Category: - Conservative Voice
 
Picture
OK, the government shutdown. So what!  If Congress were to shut down; at least then we could rest assured the federal government was finally acting with some semblance of competence.  But of course, in true Obama fashion, the shutdown is the Republican’s fault – and he and his fellow Democrats are completely innocent and not in the least bit culpable.  The shutdown, driven by Republican anti-ObamaCare sentiment has left federal employees temporarily out of work and has been made out to be the ultimate American partisan Armageddon. Ignorance abounds.

The “defund ObamaCare” line in the sand is not what it is being made out to be.  The Republicans want “changes” to ObamaCare – not to cast it into the depths of the sea as Obama has been saying… yes, your beloved presidential messiah, is a liar.  The bigger question people should be asking is what “changes” are being sought.  Before that, the Right needs to grasp the concept that the Republican political elite SUPPORT health care mandates and “taxed” socialized medicine models.  Hell, Gingrich, who many Republicans supported on his presidential run supported health care mandates as Speaker of the House. Never mind the Republican Nixon era push, or how “Conservative” organizations like The Heritage Foundation spearheaded Republican based support.  At least this supported existed when health care mandates were a Republican ideology.  As Democrat ideology, the Republican Party has developed a public oriented façade that the Party despises the concept.  If this were the case, why then would the Republicans have started the resistance with “repeal and REPLACE?”  If the Republican Party cherished constitutional authority over political agendas of tax revenue, there would have been no need to replace ObamaCare for another insurance mandate model.  Because Republican support is what is, socialized health care in its current ObamaCare form is never going away.  Get over yourselves already.  ObamaCare was largely based on RomneyCare and despite years of fussing about ObamaCare, the Right lined up in mass and voted for Romney.  If the Right truly stood against ObamaCare and its founding unconstitutional conceptualisms, Romney’s name would have never found its way to a single ballot.  It is continually that the Republican political elite say one thing while doing the opposite, yet the Right’s constituent response is only reflective to what their leading Republicans are saying – not to what they are actually doing.  This leaves the Right arguing against their own Party’s agenda because they insist upon themselves with a perverse sense of denial about the larger Party’s actions. 

Since we can reasonably establish underlying Republican support for ObamaCare, we can then focus on what the Republicans actually find wrong with ObamaCare and in the least would like its start-up delayed.  Here is what you don’t know.

Perhaps the single largest problem with ObamaCare, beyond its blatant betrayal of constitutional authority, is the enrollment process.  Forced upon the states and grossly underfunded by the federal government is the enrollment process itself which is managed by “Navigators” and “Assisters.”  These individuals are hired to assist citizens in enrolling in ObamaCare in order to stay out of jail and or avoid being additionally taxed by the federal government for not enrolling.  Due to ObamaCare’s excessive complexity, it was determined that Navigators and Assisters will need a minimum of 20 to 30 hours of training to effectively enroll potential candidates.  Despite the training concern that was generated by the Obama Administration, they have allowed Navigators and Assisters to enroll citizens into ObamaCare with as little as five hours of training despite having no prior health insurance training or experience. 

To complicate matters with enrollment, Navigators and Assisters will not be held accountable for providing misinformation about ObamaCare plans that cause the enrollee to undergo financial hardship as are other professionals such as accountants and financial planners that disenfranchise their clients through either malicious intent or professional incompetence.  Long story short; the Obama Administration recognized the high probability of enrollment errors and rather than seek to correct the issues before these problems occurred, the Obama Administration has granted Navigators and Assisters “immunity” AFTER SETTING THEM UP TO FAIL the public.  This will assuredly result in enrollment errors, cause enrollees to pay for services in which they have no need and have enrollees be refused access to care because they will not be enrolled in the correct plans.  Sadly, those doing the enrolling will be provided federal protections for the harm they will undoubtedly cause.

This immunity however, stretches a bit further than one might imagine.  Navigators and Assisters will have direct access to the enrollee’s Personal Identifying Information such as SSN, date of birth, household income and even this same information of other adult individuals living within the same residence.  During the rulemaking session HSS conducted for ObamaCare, this concern led to a discussion to determine the feasibility of conducting background checks before hiring Navigators and Assisters to mitigate the high risk of identity theft.  One government official serving as a board member who was said to be “well versed” in Human Resources questioned whether the federal government held the authority to conduct background investigations as a condition of employment.  The discussion was then curbed citing background checks would hinder enrollment in that many areas where ObamaCare is in need. Potential Navigators or Assisters in these areas were described as being unwilling to submit to a background check and thus would not qualify for employment by default. This, according the HHS rulemaking board, would then leave gaps in where ObamaCare could be accessed and background checks were not included as a condition of employment.  Again, the Obama Administration identified a risk with the enrollment process and ignored it because it was deemed more important to launch the program by a specified date than it was to protect the American consumer enrolled in the program.  Sadly, this not where the enrollment issues end, it is where they begin.

The HSS was also advised against paying Navigators and Assisters on a per enrollment basis. They ignored the warning and have now set in place Navigators and Assisters who are grossly under trained, many of which have criminal backgrounds to include crimes of identity theft and have incentivized them to enroll the highest number people possible for the most expensive plan available while further granting them federal protections for misrepresentations of the program that cause financial harm to those seeking ObamaCare.  This system of dysfunction immediately led to ObamaCare scams where individuals and organizations sought to exploit the easily compromised program.  The HSS, once informed of the fraudulent activities refused to certify legitimately sponsored programs in order to protect the consumers.  This simply means there is little to differentiate the real program from a fraudulent program until such a time as the IRS seeks action against an individual who is actually not enrolled in ObamaCare.  In such a situation, it is the consumer who lacks protections and it is stretch to think the IRS will suddenly be forgiving when owed money when it has already abused its power enforcing its own interpretation of the new health care law.  Least we not forget, despite the misinformation and misrepresentations, ObamaCare IS NOT FREE.  The majority of enrollees will have to pay for their mandated insurance plans.  Because of this, the IRS now has unprecedented access to an individual’s financials that they will forcefully police.  Failure to comply will bear results that are hardly unpredictable considering the IRS’ enforcement tactics.

The problem here is that issues such as immunity for those enrolling individuals into ObamaCare, the gross lack of training, failure of the government vetting these employees for consumer safety reasons and the IRS’ power grab have not seen the light of day in the media and WILL bring direct harm to those who have been forced into ObamaCare.  The ideology behind the program was that it was for the good of the people, yet those implementing the program have not done a single thing to protect the people from the problems that ObamaCare is guaranteed to cause.  The “Republicans who have shut down government” as Obama likes to refer to them, want things like this fixed BEFORE implementation of the program.  While there are a few who would completely defund and do away with ObamaCare in the name of constitutionalism, they are not the driving force behind the current budgetary debates.

To delay ObamaCare gives government the opportunity to correct the highly faulted program and protect the interests of the consumer who under ObamaCare are forced by law to figure out how to pay for their share of the law’s mandates.  The majority of those who do not have health insurance do not have it because they cannot afford health insurance and pay for things like groceries and rent (see RomneyCare complications for an example of how this will affect most Americans enrolled in ObamaCare).  The law forces that decision on their behalf at rates that have now been determined to be more expensive than pre-ObamaCare health insurance rates.  More specifically, Obama promised to decrease the average family’s health insurance by $2,500 per year, while it will actually surge some $7,450.

The truth, as painful as it may be, is not what the highly partisan banter has been about.  What Obama supporters need to understand is that the program’s implementation is far more important to Obama than the protection of consumer interests that are clearly compromised by the program.  The Right needs to accept the fact that the Republican political elite are now completely out of step with their constituent base.  On both sides, Americans simply want to believe it is the other side that is wrong.  Unfortunately, neither understands what is actually happening.  Democrats have been duped, by their own over-abundance of ignorance, into believing Republicans are harming them by blocking ObamaCare while they (the Republican political elite) are in fact the only entity within the federal government attempting to protect them from the certain ill effects of ObamaCare.  Republicans, in an attempt to protect the secrecy of their support of ObamaCare have used the denial of the Right to poise a defense of defunding the program.  In doing so, they have lost the only position of integrity to be found within the entire debate.   Republicans birthed the ideology of mandated health care models in America.  They have wanted “ObamaCare” (or the like) for no less than 40 years and have pushed for it on several fronts since 1974.  Supporters of the Republican Party must come to terms with this in order to understand what is really happening in America today and within their own Party.   

Amazing is the deafening impact of denial when coupled with ignorance.  Of course, the Left will never acknowledge that their great one is perhaps the single most deceptive president in US history and Right will never realize their political elite have long since abandoned them and their conservative values.  In the end, we are left with exactly what we have here today.  We now live in a land where rhetoric has replaced reality.


 
Picture
It is not that I am “anti-Right” or anything like that, though I have matured enough politically to see the gross republican failings.  Hell, that would make me a Liberal… or even worse – an Independent!  “A far Right Conservative,” a very good friend more recently called me.  It was to say that I tend to be a bit unbending in my political perspectives; rigid and unforgiving – extreme even (which is what “far Right” means anymore).  Consider it a “slight of compliment” that was both fitting and at times appropriate. 

It was a comment that made me think

Place the emphasis of “far Right Conservative” on Conservative; i.e. not Republican is what was being stated.  (I like the sound of that – “Not Republican!” It would make a good blog or website theme these days).  I like Republicanism and the associated political ideologies, but before that, the political values of fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutional rights, personal accountability, personal responsibility and limited government must be upheld.  Looking at my little checklist: Where do Republicans really fit in to my political value system?  In my opinion, Republican officials represent these values in terms of rhetoric only, not in practice.  They DO exist in Republican philosophy and mantra, but both current and more recent Republican leadership refuse to practice them.  Moreover, I see the Party for how it practices the art of American politicking, not how they wish to be perceived as practicing them.  And this is where I simply veer course from the “establishment Republican” – they either do not find such values as important as myself, or they simply refuse to see and accept the truth about what their Republican political leadership is actually doing.  It is not that they are bad people; it is just that I see things differently and am accordingly not blinded by party affiliations over personal values and common sense.  (Ahem, Not that all Republicans are).

I just don’t get it

Practically, everyone on the Right is fuming over Obama’s Executive Order essentially granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – and rightfully so.  What I don’t get is why the actively elected Right has called upon an out of office, professional President wannabe (with no active political decision making authority what-so-ever) to take the lead on the immigration issue.  Rather than effect active legislation, those HIRED TO SERVE IN OFFICE BY THE RIGHT have taken a roll of passivity while further relying on a moot political figure, solely because he is running for office.  Simply put, Romney is not in a position to right the unilateral wrong committed by Obama, nor is Romney in a position to dictate immigration policy.  Elected politicians, inept in their own individual political ability, have hid from the issue behind a Romney shield instead of taking action as they were hired by the people to do.  Yet, no one really seems to notice. 

For purposes of personal amusement, let’s take a quick glimpse on Romney and the Latino vote.

Romney’s presidential bid needs no less than 31% of the Latino vote AFTER Obama just rolled over, smiled and swallowed  and secured the Latino vote in a monumental way.  When pressed on whether he [Romney] would strike down the EO if elected President, he ducked, dodged and avoided answering.  [Should probably insert a note here that Romney’s avoidance means he will do nothing if elected].  Romney however, is not dumb, but he may be making a very stupid move to resolve the “immigration” conundrum he faces.

More of the same old thing

Have you noticed how the media consistently covered how “Obama deported more illegal Mexicans than Bush;” all while AZ was attacked for enforcing the same standard Obama was being given credit for?  Perhaps you may have noticed when Obama deportation numbers were being dropped in public view; ICE was granting amnesty.   This Democrat hypocrisy exists because MOST DEMOCRATS SUPPORT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, NOT AMNESTY.  Obama pandered to both sides of Liberal immigration temperament and then sealed the deal favoring the Latino vote over national sovereignty.  Suckers.

Here’s another little immigration conflict for ya!  Asians now stand to overtake Mexicans in immigration to the US.  If they (both Republicans and Democrats) have sold national sovereignty for the Latino vote to this extent; can you possibly imagine what they will be willing to do for the Asian vote once politicians decide to make Asians the next American race issue?  That is how they get the votes you know.  They make it look like anyone not of a specified race is wrong and racist for not being of that race and then promise they will make things different and better.  The whole time making it worse to have something to actually fix, then walking away - after the given ethic group has given them their blind loyalty that is.  If you are Black like me, that should sound all too familiar.  If you are Mexican, I hope you have been watching closely; you’re next.

Republican vetting against constitutionalism

Rubio is currently being vetted for the coveted VP slot.  Not a bad choice in terms of political perspectives, but one cannot help but wonder if this is merely a “Hey! I like Latino’s too!” move to counter traditionally low Latino support for Republican politicians in a time where the Latino vote could well be the deciding factor in the 2012 Presidential race.  Though obvious, this is not what makes it a potentially disastrous and stupid move. 

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has something in common with the good old Prez.  Rubio’s parents “held off” on become US citizens until such a time Marco had already earned dual citizenship.  (In case you have not noticed, the commonality is not the Cuban parent part….)  Please allow me to digress even further.

The Right hosed the “Birther” issue by attacking it the laziest way possible.  Challenged was “where Obama was born” because the Right felt that if it proved Obama was born in Kenya, it would be an open and shut case; WRONG!  They almost completely ignored the true issue in that Obama’s father gave him dual citizenship because he [Obama] was born of a father that claimed citizenship to a nation that extended its citizenship to those children of their citizens born abroad.  You see, it never matter “where” Obama was born per se, because the dual citizenship is where the constitutional argument lies; an argument more difficult in constitutional terms than that of Obama being born in a foreign nation.  Had Republicans taken the higher ground, the “birther” conspiracy would have held the merit it truly deserved.  The average American of course, does not know this and the majority of those whom do possess the apathy of those worthy of following only.  Be that as it may, constitutional eligibility has been brought back to the forefront by Republicans; incorrectly, but nonetheless by Republicans – and constitutionally minded Republicans at that. 

So, that leaves me pondering why a Republican presidential wannabe would venture so recklessly in the deep and murky waters of constitutional eligibility – after making such a big deal about it and all.

What matters is winning the Latino vote, not the constitution.  Sound familiar?  The system was wrong for allowing Obama to be vetted and consequently seated in terms of constitutional eligibility.  Now stay with me here.  Yet, because American politicians have failed in the three years since Obama’s election to correct (or even attempted to correct) the failed system that allowed Obama to win the Presidential seat in the name of the Democrats – it is now only appropriate that the constitutional eligibility blind eye now be turned in REPUBLICAN favor.  A little quid quo pro if you will.  Since when was the constitution relevant anyway?  When will we, as Americans, become smart enough to realize that Left versus Right yields no true winner when both are wrong?

When both are wrong; all lose

And that is the underlying theme of all of this anyway isn’t it?  Both sides are wrong and they are wrong on all of the issues.  When it comes to the political elite; they are of the same agenda, just with different means to their ends.  Obamacare was so wrong, yet we nominate its architect for President? Never mind Nixonian Republicans and their attempt, ignore Clinton’s attempts and Gingrich who pushed it while Speaker of the House. Illegal immigration is wrong, but Reagan passed Amnesty; now Obama pens an EO for the exact same reasons Reagan pushed it through.  I mean really, with such hypocrisy; who should take the establishment Republican or modern Liberal seriously?  When is the last time an administration, albeit Republican or Democrat, effectively reduced government, regulation and spending?  Chirp, chirp.  (Hint: WWII for those not taking the question with its posed rhetorical intent.  BTW, it was the sharpest recession recovery in US economic history – yet today both Republicans and Democrats see it only fit to increase spending in order to provide entitlements in barter for votes).  The big difference is that Democrats have arguably done a better job of exposing Republican failures than Republicans have exposed the egregious failings of Democrats.  What’s funny is that Americans are ever so bitterly divided – all while their given elected officials pursue a common agenda against the good and freedoms of the people.  Well, that’s not really funny is it?  Please interject sad, pathetic, pitiful or any other adjective you deem most appropriate lieu of funny.

Conservative deviance

The problem is that, to an establishment Republican, I maintain an “extremely conservative” political perspective.  (The word they are looking for is DIVIANT, not so much extreme – while fully admitting extreme can fit in several places).  ;)

It is this deviance that separates Conservatives from establishment Republicans.  It is almost as if establishment Republicans have not yet awakened to the fact their political elite do not share their agendas, or at least I hope they don’t (given all the unconstitutional laws passed and what not).

It goes to reason why so many people refuse to follow politics.  It is truly a culture of deceit, corruption, hypocrisy and destruction.  In not following, you are spared the frustration and don’t have to look like a hypocrite for supporting one side over the other; you win by not playing.  What’s better than that? 

I hope at this point you realize our problem is not so much what the Left is doing versus what the Right is doing.  They are doing the same things and we only find political wrongs “un-American” and unconstitutional when it is the other side penning the legislation.  It is as shameful as it is true.  Perhaps what is most shameful is supporting this Two Party system solely designed for internal destruction and expecting someone to take you seriously.


 
It is sort of funny, but I have been everything in the book.  Most notably, I would have to say would be neo-Nazi and liberal.  What makes it all the more amusing is those that have called me a neo-Nazi cannot list a single trait of commonality that would link a position of mine and that of the Nazism they heard (mis)used by CBS and Keith Olberman, thus picking the verbiage as a new key phrase of their own.  The sad part is the bastardization of liberalism that more aligns the Modern Liberal to the Nazi agenda than any other major political party in US history.

When faced with the neo-Nazi comment I usually ask “how” and wait for their response.  It is no surprise that their responses actually accuse the positions of the Modern Liberal and not my comments against this new and perverse direction the Left is moving in.  Therefore, it is laughable when a member of the Nazi leaning Left, accuses me of having a secret desire to bring Nazism to America.

When we look at liberalism, we cannot help but look at Obama himself.  Few realize how little he even uses the word and when he does, he dares to not delve into its lost definition.  The liberal of today cannot define liberalism beyond that of the common dictionary usage of “liberal.”  Tearfully sad I might add.  What’s worse is that so many of those whom supported Obama’s quest of Commander in Chief had so little interest in America herself, they could not articulate the difference between Left and Right, let alone find an internal political value that aligned them with a concept of liberalism that spawned an aged of accelerated Marxism, Leninism and economic Fascism; among other non American political agendas. 

Part of our collective problem is the need to define and label each other.  We do so with a ruthless scrutiny that disallows the individual expression of moderation.  You are either a full on party line puller, or nothing.  This is not unique to the rhetoric of the Left.  The Republican Party, which in my opinion has been a very poor representation of the Right in recent years is equally guilty.  Thank goodness for the Tea Party and their intent to return Conservative Values to the Right.  Either way, we are not a nation of special interests; we are a nation of individuals born with the right of the individual pursuit of our individual happiness!  To be clear, I redundantly used the word “individual” because that is where I feel the right to pursue life and life’s happiness falls.  It is not an entitlement in terms of guaranteed results as the Left is trying to turn it into.

However, I freely admit that I am not party line pulling conservative either.  Why would I want to be?  I define me; my political affiliation does not.  This definition is based upon a lifetime of developed personal values and beliefs.  I do not agree with all things conservative though conservatism best aligns with me.  If you were to be technical about it and base it solely upon “political aptitude,” I am actually better defined as Libertarian / Conservative!  Here is the kicker.  Most conservatives today actually lean more towards Libertarianism while they hold their conservative true to heart.  The Right of course downplays this because Libertarianism is gaining ever increasing representations that threatens the house that Republicans built on their journey away from conservative values as they pandered to the personal benefit of special interests.  This freedom that I express has caused some to say that I am liberal.  Hold your horses; if you read some of my writings, on the surface you will find some commonality with that of a Left that is now lost.

I am cool with gays in the military.  I have not always been, but “grew into it” as I matured in the military in the same manner I grew out liberalism while I was in the military.  Such a concept may at times cause a lesser politically articulate person to believe blue blood runs through these veins.  At the same time, though I am anti abortion, I am not Mr. Pro Life either.  Again, because I believe there are times that abortions are indeed called for, these same individuals may believe I am Pro Choice because seen in the writings are only certain key words that are attributed to a given side.  Just like people have selective hearing; people also have selective reading habits.  All I can say is read a bit deeper and if I write above a person’s level of understanding; read more – you will eventually catch up.  The one thing I am not is liberal.

Another part of this misunderstanding is what makes a conservative, a conservative.  I believe in less government - a very anti liberal position.  Going back to the individual pursuit, the pursuit comes with a certain burden of responsibility, a responsibility that lies solely with the individual.  It is not a gift owed to a person from governmental involvement in the regulation of personal lives.  What the government owes is equal opportunity, not equal outcomes!  The only gift provided upon birth is the gift of freedom that comes with being American.  What the individual does with that gift is up to them!  The Left of course does not agree with this.  And don’t feed me that “disadvantaged” BS because few were born more disadvantaged than I.

I believe in life and that life should be far more embraced than Americans today are willing to appreciate it.  Abortion in my eyes is not and should not be used as birth control, or as a tool to absolve individuals of their personal acts of irresponsibility.  Even though I do not fully agree with the Pro Life agenda, does not mean that I do not appreciate life for what it is or make me Pro Choice for that matter.

In as much, I believe in personal responsibility and accountability.  By far, this is the single greatest separation between my beliefs and that of the the Modern Liberal that has hijacked a once decent political philosophy.  What Obama and his minions of Modern Liberals want is equal outcomes in order to absolve the individual citizen of the personal responsibility that is granted as a gift upon birth requiring individuals to put their best foot forward despite the challenges they are born into.  This gift of freedom is viewed as curse because the Modern Liberal now covets on behalf of the other.  The other has identified this from a perspective of not having to fully effort the individual pursuit of happiness because it is easier for government to provide than it is for certain individuals to the risk the pursuit of more.  The ability to fail is freedom’s accountability for the willingness to strive.  The Modern Liberal now lacks the courage it takes to accept the consequences of failure as a part of Americanism.  By insisting upon equal outcomes, the Modern Liberal removes the individual responsibility of freedom and the accountability of where an individual finds them self in life.  In doing so, freedom itself is actually abolished!  Personal responsibility and accountability is everything.  It just takes guts to believe in it when times are hard.

How can I be cool with homosexuality?  It is about personal responsibility and accountability.  Homosexuality has been denounced since the onset of monotheistic religion.  For it, there is a consequence and that consequence comes in the form of accountability.  So, for me it is easy.  An adult makes choice just like any other and as with any choice, there will be accountability.  Because a person is gay does not make them bad when it comes to military performance.  It takes a certain type of person to be able to do the things required of those in the military and if that person happens to be gay, so be it.  From firsthand experience, the majority serving with them are more concerned with whether or not those that have been charged with the responsibility of having the life of another in their hands are capable of fulfilling the requirement.  It makes no sense to replace a gay person who can with a straight person who can’t.  Ask anyone who has had their life saved by someone who is gay and I am sure they will tell you the same thing.  If a gay person cannot fulfill such a mission, they should be prevented from serving BASED UPON THAT!  My fear is that gays will exploit this latest ruling and serve solely because they can and not because they are actually capable!  I fear that government will lack the courage to refuse service to those said gays out of fear of lawsuits and allow all gays because they are gay.  You see, supporting gays in the military comes with very conservative values; those of personal responsibility and accountability.  The Modern Liberal sees the tag GAY only and places no conditions of responsibility with it. 

So no, I am nothing like the Modern Liberal of today even when my views are confused with values of the Left.  For anyone stuck on the whole neo-Nazi thing, read a history book that is available anywhere in the world EXCEPT Germany and then re-evaluate your own position before judging mine based upon inaccurate Left Wing rhetoric.