The Conservative Edge

Who says that conservatives and liberals can’t agree on anything?

I can’t say that. Not after reading Bob Herbert’s latest column that was published in my local newspaper, the Dayton Daily News. In his piece, Herbert states that the Democrats are in political trouble because they have paid so little attention to America’s economic distress. As I read his column, I wondered if he had been secretly reading my blog.

In case you are unfamiliar with Herbert, you should know that he writes for the New York Times. He also writes from a decidedly liberal perspective. His specialty seems to be economic and social issues, and how government might best resolve those kinds of problems. This blog, The Conservative Edge, has taken the Obama administration to task for reneging on campaign promises to give the economy a “quick jolt.” It took an entire year for Obama to declare that the economy would be his chief concern. And yet, here we are, one-and-a-quarter years into the Obama presidency, and he is still fixated on health care reform. He and the Democrats are gambling their election year prospects by not making job creation a top priority.

Herbert agrees. In fact, here are some of his statements: “Instead of focusing with unwavering intensity on this increasingly tragic situation, making it their top domestic priority, President Barack Obama and the Democrats on Capitol Hill have spent astonishing amounts of time and energy, and most of their political capital, on an obsessive quest to pass a health care bill.”

He further writes: “Health care reform is important. But what the public has wanted and still badly needs above all else from Obama and the Democrats are bold efforts to put people back to work. A major employment rebound is the only real way to alleviate the deep economic anxiety that has gripped so many Americans. Unaddressed, that anxiety will evolve into dread and then anger. But while the nation is desperate for jobs, jobs, jobs, the Democrats have spent most of the Obama era chanting health care, health care, health care.”

So it seems that liberals and conservatives can agree. Even a liberal like Herbert can see the error of Obama’s ways. The only difference is that some of us conservatives saw it first.

I wrote in a previous post about the movement of political power. I said that power has a way of moving from the inactive, into the hands of those who are most active. We have seen the political sands wash from under the feet of the Republicans, as they abandoned their foundation of smaller government, low taxes, and personal freedom. Waves of liberal ideology are sweeping quickly across this country as the Democrats in power seek to destroy conservatism, and rule a socialist America.

A political party must eliminate any opposition that can influence society, in order to exert and maintain control. This is being done in America, less than two months after the inauguration of Barack Obama as President. It is happening first at the local level, but liberals have a much bigger target in mind. Rush Limbaugh is the ultimate voice that must be silenced. He is viewed as the person who represents those Americans who disagree with Obama and his national socialist agenda.

First, let me tell you about a situation here in Dayton, Ohio. A conservative talk show host named Mike Scinto has been dismissed by his radio station, WDAO-AM. Scinto worked at WDAO since 1999, but was so abruptly fired that he never got a chance to say goodbye to his listeners. Scinto said that he thinks his criticism of President Obama and the stimulus package played a role in his dismissal. On its Web site, WDAO is said to be a station that is “Targeted to the metro community” and is “specifically geared to their lifestyles.” With Obama’s focus on urban community organization, it seems likely that Scinto, and his conservative ideas, are to be shut out of urban affairs. It also seems likely that there is a master plan to shut down conservative expression altogether.

This is how Limbaugh will be silenced. One by one, urban and metropolitan radio stations will cease to carry Limbaugh’s program. More radio and TV networks may end up being purchased and operated by minority groups, and it wouldn’t be surprising if they get funding to do so from the stimulus package. It may take some time to bring Limbaugh down, but expect first to see your local conservative programming eliminated. Most major news outlets in the country have reported that Obama wants to repeal the legacy of Ronald Reagan. Silencing the conservative talk shows is the first step toward a dictatorship by the Democratic Party.

I read a column in my local newspaper today (Jan. 19) that left me a little upset, and scratching my head. Isn’t it amazing how prominent columnists and political observers now want everyone to be nice, quiet citizens, and speak no ill toward the new administration? I felt the need to respond to a column by Kathleen Parker, and the entire contents of my letter are below:

“Kathleen,

“I just read your column “The Importance of Not Being Earnest”, published in the January 19 edition of the Dayton Daily News. While some of the column attempted to be encouraging, I saw an undercurrent of sarcasm and high-mindedness.

“Let’s take your indictment of our (your readers) seemingly inherent “snarky” attitudes. Are you suggesting that we are the only cynics and skeptics? That “snarkiness” must come from our own cold hearts and judgmental minds? Perhaps you should consider that some of us might be products of what we see on TV, or read in magazines and op-ed pieces. If it is the intention of editorial writers and other commentators to change or influence the thinking of those who read their works, then perhaps you should be willing to accept your role in shaping the attitudes of those you criticized in your column.

“For example, I believe it was you who, in a recent commentary, did everything but kick George Bush in the ass as you shoved him out the back door of the White House. Was this done in civility and grace? Hardly—to quote Clint Eastwood in the movie Heartbreak Ridge, “…that’s not very dignified for a mature woman…” And this is the kind of work many of us have been reading for the past 7 or 8 years. How can you then think that Americans have been immune to this kind of critical opinion? Is it possible that editorial poisons have sickened the American people?

“Another example of editorial pollution has been spread by your fellow columnist and “economist” Paul Krugman. I can’t think of a more crass, belligerent and snarky writer than Mr. Krugman. I have cut several of his columns out of the newspaper, just to marvel at his toxic vendettas he hurled at George Bush and other conservatives over the past few years. He has lambasted the Republicans for running federal deficits, but has now turned on a dime, insisting that deficits are necessary to turn our economy around.

“It seems that you have also turned on the same thin dime. You have gone from accuser to some sort of Pied Piper, telling us how WE need to develop a love for service. I think all of you who have fanned the fires of disdain and derision need to atone for your past few years of unpatriotic “snarkiness”. You have built your Golden Idol, and you want all of us to join the orgy of celebration. I’m sorry, but before I get all aglow, I need to see some admission of your own harboring of the things you seek to exorcise from us. Go ahead—confession is good for the soul!”

That’s my response. I guess we’re not supposed to treat Mr. Obama the same way that all the writers like Mrs. Parker treated the Bush administrations the past few years. It’s the old “Do as I say, not as I do” attitude. It’s the Democratic/liberal way.

The celebrations and festivities are kicking into high gear. Of course, I’m referring to the excitement of the impending inauguration of Barack Obama as the next President of the United States. There was somewhere around 40,000 people in Baltimore, Maryland to see Obama on one of his train stops, as he traveled on to Washington, D.C. I have seen photos of people crying, as they stood rapturously attending to Obama’s every word. Thousands of citizens are pouring into our nation’s Capitol, eager to celebrate this historic moment, and celebrate this great time of “change”.

Everyone except me—and others who know, deep down inside, that our country is set for a socialist takeover. I’m not sour about the election, as though John McCain got cheated by a fraudulent election, or some other shenanigans. In fact, the American people made it clear that they wanted someone quite different to perform some miraculous revival of our country’s “greatness”.

It’s just the definition of “greatness” that troubles me. It should trouble most white Americans in particular, but also anyone who values personal liberty above an omnipresent, omniscient government. Americans have come to see our current crises as a unique time for government, with a knight in shining armor leading the way, to magically solve all of our problems.

And government will intervene, too. Americans have lost confidence in themselves, partly because of inaction by conservative leadership, but mostly because of the messages we have been receiving. We have been told that America has spoiled its reputation abroad with its “cowboy” attitude. We have been scolded for burning too much fossil fuel, causing dramatic changes in global climates, and that we must bear the burden for cleanup. Too many of us are stubbornly “clinging to our guns and religion”. Therefore, we must purchase our ammunition coded with ID numbers, so our misuse of lawful arms can be tracked and verified. We must tolerate the establishment of Islamic temples and organizations, some of whom funnel money into terrorist networks all over the world. All Big Businesses (especially oil companies) are evil, so they must be taxed and regulated, to the point that they move their workforces overseas. Individuals who are “rich” must give their wealth to the government, to be given then to the “less fortunate”.

Does this sound like the prescription needed to cure our economic and social sicknesses? Is this the “change” we should celebrate? I read an observation made by an author of one of my favorite books, which states, “…unused power passes imperceptibly from idle hands into more active ones.” This is precisely what is happening in America today. The more active hands belong to the Democratic (I call it the National Socialist) Party. They exert their power more as the power of the individual weakens. So, this is a perfect time for them to ride in as “saviors”, when they are actually consolidating power among themselves.

I’m reminded of a story in Biblical history. When the young nation of Israel tired of being ruled by a prophet or judge, they demanded a king be anointed over them, just as all the other nations had done. Samuel the prophet, the last judge of Israel, tried to warn the people what they would endure under a monarchy. He told them that they would be heavily taxed; that the best of their sons would be conscripted for the king’s guard and the national army; other things they would sacrifice to keep the monarchy fed and supplied. But the people told Samuel that they didn’t care. They demanded a king! So, Samuel anointed a man named Saul as King of Israel. He eventually descended into madness, and nearly destroyed the nation of Israel.

America has demanded its “king”. I certainly hope we don’t get the same results.