Skip to main content

Revolution a-Brewin'?

"How long it will take for this revolution to run its course, and turn the world we live in upside-down, cannot be known. It may be this year or it may be fifty years. But this much we do know: those of us committed to the building of an intellectual infrastructure necessary to overturn the despotism of a government-managed society must never let up. Never let anyone tell you that what you believe is an anachronism. The Left does not own the future."

While we Conservatives continue our healthy debate on the choices made by our President, while we voice our dissatisfaction with the current apathetic approach to protecting our borders, and while we call B.S. on any Republican who claims to be Conservative but doesn't follow word with deed, I am reminded of something I read a few years ago: "The Transformation of American Opinion," written before the events of 9/11. It could not possibly be more relevant that it is today. I enjoy reading Lew Rockwell's opinion pieces.

This piece reflects my optimism that we are due for and will have the strength for a revolution of sorts in this country. When our Congressional representatives can craft a lovely retirement plan for themselves but subject the "average" American to the nanny-state expectation of receiving funds from a failing socialist mess like Social Security, we should be getting just a tad angry. When a whole new department called "Homeland Security" is created while our borders are neglected, we should be a whole lotta angry. Has this country lost its friggin' mind? Where is the American spirit? I believe Mr. Rockwell was onto something in 2001 and it's only a matter of time.

I'm fed up and in 2008, the Republican party had better cough up a candidate who will get this country back on track to less government and more free market, less talk and more action or this ConservaChick will be looking to the Libertarians for a viable option.

By the way, I feel the need to point out that I differ largely with the Libertarian view of war as imperialism. I believe that wars are sometimes necessary for the defense of our nation. I do not believe war in and of itself is imperialistic.

Comments

GreatBlueWhale said…
You know, I feel your pain about the lack of just about everything we expected from the GOP, but going to one of the fringe parties is so useless from a practical perspective. The way I read it, we have two years to raise enoughh Cain that the GOP WILL follow thru like they should. I think that is the main reason for all the furor on the right re: Harriet Meirs.

Popular posts from this blog

Is conscription the prescription?

US Representative, Charlie Rangel (D-NY) is at it again. Rangel's prescription for fixing the ills we're feeling in Iraq is a draft . I have very mixed feelings about this. Conscription is conscription no matter what you choose to label it. Is that appropriate in a free country? On the flip side of this coin, I've often thought that compulsory national service would be a great idea for American kids right out of high school. It might have been a better start for me than learning to down beer at a Liberal Arts university! Two years in the service might give kids time to think about their future, learn higher levels of responsibility, and begin to take life more seriously. There are many countries who require some level of mandatory military service: Belarus, Chile, China, Croatia, Serbia, Russia, Iran, Lebanon, our neighbor Mexico, and our old buddy Germany, to name a few. Gee, now that I look at that partial list... aren't many of those countries Socialist or at battl...

As the Blog Turns...

Gee. I have found myself fascinated by the soap opera unfolding in the comments section of this blog since last night. One little mention on a controversial Democrat's blog and it's High Noon on ConservaChick! (Yes, I'm laughing while I type this.) For those of you who have no idea what's happening in the ever-expanding comments section , join the club! Here's what I know about Mark Nickolas from bits and pieces I've read on his blog, and from a local news report: Nickolas likes to sneer at Republicans and call them snide little nicknames as he provides his "Unfiltered and Candid Look at Politics, Politicians and the Media in Kentucky;" he raised a ruckus within the Democrat party here in Kentucky by filing a suit against the chairman of the party , Jerry Lundergan; and he will be appearing on the same panel with yours truly on Thursday night. That's about it. You now have the benefit of my not-so-extensive knowledge on this subject. Nickolas poste...

Pol Watchers Responds

I think it's important for anyone with a voice on the internet to present all sides of an issue. In that spirit, I am posting the response I received via email from John Stamper of the Lexington Herald-Leader to the piece I wrote about censorship on blogs: "Your post about Pol Watchers does not contain the entire thread of comments, as your blog states. If you go to the post in question , you will see that there has been no effort to eliminate comments just because they question Jonathan Miller and Mark Nickolas. Plenty of them still remain. However, as stated in my comment on Pol Watchers, we're not going to allow people to use the blog as a forum for name calling. It's that simple. Check around, it's a pretty common policy. For example, blogs at WashingtonPost.com have this policy: 'User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsi...