If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.

REQUIEM

Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010

4/10/2008

Come November ... Part Two

voting machine 1.jpg

I am not quite as sure as some conservatives are that John McCain would be an defender of the Constitution. Granted, he has held fast on a number of Constitutional issues, but his abandonment of that precious document on an equal number of other issues worries me deeply.

Take McCain-Feingold. On the surface, it would appear that our national sovereignty, and our ability to keep Islamic terrorism at bay, are more important considerations than our First Amendment rights.

But are they?

One of the reasons we find ourselves in this terrible dilemma this election cycle rests in the fact that so much of our modern-day election process has literally been taken out of the hands of the people. The nominees are chosen by an ever more circuitous process in which ‘the people’ have less and less say – some states having caucuses and primaries; some having delegates that really are uncommitted; some having ‘super-delegates’, etc. The representation of the people’s will in our election process has become so convoluted as to be almost laughable anymore.

Our voices, no matter how loud and impassioned, are now channeled through so many mazes that they become all but inaudible. Special interests have hi-jacked the political process, and individual candidates, unless they are independently wealthy, have very little opportunity to rise to the top.

What is really more important, bottom-line, than the ability of a free people to speak their minds, especially in the process of electing those who will lead them (those who will make the major decisions regarding our national sovereignty and the determination with which we will battle Islamic terrorists)?

If our leaders don’t reflect our wishes, because of the convoluted, unconstitutional process by which we put them in office, then our ability to effectively do the things about which you and I are so concerned is compromised from the start.

John McCain contributed mightily to that circumstance in co-authoring McCain-Feingold, one of the most insidious affronts to personal liberty in recent memory.

He is also on board with many other left-wing, liberty-robbing agendas, whose sole purpose is to destroy our capitalist foundations and amass unbridled power for the ruling elite. His support of global warming initiatives is a sterling (but not the only) example of such a mindset.

Every national leader who supports such initiatives knows how phony, deceptive, agenda-driven and perilous they are. Those 'leaders' aren’t dupes. They’re the authors of the hoax. Global warming advocates, put simply, are placing the amassing of political power above the safety and sovereignty of our republic every bit as much as those who want us to retreat from our mission in Iraq. They steadfastly handcuff our energy policies, prevent us from developing our own oil reserves and building new refineries, etc., which results in our dependence on our ideological enemies (and those who perceive our annihilation as their destiny).

John McCain is pandering to supporters of such agendas.

His sponsoring of the ludicrous Patients’ Bill of Rights served as more evidence that he tends to march in lock-step with those who author altruistic sounding, liberty-robbing legislation. The bill was just another major step toward universal healthcare/socialized medicine, in that it deliberately imposed onerous regulations on the insurance industry and opened the door for a myriad of additional frivolous lawsuits against healthcare providers. The ultimate purpose of all such legislation? To turn the best medical care in the history of the world into an expensive bureaucratic nightmare. The inevitable ‘solution’? Nationalized healthcare.

And his stand on immigration – at least the one he formulated before the American people rejected it – would have rewarded criminal behavior and dramatically changed the fabric of our society, without the necessary means to ensure future enforcement of immigration laws. He authored a pretty package that had no teeth. And he knew it.

In short, while I do believe that McCain would conduct the war against Islamic terrorism as we would want him to, I believe he also embraces policies that would endanger our liberties and place our national security in jeopardy in other equally perilous ways.

He has succeeded in stifling our voices in our efforts to elect those who represent our views.

He has authored and supported measures that could soon alter, in a major and irretrievable way, the complexion of our society (according genuine patriots such as you and I less and less of a voice about the direction in which our republic travels).

And he embraces leftist environmentalist/climate/healthcare policies that dramatically tighten the socialist grip, and make us dependent on some of the worst terrorist leaders of the world.

Sometimes the threats that lie beneath the surface, and that receive minimal attention, can be every bit as menacing as those that we discuss openly and frequently.

Rick Santorum, my former Senator, for whom I have a great deal of respect, observed a few months ago:

It’s amazing to hear what John McCain is trying to convince the voters he is all about. The bottom line is, I served twelve years with him, six years in the Senate as one of the leaders of the Senate, trying to put together the conservative agenda, and almost at every turn, on domestic policy, John McCain was not only against us, but leading the charge on the other side.

I was determined until recently that I would simply sit out this presidential ballot (for the first time in forty years). Since recent disturbing revelations about the company that Barack Obama keeps, I have wavered in that decision. At this point, I am not certain how or whether I will be casting my vote for president. I cannot vote for Obama, but I believe McCain is a far greater threat to our liberty and sovereignty than most of us are willing to admit. The fact that he isn’t a conservative represents just the tip of the iceberg.

~ joanie

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is really more important, bottom-line, than the ability of a free people to speak their minds, especially in the process of electing those who will lead them (those who will make the major decisions regarding our national sovereignty and the determination with which we will battle Islamic terrorists)?

McCain-Feingold, one of the most insidious affronts to personal liberty in recent memory.

Well said.

smithy said...

Joanie, you'll hold your nose and vote for McCain. So will I.

robmaroni said...

I wouldn't change a word Joanie. There are obvious enemies and there are those in sheep's clothing.

marcus aurelius said...

Very well summarized, Joanie. I especially like your point about McCain affecting the way we choose our leaders, stifling individual voices. Those leaders chosen by the system he helped to corrupt are the ones who make the decisions about what most of us think are life and death, tyranny vs. freedom, issues.

lori_gmeiner said...

Joanie,

Stick to your guns. Your conviction before that it's time to stop voting for the lesser of two evils was so right. Don't abandon it.

Minuteman23 said...

Well said as always Joanie. No bones of contention here.

John Cooper said...

Let's face it, we conservatives are screwed no matter which presidential candidate we vote for this year. No matter how the election goes, we're going to be saddled with a big-government, president who is ignorant of and could care less about the U.S. Constitution.

Rather than "get over it" as McCain has suggested, what we need to do is concentrate on making sure the RNC doesn't hijack the primary election ever again. They were singularly responsible for insuring that the first volley of primaries were in liberal states with open primaries, and that's got to stop.

McCain never would have become the party's candidate had all primaries nationwide been held on the same day.

Since that's probably impossible to change, my suggestion is that we get rid of the popular primary elections all together. Personally, I'd rather go back to the legislatures selecting candidates in smoky back rooms than letting 2% of the people in New Hampshire and Iowa select our national candidate for us.

Let's not forget that the idea of selecting candidates via popular vote was foisted on us by the progressive (e.g. communist) movement in the early 1900s.

Here in NC where I live, McCain was dead last in all the polls until he became the only choice left. Hell, we tarheels don't even get to vote until May, but why bother? We effectively have no say in the matter.

We need to repeal the selection of candidates by popular vote for the same reason as we need to repeal the 17th Amendment.

Oh, and one more thing. Since we're already screwed as far as a conservative president goes, we should focus on getting some more conservatives elected to congress in the hopes of blocking what the next statist president will try to do to us.

john galt said...

Bravo Cooper! Well said! I'm sick of just a handful of people in a handful of (generally liberal) states being the ones who choose our candidates for us. The rest of us might as well just forget about having a say. And the result is that the choice we will have in November is nothing like what the majority of the country wants. But its exactly what the liberals and the media dictate.

Let's not forget that the idea of selecting candidates via popular vote was foisted on us by the progressive (e.g. communist) movement in the early 1900s.

The best, and most ignored, part of your whole response. How many Americans realize that? I'll tell you how many. Close to none.

john galt said...

I didn't mean to forget you, Joanie. Great job putting everything in perspective!

I don't think even half the country is aware of McCain's role in all of the atrocities you mentioned. And they'll go into the voting booth that way 7 months from now.

Anonymous said...

There is more intelligent discussion on this one little blog than in most major newspapers.

John Cooper said...

Thanks J_G. I guess I'm not the first one to have thought of holding the primaries on the same day. In googling around, I found this webstite with some articles on the evolution of primary elections. This particular article was written twelve years ago. (Disclaimer: I'm unfamiliar with this site or it's biases, if any.)

The Evolution of the Presidential nominating Process: Slouching Toward a Nationwide Primary
~~~~~
"The front-loading of the calendar for the presidential primaries and caucuses this year is a reminder of the evolutionary nature of the presidential nominating process, subject not only to abrupt changes brought about by sweeping reforms like those of the McGovern-Fraser Commission. In examining the major changes in that process over the past century, it is difficult not to conclude that the changes generally point in the same direction -- to a nationwide primary on a single day. This is not to predict that the adoption of such a procedure is imminent, or even in the foreseeable future, although such adoption would not surprise the author. Rather, the inner logic of the development of our nominating process seems to imply the emergence of such a system. Indeed, it is remarkable to note how close we are to this procedure already, as the following tables illustrate -- the proportion of delegates selected in primaries is approaching 100 percent. This year, moreover, marks the shortest and most front-loaded process since the proliferation of primaries began in 1972."
~~~~~

siliconvalleyguy said...

Joanie,

Did you hear Obama's quote yesterday about "small town Pennsylvanians?"

I'd like to hear your rebuttal. ;)

Anonymous said...

Did you hear Obama's quote yesterday about "small town Pennsylvanians?"

I'd like to hear your rebuttal. ;)


Me too. :-) I expect it to be quite hot under the collar--and rightfully so.

John Cooper said...

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them...And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not."

"And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."


You've got it all wrong, Sen. Obama. Those small-town Pensylvanians just don't like ni**ers.

kathymlynczak said...

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!! John Cooper, you're priceless!

John Cooper said...

kathymlynczak: I'm glad someone understood my wry humor there. I was getting a little worried...

trustbutverify said...

Joanie, you should be a syndicated columnist.

Cooper, you should do "follow up". ;)

calbrindisi said...

I second trustbutverify's motion. Joanie can take care of the serious stuff and Cooper can do the tongue in cheek. With the world in the shape it's in both are equally important. < g >

Montypython2 said...

McCain this weekend, talking about the government stepping in and bailing homeowners out of the "mortgage crisis":

"Americans are sitting around the kitchen table, and they're trying to figure out a way to keep their home and realize the American dream."

His solution: Big Daddy in Washington will step in and lend a helping hand with other people's hard-earned money. He's becoming more and more a practitioner of socialism with every passing day.

Thanks for the great commentary, Joanie.

Anonymous said...

See "ANGRY RENTERS"

John Cooper said...

Montypython2 said... [McCain's] solution: "Big Daddy in Washington will step in and lend a helping hand with other people's hard-earned money. He's becoming more and more a practitioner of socialism with every passing day."

Once again (or should I say "still"), McCain is operating in extra-Constitutional space. Article I, Section 10 reads:

No State shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts...

I guess he figures it's OK if the federal government does it rather than the individual states.

Anonymous said...

What's wrong with you Cooper? Aren't you aware that the Constitution is a living document? The founders couldn't foresee a mortgage crisis like this so it has to be "adapted" and the government's powers changed accordingly. Get with the program.

Anonymous said...

Joanie:

I feel the same way you do. I'll no hold my nose and vote for any of the three. I'll proudly vote for Ron Paul, who is the only voice of the people in Amerika now.

McLame is dangerous and will continue the "decider's" game of destruction of Amerika for the chinese and mexicans.

You have a great voice. Thanks for the thrill of feelin' someone thinks like most of the rest of us.

John Cooper said...

Joanie--

Rush Limbaugh today supported the "bring on the revolution" crowd (of which I am a part) in the next election. To me, he makes a lot of sense. For as long as the entire piece stays up, it's at A Third Party Isn't the Way

In a nutshell, he says that the current management of the republican (lower case intentional) party must be flushed out if conservatism (and America) is to survive. The only way to do that it to suffer a democrat administration for the next four years. Sample:

"...party regulars, some conservatives are not quite sure what to do or how to react because they're afraid of being accused of helping to elect a radical like Obama if they don't support the party. But they are disgruntled with McCain. Still, what they end up doing is hoping that McCain, who is solid on Iraq, will somehow reveal at some point that he really is one of us. The current theory is that McCain -- and this is Wishin' and Hopin' (Dusty Springfield, 1964).

What they are hoping is that this is all just a public calculation by McCain to get elected and then when he gets elected, then here comes the real McCain, which will be conservative a la Ronaldus Magnus. This is what people are hoping. This is what little they have to grasp to because if it's not that then they know we're in trouble, but they just can't vote Obama. They just can't do it, just won't do it. And they don't want to sit out because they think that will give it to Obama. They just cannot have Obama, but then the alternative is just... Argh! So they construct a theory: "Hey, it's really not that bad. This is all just a game. McCain is just doing what he's doing to get a lot of Obama's votes and get elected, but then when he gets in there, that's when he'll become the real conservative." They're hoping he really doesn't believe all this radical nonsense about global warming. They're hoping he really doesn't believe all this stuff he's saying about the eeeevil oil companies.

They're hoping he really doesn't mean it when he says we need to close Club Gitmo -- and, by extension, shut down my thriving merchandise business there. They're hoping he doesn't mean it when he says that he's going to put the telecoms on the griddle for working with the Bush administration on warrantless wiretaps. But they are wrong. McCain believes in his own press. He believes he's a pied piper. Believe me when I tell you we're seeing the real McCain. He's been freed and liberated. He's the nominee, he can do what he wants, and this is the real conundrum for a lot of people."

If McCain becomes the next president, the entire democrat platform will be enacted, and the republicans will get the blame.