Please read this poem, 'Cheney Rove Treason'. I didn't write it. But it is printed on this web site with permission from the author.
For longer than I've been around the political landscape in the USA has been characterized one-dimensionally. You were either Liberal, or Conservative or somewhere in between. I consider this characterization bone-headed since it links unrelated beliefs together. In any case, the neo-cons have perverted the term conservative so that it no longer has any consistent meaning.
Historically, strict constructionists were considered conservative. Liberals were more willing to reinterpret the Constitution. At least, that is what I've always heard.
The neo-conservatives have turned that on its head. They seem to have no regard for the constitution, and are eager to run roughshod over the Bill of Rights.
If the USA is to be a free country we cannot allow the neo-cons to destroy our Constitution. The civil liberties enshrined there are the only thing protecting us from tyrrany.
So I would be considered a conservative by this criteria.
The common wisdom is that conservatives value constraints over civil liberties. Conservatives consider marriage between a same-sex couple to be anethama. I don't know where this attitude comes from. I certainly see nothing about it in the Constitution. What I do see in the Constitution is States Rights. Any power not expressly given to the federal government is reserved for the states.
It should be very clear that any state may legalize quite a number of activities including: same-sex marriage, drug use, prostitution, assisted suicide. The federal government should not interfere. According to the Constitution it is up to the states to decide these issues.
I think a true conservative would agree with my position about states rights. Unfortunately, what we have is a lot of fake conservatives who are really just repressives.
Where we would differ is in how the states should decide to deal with those issues. In this I am with the Libertarians, who oppose all victimless crimes. None of those activities listed damage anyone other than the person doing the activities. They should be legal.
Some people argue that drugs damage others. That drug users steal to support their habit. That seems to be often the case. But if the drug wasn't illegal it wouldn't be so costly, so they likely wouldn't have to steal to get the money. In any case, it is the theft which is the problem, and that is already illegal. Why do we have to make drug use illegal? It makes no sense.
In these areas I would probably be considered liberal. I just don't think the government should be meddling in people's lives.
Even more insane are efforts to ban flag burning. Burning a flag is making a statement; saying "I'm very mad with the government". What could be more clear? And nobody suffers injury or looses property. The First Ammendment to the Constitution says Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech... Seems clear to me. And where is the sense in banning flag burning? A person who is that angry at the government is going to make a statement. If he can't make it in a showy but not damaging way he will do it in a damaging way. So a flag burning ban will just escalate the protest to violence. Where is the sense in that?
True conservatives don't think it is the business of the USA to be meddling in other countries business. By contrast the Republican party has been taken over by neo-cons who consider all the world potential colonies of the USA. Thus we have a war in Iraq in order to steal oil from those people.
I think it is up to the Iraqis to decide how to run their country. Not us. By meddling there we only create enemies. We will pay for this meddling for many decades.
Conservatives are careful with money, not spending more than they make. The common wisdom is that Liberals are spendthrift.
But those definitions have been turned on their ears since 1980 when Reagan became president. He and all of the Republican presidents who have followed have been more spendthrift than the so-called tax-and-spend liberal Democracts. Reagan ran up a debt that dwarfed all previous presidents. Now we have George W Bush, whose spending makes Reagan look like a cheapskate.
Republicans claim to be conservatives. When it comes to taxes and public spending that is clearly a lie. Whatever happened to balancing the budget? These guys borrow at astounding rates.
I consider deficit spending evil. Borrowing money should only be done in times of emergency. Evidently in this I am more conservative than anyone in government.
In summary I consider myself a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.
Hooray for the people! I honestly didn't think this was possible. The neo-cons had corrupted so much of the election process that I wasn't sure that even a landslide away from the Republicans would lose them the election. I refer especially to Diebold and all the election machines they manufacture. Those machines are designed to be able to dial in any election results you want, independent of how the people vote. The 2004 election of George W Bush was fraudulent. He lost the election. But in the states where Diebold equipment was used to talley the vote, those doctored results showed Bush winning. The worst case of this was Ohio. Exit polls different substantially from the vote talley.
This interview, http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen , is a good summary of the issues involved.
But it appears that this time the scum bags underestimated how much they would have to doctor the election to get the results they wanted. And the Republicans lost despite the doctoring.
But we are not out of danger yet. As long as those scum bags can continue to doctor the votes our country is in dire danger. We must secure the election machinery against tampering.
Secure voting machines must have all of the following:
The only way you can have a recount with confidence is if you have something to recount. The votes must be recorded on paper.
Diebold's attitude about their design is "trust us". And yet the president of Diebold promised to deliver the 2004 election to George W Bush. We also have direct evidence that Diebold voting machines can be quickly and easily tampered. No company can be trusted to deliver secure voting machines. Most especially not Diebold.
I will close this section with a quote:
Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything. --- Joseph Stalin.
You might conclude that I am a Democrat because I am celebrating the election where the Democrats got control of the Senate and the House back from the Republicans. Well, its not that simple.
What I really think is
I don't really vote Democratic. I vote against the Republicans. And I wish they would both go away so we could get some new parties with new ideas. I regret that the USA is stuck in a de-facto two party system. I think our system would be a lot more healthy if we had five parties, all competing and all cooperating.
If I had to pick a party I agree with more than any others it would be the Green Party. But they don't have a chance against the Republicans. And Republicans are horribly damaging to the USA and the world. So I hold my nose and vote Democratic.
I fear for the future of the USA. This 2006 election is not enough to save us. The neo-cons control the Supreme Court. And no election will change that. Those judges will just have to die off. It will take time. And I'm not sure the USA will survive long enough to see that happen.
And the problem? The neo-cons.
The neo-cons do not believe in democracy or freedom. What they believe in is aristocracy. The aristocrats have the power and the freedom. Everyone else is a serf. The neo-cons also have no regard for legal process. This all makes it very difficult to remove them without bloodshed. Even with bloodshed!
Thus I was very suprised at the latest election. But I am not convinced they have been defeated. I fear their return to power. They still control the Supreme Court. And they still control the voting machines in several states.
Copyright 2006 Allen Brown