Tag Archive for republican at Zeal For Truth

Tag Archive for 'republican'

Why I am not a Democrat

Published by Kenneth Martens July 16, 2008 in Religion and Politics. 14 Comments

This is part of my Christian libertarianism series, which is a description of my beliefs. I do not claim to speak for all Christians, all libertarians, or all Christian libertarians. In previous articles I explained how:

My libertarian beliefs are compatible with a biblical worldview
Why I believe in minarchy (small government) rather than anarchy (no government)
Why I appreciate Ayn Rand but cannot be an Objectivist
Why I am not a Libertarian Party member

Today I will discuss why I cannot in good conscience join the Democratic Party.

In my last article, I explained why I believe the Libertarian Party (LP) is not a serious political party. If the LP isn’t the answer, maybe I can have an impact in one of the major political parties. Let’s look at the Democratic party. At a surface the Democratic party appears more congruent with libertarian values than the Republican party is. The Constitutional Conservative explains:

There are three areas to conservatism (or liberalism, if you prefer):

Foreign Policy

Social Policy

Fiscal Policy

Libertarians will generally be liberal on foreign policy (isolationist, anti-military, many are anti-Israel, etc), and liberal on social policy (legalize drugs and so on), while conservative fiscally (return to gold standard, etc).

Foreign policy
Our own Colin Elliott has written an article explaining that libertarian policy is not isolationist, but is rather based on the non-aggression principle. The Democratic party may sometimes support policies that coincide with libertarian values, but this does not indicate any real agreement in principle. You might think that a libertarian would be eager to vote for Barack Obama, a candidate who has steadfastly voiced opposition to the war in Iraq. You would be wrong: Obama objects to the war in Iraq, but he’s no friend to libertarians. Just this past Monday (July 14) he vowed to send 10,000 additional troops to Afghanistan while reducing the troop levels in Iraq. Democratic foreign policy is unacceptable to a libertarian.

Social policy
This is the tricky one. As a libertarian, I support liberal social policy. That is, I can agree with legalizing drugs, permitting gay marriage, and so forth. However, as a Christian I cannot condone those same activities. I’m not advocating sin, I just want the government to get out of people’s lives. So although I sometimes agree with the policies the Democratic party advocates, I can’t agree with their reasons for advocating them. I can’t associate with an organization that asks me to accept sin as a legitimate lifestyle.

Today, on behalf of Democrats across America, we join together in celebrating the contributions that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans and their families make to our society and reaffirm our Party’s commitment to promoting full equality under the law for every American.

As leaders of the Democratic Party, we stand proudly with the LGBT community and commit ourselves to working together to build an America that is truly inclusive. Every American has the right to live in dignity, with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law.

[Democrats.org]

Sure, I agree that everyone should have “full equality under the law,” but I cannot agree with the implicit assumption that Americans must accept the homosexual lifestyle as morally acceptable in order to have an “inclusive” society. I can advocate full equality under the law while also speaking out against sin.

Oh, and the Democratic party’s support for abortion rights doesn’t help much.

Fiscal policy
This is an easy one. Democrats typically favor increasing the scope of government programs, a more progressive income tax, and all manner of wealth redistribution programs. No principled libertarian can support Democratic fiscal policy.

To sum up
So, while libertarianism might appear to match with Democratic values, on closer inspection it is a poor fit. Libertarian principles are at odds with Democratic values in foreign policy and fiscal policy. On social policy, the Democratic party’s policies are often congruent with libertarian principles, but the underlying Democratic agenda is antithetical to biblical values. As a Christian libertarian, I disagree with the Democrats about foreign policy, fiscal policy, and social policy. Three strikes, you’re out.

Liveblog: The Iowa GOP Debate

Published by Colin December 12, 2007 in Politics. 8 Comments

For the first time, we are going to liveblog today’s GOP debate (before the blog, a long time ago, there was this, this and this). It is the final debate before the Iowa Caucuses. The debate starts at 1:00 EST. Stuck at work? No cable? You like hacks like us? We’re going to bring the action live, with commentary. Tune back here around 2:00pm EST.

1:55 - Welcome everyone. Looking forward to getting this thing started.

1:57 - I wonder if John Cox is still ticked off that he isn’t invited to these debates.

1:59 - I’ll be watching via the fox news stream, where all the candidates seem to be practicing at being statues before the cameras come on. What terrible audio!

2:02 - Thank goodness, no discussion on Iraq.

2:03 - They seem to have a grip on the applause. Another positive. A well disciplined audience gives a lot more time to the candidates.

2:06 - Giuliani says that economic crisis is not a issue of national security - thank goodness. Ron Paul says it is, and ties it to foreign policy.

2:09 - Tancredo miraculously does not tie this question to immigration.

2:09 - Thompson speaks truth - the debt is going to really hurt future generations. Romney decides to sound upbeat and polished. His breathing and pacing is quite measured.

2:10 - Huckabee speaks to his socialistic/protectionst roots: a country is responsible for feeding itself, fueling itself and fighting for itself.

2:11 - Keyes argues to abolish the income tax, replace it with a sales tax.

2:12 - excellent question: what sacrifices should the American people make to relieve debt. Giuliani says its not the American people, it is the government. “Rather than relying on government as a nanny government, we should rely on people to make their own choices”

2:14 - Paul goes to foreign policy again… wow. “No need to sacrifice… we need more liberty!”

2:14 - Huckabee calls current healthcare model “intervention based” - is this a rip off of Paul. Are these geeky libertarian words becoming cool again?

2:16 - The tenor of this debate is so different than other debates. All the candidates sound like radicals compared to their former selves at the start of the campaign. They are demanding to “follow the constitution” and seeking to radically cut taxes and spending. Tancredo right now “don’t ask the government for womb to tomb protection.”

2:18 - Thompson says he’ll run debts for military and infrastructure. The guy that a lot of conservatives loved before he entered, is the biggest left-winger on the stage right now.

2:19 - Question: who is paying more than their “fair share” in taxes?

2:20 - the interviewer tries to interrupt Alan Keyes while he’s bouncing back and forth like a muppet - bad idea.

2:21 - Thompson is quite witty - would like to be rich like Romney so he doesn’t have to care about taxes.

2:22 - Ron Paul talks about the “inflation tax” as the “most evil of all taxes.” Iowa republicans say “wha?”

2:23 - free statement time! Wasn’t this supposed to be a debate. And now a round of commercials from the candidates…

2:25 - Paul asked about keeping foreign markets open while protecting American jobs. Paul talks about opening individual trade agreements, and fixing monetary problems. Again, probably over everyone’s head.

2:27 - Huckabee with another “three things” speech. How simple all our problems are! I’m surprised Huck doesn’t pull out the chalkboard.

2:28 - McCain - “I’m the biggest free-trader” Ha! But then makes a bold point about eliminating subsidies for farms. Guy has gusto!

2:30 - Tancredo: “NAFTA is a disaster” - here he goes on immigration now. Hits up on national sovereignty also. Duncan Hunter, peaked eyebrow and all, “trade deals are business deals between nations” - awesome!

2:32 - Paul: “We have no chance if we don’t restrain the government.” Thomspson talks about how afraid we all should be about terrorists.

2:33 - Thompson fights the host and wins some applause. Anarchy has now broken out. Everyone talks about global warming at once.

2:34 - Giuliani: climate change is real. Everyone else doesn’t want to answer the question, but they all want to speak. Such are the quandries of politicians.

2:36 - Keyes started out with a great moment after the anarchy… then goes on a rant unrelated to global warming. He’s waddling again. He’s unstoppable. Thompson just makes fun of him. Best debate ever!

2:38 - Huckster: “We don’t own this earth.” I think someone just started humming “Imagine.”

2:39 - Huck: “Let the government be the marketplace and we’ll create the demand that lowers the price.” This guy is insane.

2:40 - Tancredo makes the best statement of the season on global warming - the government has no idea how to set mandates, they have no clue what they are doing. I trust the market ore than the government.

2:42 - Huckabee cites the founding fathers. Yes, they really would have loved that last statement on making the government the market.

2:42 - Going to education now. Let’s see if anyone can tie it to terrorism. Go!

2:44 - Giuliani calls current education model a “government command” model. Duncan Hunter tells campfire stories about education as a response. “Let’s inspire them to reach for the stars.”

2:47 - Romney wants the fed to be like his state program - give free tuition to students in the top 25% of graduate exams.

2:48 - Huck says that education should be a state issue, and then says that the federal government. Huckabee says to release “weapons of mass instruction.”

2:49 - Keyes is fighting the host and wins. Get’s 30 seconds, and demands one minute. This lady is going to get fired. Claims he’s being ignored. He uses his time to preach. There goes the bobbing. This guy should never be at another debate again.

2:50 - Back to Paul, who politely waited for Keyes to stop babbling. Wants to get rid ofDept. of Education and give tax credits to teachers and encourage homeschooling. Wants parents to have control again. Very strong answer - first for Paul on the night.

2:52 - Thompson calls out the NEA. Have fun swimming with the fishies!

2:53 - Tancredo gives a strong answer and gets applause attacking Huckabee. Nice one! Huckabee gives back cool word-twist: “communicator in chief.”

2:55 - Romney attacks the Union too, but he’s got an army of Mormons to fight for him. Thompson only has a bunch of actors on his team.

2:57: Duncan Hunter: “The sky is falling!” Talks about all the potential enemies we could have and how we should strengthen the military.

2:58 - Paul, in one year, would end the war and reestablish diplomatic relation.

3:00 - first mention of “radical Islam” - took a whole hour. Astounding!

3:01 - Romney is ready for universal health care. Huck says that the president should be “a president of all the united states.” Does this guy ever say anything of substance?

3:02 - Keyes is probably the only motivational speaker that can hold a flame to Huckabee. Talks over the host again. Still going… Still going…

3:05 - Keyes plugs his “political army of america’s revival.” Only has to be reminded to shut-up once.

3:07 - Video time.

3:09 - Keyes attacks Romney about flip-flopping. Then says that our creator is more important than the constitution. Attacks Giuliani. Is asked to shut-up twice.

3:12 - Thompson says that the intelligence and military has been “neglected” and that is why no one trusts their reports. Says we need to rely on other country’s intelligence.

3:13 - More videos.

3:14 - Huckabee asked about examples in healthcare and education. Guy is quick witted. Takes the golden rule and applies it to health care. Missed the last bit - as my internet broke and is restarting.

3:19 - Tancredo grilled on foreign policy. Says debate can be narrowed to the idea that we can’t leave Iraq, but we can stop being the police-force in Iraq.

3:20 - Paul grilled on how in the world he’s going to do all this stuff. Other candidates laugh. “Freedom is unifying,” says Paul. Claims that he has the ability to unify congress. Me thinks not.

3:23 - New years’ resolution time. Keyes dodges it. McCain asks for unity. Huck says he’ll be careful about what he says. Romney, wants to “come together.” Thompson wants to be a better man. Tancredo actually answers, by saying Huckabee is poor on immigration, Paul says follow the constitution, Hunter says to buy american, and Giuliani says we should have a sense of optimism.

3:25 - Debate is over.

Immigration is not the Problem: American Policy Is

Published by Colin June 8, 2007 in General and Current Events. 15 Comments

Cannock coal mines similar to those my father worked in.

I am a first generation american - my father came here in the 1970’s from the state-owned coal mines and military imperialism of the United Kingdom in Ireland. In England he lived in a government housing project, worked in a government coal mine and joined the military to participate in peacekeeping in Northern Ireland during the bloodiest years in Northern Ireland’s modern history. Those were his options. The military took him to South America in the mid seventies where he served out his time.

He ran into some Texans in Belize who picked him up and drove him to Harrisburg, Oregon. There he met my mother and decided to marry her and was promptly deported - barely managing to get a visa. He started his life with her in a spare room working a temporary job in a local manufacturing facility. Now, though he still retains his British citizenship, he is Worldwide Director of Quality for a large manufacturing outfit based in central Los Angeles owned by an Iranian and staffed by pacific islanders and Mexicans.

My father is clearly not part of the problem - he has come over to work for himself and what he holds dear. He has done this in the likeness of the immigrants in the 19th to mid-20th century - gambling with all he has to make a better life for himself.

But some of today’s immigrant are different. They come to the United States with no intention of staying and rather than work for themselves, they quickly seek to gain access to America’s vast welfare net. They have children while in this country to get them taken care of by the state as well.

It is, of course, perfectly correct to place the blame for these actions on the immigrants that are doing this. At the same time, we have to ask ourselves a tough question - is there anything different about modern America that is contributing to this? Surely there are still hardworking immigrants; but why aren’t we getting more of them?

America has set itself up for the current immigration problem over the past eighty years. Indeed, immigration itself is not actually even the issue here. Yes, today’s immigration problems are actually the unintended consequences of domestic policy decisions originally intended to help Americans.

There was absolutely no attraction in 19th century America for the kind of immigrants that are now entering the country in droves. Immigrants faced thsi reality: work hard - or suffer. There was no safety net, no free health care, no free education, no free retirement and no legacy of amnesty for law-breakers. However today’s America represents an attractive entitlement prize for anyone who can just get here long enough to have a child or get bailed out by amnesty bills.

Thus, the immigration problem was not caused by lack of a fence, lack of border security or lack of some other kind of further government involvement - the immigration problem has been caused by government and it most definitely will not be solved by government. We are merely reaping what we have sewn. The answer then is not more intervention - but less.

We have to take a critical and honest look at the consequences of our welfare state expansion if we are going to fix this. We have to be willing to allow America to again be a land of opportunity (and risk) for any who would seek to come and gamble for a better life.

The reality is that the American dream is a dream of immigrants, like my father - and it takes immigrants to rejuvenate that dream in every generation. As it stands now, we are attracting people who dream of a handout and materialistic, lazy comfort. And the dream will die with this generation unless the cogs of American capitalism are allowed to once again be turned by citizens and immigrants working together - for themselves.

Amnesty is beaten, but not dead

Published by Chang He June 8, 2007 in Politics. 14 Comments

As I write these words, the much vaunted “immigration reform” bill is dying in the Senate. In its relatively short life, the bill dragged down the now Democratic congress’s approval rating to pre-election levels, alienated most of the President’s remaining supporters, and changed the familiar right-left division to a commoner-elite one. The commoners have won this battle, and it remains to be seen whether we can win the war. To do so, a clear, consistent, and supportable set of goals will need to be promoted.

First, existing immigration laws need to be enforced. America can do anything it sets it mind to, and if that means deporting 12 million people whose presence costs our country trillions a year, who presence adds little or nothing to our society, then we can do that too. They are criminals, and while they need to be treated as people, they can firmly and kindly be sent home. Criminals need to be punished, and granting amnesty now, with a promise of stricter enforcement later, is caviling at best and deceptive at worst. We must hold our government to its responsibilities, including upholding the rule of law and protecting our country from invasion, both military and civilian.

Second, a firm idea of what citizenship means must be promulgated. We must begin to understand citizenship and its benefits as a great privilege, and not hand out this privilege cheaply. It is not helpful when Senator Harry Reid of Nevada says on the Senate floor that the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants are “Americans.” They are not. They are foreign lawbreakers, and are an economic drain on our society. In order to preserve America, we citizens cannot allow her to bankrupted, especially not for the sake of non-citizen criminals. There are many who argue that it is unfair to send illegal immigrants home when they are better off here. But that is precisely the point. They are better off here because this is America, and if we want to preserve what America is, we must enforce her laws, and we must not allow the breaking of them to be rewarded.

Third, constructive and effective immigration reform needs to be passed. A vague notion of America being a “land of opportunity” with open borders still exists in the minds of many Americans. This idea, like most ideals, does not work in reality. America was able to be a land of opportunity in the past, when higher levels of education were not as necessary as work ethic to success. In a modern world, education is necessary to succeed, and immigration should be restricted to those individuals able to contribute in meaningful ways to our society. Confrontation with the Mexican government must be forced. For years they have eased their social tension by exporting their lower classes across our border, and we must stop this flow from both sides. We must enforce our laws regarding deportation and we need to encourage responsibility in the Mexican government, refusing to allow them to force us to pay for their problems and their citizens. Opponents of the war in Iraq often point to its cost as a significant mark against it, with various estimates between $400-700 billion floated. This amnesty plan would cost at least four times that amount. And we must end birthright citizenship for the children of illegals. This legal loophole only encourages lawbreaking, and should be replaced by a model rewarding the legal naturalization process by only allowing the children of those in the country legally to become citizens.

S. 1348 was bad for America, and its defeat is a positive good. But we as a populace cannot rest now that the government is truly reacting to our desires. We must press on from here in a direction that benefits us all, and preserves our country.

EDIT: The original version of this post neglected the hyperlink in the second paragraph.

The GOP Debate (in short)

Published by Colin June 6, 2007 in Politics and Current Events. 28 Comments

I have very little time to post a lot of verbiage about the debate - so I will just mention a few quick observations.

Tom Tancredo
Tancredo really had a lot going for him going into this debate. While everyone could see he was the most outspoken on immigration - he really seemed to stand for limited government. Last night he had the opportunity to discuss the caveat of the English language. Quite frankly, I was appalled. He refuses to have his website in Spanish, and then, in the most outrageous proposal of the year from any politician thus far, declared that all immigration (both legal and illegal) be stopped:

We talk about all the immigration reform we want, and what it’s got to get down to is this: Are we ready for a timeout? Are we actually ready to say, “Enough is enough”? We have to stop all legal immigration except for the — for people coming into this country as family members, immediate family members, and/or refugees.

Granted, Tancredo also had the best statement in the debate on what Role he would have for George W. Bush if Tancredo was president:

Some time ago, 2003 I think it was, I got a call from Karl Rove who told me that because of my criticism of the president, I should never darken the doorstep of the White House. I have been so disappointed in the president in so many ways… I would have to tell George Bush exactly the same thing Karl Rove told me.

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

Mike Huckabee
The most memorable moment of the night for Huckabee, was his literal sermon on God. I really couldn’t doubt the man’s sincerity. Very eloquent, specific and unashamed about his views on creation.

Duncan Hunter
I think Hunter’s idea about a border fence are all washed up. I watched a great episode of Penn and Teller BS [WARNING: ADULT LANGUAGE] that demonstrated just how weak his fence was (physically and in terms of policy). He hammered on it over and over, making his aluminum fence sound like stone ramparts.

John McCain
As in the last few debates, McCain has had responses more scripted than dialogue from Titanic. I think even God got a little tired of it.

Mitt Romney
Romney got asked directly about his blatantly socialist health care system. He then proceed to write a second book on doublespeak. His system is virtually identical to Hillary’s plan, and identical in principle. Sorry Mr. Romney, but “mandated” and “free market” do not belong in the same sentence.

Zeal For Truth