line to more than half then they can vote for any increase they want and we become slaves. I do not know much about corporate tax, but I know that a flourishing economy helps towns and states, and I have observed in my lifetime how a state like California gets greedy and will overtax a business, which will drive the business away. States who understand this principle offer incentives to companies because they bring jobs, new homes, more goods and services and a thriving economy. I liken this to the story of the Goose that laid the Golden Egg. You can get a golden egg, in this case taxes and prosperity for your region, on a regular basis, or you can get greedy and cut it open to try and get more, and you will get nothing because the goose will die.

Foreign policy to most conservatives means peace through strength. We want to not start wars, but to defend ourselves and to deter war. In the global age we live in though, you can be threatened from the other side of the planet. Terrorist acts, which are acts of war, are taken against Americans wherever they may be, and we also have made a significant investment to protect our allies, and in some cases our national interest, the greatest being to protect fledgling democracies around the world. High on this list is Israel, a lone democracy and an ally (up until president Obama). The liberal tendency of appeasement to those who threaten us seems wishy-washy and naïve. It doesn’t work and only makes our enemies bolder.

Education-I think the teachers unions are the main cause of the poor quality of education. (and most conservatives are decidedly anti-union and pro merit). Good and outstanding teachers will not be afraid to stand on their own merit, but instead they are dragged down by the weight of bad teachers that can’t be fired. Also an exceptional 5^th grade teacher, instead of being paid on his or her merit as a teacher, will have to move up to high school to get a significant raise, and maybe then on to the administrative side. Much of the technology in the school is wasted. A great teacher is worth all the ipads and smartboards in the state. Personally I think come raise time teachers should be stack ranked based on a combination of student scores, goals met, numbers of special needs students taught and feedback from the parents, The top ranking teachers getting the big bonus, and the bottom ones getting the boot. This may be extreme even for many conservatives. But the product would be a well educated student. And more new teachers coming into the workforce would get their chance. Oh, and I’d probably cut the dept. of Education altogether and put it at the state level.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by ‘representation at the federal and state level’, other than that, in both cases I want a representative that will care more about the country at large than bringing home pork to their district.

I will add that conservatives favor close adherence to the Constitution and Bill of Rights and reject the liberal notion that it is a living document meant to be shaped to the needs of the times. It is a solid guide, inspired by God to provide a home of liberty where the gospel would be able to come forth.

Government is established to protect our rights, not to furnish us with our needs. That is each person’s job, in their own life and own family. Most conservatives would still agree that there should be some welfare system as a safety net. But government should not siphon funds from my family to pay for the livelihood of another family any more than someone should barge in my house at gunpoint and demand the contents of my wallet, or fridge, or medicine cabinet. They have no right and that power is not granted in the constitution. Conservatives do believe in giving to charity and according to surveys give a lot more to charity than liberal people. But they believe in doing it in private and not waiting for the camera crews and praise of the world. And to me it seems like liberals and progressives want to give freely to the poor- but not of their money but ours.

I suppose when it comes down to it the real question is power. Liberals want power over their fellow human beings to make them do what they want. Conservatives want to clear the way for people to live their own lives with as little hindrance from the government as possible.

I Don’t Get It

Some friends on Facebook are having a little discussion about a blog post on Mormons For Obama. Her is the post in question, and here is my response:

The author seems to have a twisted and mind boggling lack of understanding of what conservatives actually believe. (Having said that I will add that Mitt Romney, while I believe him to be a great man and well qualified for president, is far from a conservative. Why do you think conservatives were so happy with the addition of Paul Ryan?).
I think free agency is at the heart of it, but not in the way the author describes. First let me say that as far as gay marriage goes, I'm against it because it will corrupt our country so quickly. If gay marriage passes then the first thing that will happen is that the gay lifestyle will have to be represented in textbooks for children of all ages. The leading textbook companies based in California already have vast guidelines of what politically correct illustrations they can show in a textbook. So what does it mean when those who are morally opposed to homosexuality have their children forced to constantly view what is a sin to them? If people would just keep it in their own bedrooms that's one thing, but our lifestyle is under assault.
As far as giving to the poor goes, what is a good rule for an individual is not necessarily a good rule for government. The government can never make things fair. Taking from those who sacrifice and work hard to give it to another deemed more worthy by some council is decidedly unfair. Redistribution of wealth does not work. It leads to more poverty and larger demands. I am not a libertarian because I do believe government has a right to tax those who are enjoying the benefit of public services deemed important by us through our representatives. But there is a proper amount, and we are way beyond that. I do think it's immoral to force on person to sacrifice their time, life and efforts to serve another. And that's really what liberalism is all about.
God knew there would be suffering and unfairness from the beginning. He gave us a Savior to provide a healing atonement for us and hopefully inspire us to serve our fellowman. But forcing everyone to be kind and good and righteous was Satan's plan, and I rejected it once and I will spend my life rejecting it. It cripples the receiver and enslaves the giver.

-Lynnae

GOP Convention

Despite last night’s highlights for me, Mia Love and the wonderful Ann Romney, I was a little irritated with the coverage on FOX News. I think they covered more of the convention than other cable news channels, but too many times they would tune in to a speech, only to cut away 5 minutes later for interviews or a panel discussion. As funny as it was to see Juan Williams make his ‘Ann Romney is a corporate wife’ comment and then see him missing from the panel a few minutes later, I would like to hear speeches in there entirety.

So tonight I’m parking it on C-Span, except maybe for the musical acts. I may turn it back to FOX but as soon as some one hits the podium I’m going back to C-Span.

The theme last night- We Built It. I love it. It’s genius! That simple phrase illustrates the difference in our values and those of President Obama. And now democrats are whining “That’s not what he meant” like a bunch of babies. No wonder what context you take that phrase “You didn’t build that” in, it still means the same. Maybe even worse on closer inspection. You are what you are because of government, not your ideas, labor, or sacrifice.

Despite Obama having a large section of the media in his pocket, occasionally something comes along so clear and concise that people just get it and pop culture runs with it.

And I think my favorite line so far tonight would have to be from Tim Pawlenty,  “Barach Obama has failed us. But look, it’s understandable. A lot of people fail at their first job”.

-Lynnae

Home Sweet Underwater-Eminent Domoain-Bank Cheating Home.

According to the Los Angeles Times, cities in San Bernardino and two other counties have a great idea to relieve the suffering of homeowners whose homes are underwater- worth much less than the mortgage they hold on them. The clever plan is for the city to confiscate the property using ‘eminent domain’ laws, and then return it to the bank with the understanding that a new loan to the current homeowner would be made at the current value of the house. Sounds just peachy, right?

In reality the bank is also an owner of the home. True, they are an ‘evil corporation’, but they own the home nonetheless.

This makes me wonder why the government is so intent on destroying the banking industry as we know it. Surely there are some entities dreaming of a world where all loans are held by the government. And when the government holds all loans, they will ultimately have the power to control all loans given, and be the judge in whether or not a certain loan (or type of house, boat or car) is appropriate for you.

But the point I’d really like to make is regarding the importance of contracts in our free society. The ability to enter into a contract, and to have it be honored by the law and upheld by the courts is what separates us from third world banana republic countries. When contracts are no longer upheld, or they are able to be dissolved for some motive popular to the people in charge, we are one step closer to a ‘might makes right’ system of government.

Cornell Law Professor Robert C. Hockett, advisor to Mortgage Resolution Partners, the designer of the proposal, does not see it that way, declaring “This is actually a pro-market solution”.

Hmmmm.

Lynnae

One Week Down…….

My sweetie has been gone just over a week now. Over 9 months to go for his deployment. Just writing that sort of takes the wind out of my sails a little bit.

I know I’ve been a crummy blogger lately. Between getting up at 4:30 every morning for an early morning job (which tires me out), and preparing for my husband to be gone (which saddens my heart) I just haven’t had the mental energy to sit and blog and say everything except what I’m thinking about non-stop.

-Lynnae

My Right to Contraception and Fresh Apples.

While I agree with others that the Democrats have brought up this whole issue of contraception-being-denied as a way of distracting people from the horrible economy, I do want to chime in a little bit on the topic.

 

Way back when this all started, George Stephanopoulos asked Mitt Romney a question along the lines of “Do you believe that the states have the right to ban contraception?'”

My answer would have been something like this.

I don’t believe states have the right to ban a business from offering contraception. I also don’t believe the states (or The State) has the right to FORCE a business to provide contraception.

Since this time the focus has turned more to religion and the first amendment, which is very important, but that aside, why should the state have the right to tell any business, moral, religious or otherwise, what services they must provide? That’s like telling a hamburger store they must serve apples!

Oh, wait, they do that too.

-Lynnae