Its time to rebuild the Republican Party.
1. Make a small government. We need the government to provide infrastructure, law enforcement, military protection, and other areas that the private sector cannot effectively do (ex. curiosity based research). The federal government should not be trying to solve everyones problems.
2. Focus on the economy and support the free market. Embrace globalization, even with the hardship of outsourcing. It will be best for the workers in the long run when new jobs are created, and cheaper products can be bought. Resist raising the minimum wage even with accusations of being heartless - it causes jobs to be loss, hurting more than it helps.
3. Be adamant in federalism. The states have rights. Lets not take them away. Why give the states power, yet take it away when the party disagrees with states decisions? Perfect example, let state courts and legislature decide on gay marriage. When they allow it, don't get angry and push for a nationwide ban. Encourage state and local activism.
4. Reduce both taxes and spending. Don't do one without the other. The last 8 years have not been managed correctly.
5. Stay pro-life. But don't alienate those who disagree.
6. Support the military. R&D for the military helps the private sector. But when decreasing government spending, make sure to include the military when looking for inefficiencies.
7. Fix healthcare. Offer a plan that rejects government sponsored healthcare for a market driven solution. We don't want to lose the scientific breakthroughs that are made because of competition in the market. We are the leaders in the biomedical sciences for a reason.
8. Learn science. Become educated. Ex: 1) Stem cells do not come from aborted fetuses. They come from unused embryos in IVF. Big difference. 2) Fruit fly research is not a pet project. A little education will go a long way in policy.
9. Expand the base. Don't let liberals claim whole groups. Gays, women, minorities, and the poor do not belong to them. We need to embrace them, and explain why specific policies (ex: equal wages for equal work) would be more symbolic than actually helping them.
10. Bring back intellectualism. William Buckley Jr. shouldn't be the only one. We need to foster conservative intellectualism - more than just the WSJ and the National Review. Bashing liberal academics doesn't make our ideas any better. Fund research and institutions that will revisit the academic roots of the party. Don't sacrifice academic integrity to reach out to the everyday man. That said, don't be arrogant either.
There are many more things to do, but this is a good start. Let's not lose hope. We've got 4 more years and then another try!
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Multitasking
John McCain called for the debates to be postponed until the economic crisis was fixed.
Barack Obama rejected this idea, saying that the debate must go on. He said, "part of the president’s job is to deal with more than one thing at once. In my mind it’s more important than ever.”
I want a president who can prioritize. One who will not spread himself too thin, and focus on the main problems of the day.
And this is supported by the many scientific studies showing that multitasking decreases performance and increases errors.
Don't dismiss this as showing that McCain can't handle the job. I'd say its wisdom in knowing ones limits. As much as Obama likes to think he can, no man can do eveything.
Barack Obama rejected this idea, saying that the debate must go on. He said, "part of the president’s job is to deal with more than one thing at once. In my mind it’s more important than ever.”
I want a president who can prioritize. One who will not spread himself too thin, and focus on the main problems of the day.
And this is supported by the many scientific studies showing that multitasking decreases performance and increases errors.
Don't dismiss this as showing that McCain can't handle the job. I'd say its wisdom in knowing ones limits. As much as Obama likes to think he can, no man can do eveything.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
White Privilege
Pam's House Blend has posted quotes from Tim Wise of AWARE, a group based out of Nashville , TN. With liberals so bent on understanding nuance and the many shades of gray in this world, I particularly enjoyed this quote.
'And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.'
This analysis is so very insightful. I am glad we have reduced the personalities and issues in this campaign to the issue of white privilege.
First, I acknowledge that the Presidency has a unique role in guiding this country. However, with an approval rating of only 20% for Congress, something is clearly going wrong. To claim that Bush has the majority of responsibility for unemployment, housing, and inflation is ridiculous. There is fault from congress, the president, and the market in general. It is not the government's job to protect people and corporations from stupidity and bad investments. There should be regulation, yes, but a huge oversight committee would not have avoided this crisis.
Second, he claims that America is isolated from world opinion. This is a blanket statement which is in itself neither good nor bad. I think America should listen to the opinions other nations, but itself remain independent. Every decision aligned with world opinion is not necessarily good, and decisions that are at odds with the world decision are not necessarily bad.
The claim that it is only white privilege guiding this election is sickening. Disregard beliefs in a free market, globalization, promoting life and reducing abortion, and promoting innovation. Completely ignore disdain for 'progressive tax codes' which support wealth redistribution, for government intrusion into our work, our bank accounts, choices for health care, our choices of schools.
And Tim Wise while pointing out 'hypocracy' in the 'preferential' treatment of Sarah Palin and John McCain, he is mocking each of them with the same attacks he accuses whites of committing against minorities.
Lastly, he is mocking the claim that change is too ill defined. That anything has to be better than what we have now. The liberal platform is largely anti the Bush administration. It requires and is defined by the 'other.' It does not stand on its own, but is based on being against the platform of conservatives. As such it is required to consistently tear down the other platform. The country thought Bush was leading us wrong, but did not run to Kerry, because there wasn't a platform to run towards. This seems to be happening again. Change is defined by what it is not. Not on its own foundations.
To the liberals, I want to remind you that burning down your neighbors house doesn't make yours look any better.
'And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.'
This analysis is so very insightful. I am glad we have reduced the personalities and issues in this campaign to the issue of white privilege.
First, I acknowledge that the Presidency has a unique role in guiding this country. However, with an approval rating of only 20% for Congress, something is clearly going wrong. To claim that Bush has the majority of responsibility for unemployment, housing, and inflation is ridiculous. There is fault from congress, the president, and the market in general. It is not the government's job to protect people and corporations from stupidity and bad investments. There should be regulation, yes, but a huge oversight committee would not have avoided this crisis.
Second, he claims that America is isolated from world opinion. This is a blanket statement which is in itself neither good nor bad. I think America should listen to the opinions other nations, but itself remain independent. Every decision aligned with world opinion is not necessarily good, and decisions that are at odds with the world decision are not necessarily bad.
The claim that it is only white privilege guiding this election is sickening. Disregard beliefs in a free market, globalization, promoting life and reducing abortion, and promoting innovation. Completely ignore disdain for 'progressive tax codes' which support wealth redistribution, for government intrusion into our work, our bank accounts, choices for health care, our choices of schools.
And Tim Wise while pointing out 'hypocracy' in the 'preferential' treatment of Sarah Palin and John McCain, he is mocking each of them with the same attacks he accuses whites of committing against minorities.
Lastly, he is mocking the claim that change is too ill defined. That anything has to be better than what we have now. The liberal platform is largely anti the Bush administration. It requires and is defined by the 'other.' It does not stand on its own, but is based on being against the platform of conservatives. As such it is required to consistently tear down the other platform. The country thought Bush was leading us wrong, but did not run to Kerry, because there wasn't a platform to run towards. This seems to be happening again. Change is defined by what it is not. Not on its own foundations.
To the liberals, I want to remind you that burning down your neighbors house doesn't make yours look any better.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Starting Here
As the first post for this blog, I want to explain my rationale for why I am writing.
I am tired. I am tired of candidates, parties, organizations, or individuals speaking for entire groups of people.
How can bloggers and columnists claim that John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for VP is an "insult to all women." Do they speak for all women? Should Sarah Palin be insulted? And what of the millions of American women who will vote for the ticket?
Why should teachers be forced to be in a union? A union whose monies and efforts go towards candidates that many teachers don't support? Are these leaders so wise to know what is beneficial for each individual teacher?
As a gay man, I am frustrated with people telling me repeatedly that I am "voting against my own interest," or that I am "self-loathing," or that I will realize I am truly "a liberal at heart."
Yes, the GOP isn't perfect. No, I do not agree with John McCain on every issue. But I believe in many conservative ideals. And because I am conservative does make me any less a part of the gay community.
Both sides like to claim they are in touch with entire groups of people. I am simply stating that because I am a gay man, does not mean that my vote is predetermined to be cast for a liberal. I vote on more than gay issues. My identity is not contained in the word gay. I am first and foremost a Christian, then a human being, a scientist, a friend, etc., and somewhere down the line, gay. Being gay is part of who I am, and I embrace that. But it does not define me.
With this blog, I want to show the diversity of views within the gay community. I want to counter the anger from the gay community towards republicans, conservatives, fundamentalists, and Christian churches. I feel that the gay community responds with the same hostile attitudes that these groups are accused of displaying.
Lets restart the dialogue. Somewhere along the way, it got very one-sided.
I am tired. I am tired of candidates, parties, organizations, or individuals speaking for entire groups of people.
How can bloggers and columnists claim that John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for VP is an "insult to all women." Do they speak for all women? Should Sarah Palin be insulted? And what of the millions of American women who will vote for the ticket?
Why should teachers be forced to be in a union? A union whose monies and efforts go towards candidates that many teachers don't support? Are these leaders so wise to know what is beneficial for each individual teacher?
As a gay man, I am frustrated with people telling me repeatedly that I am "voting against my own interest," or that I am "self-loathing," or that I will realize I am truly "a liberal at heart."
Yes, the GOP isn't perfect. No, I do not agree with John McCain on every issue. But I believe in many conservative ideals. And because I am conservative does make me any less a part of the gay community.
Both sides like to claim they are in touch with entire groups of people. I am simply stating that because I am a gay man, does not mean that my vote is predetermined to be cast for a liberal. I vote on more than gay issues. My identity is not contained in the word gay. I am first and foremost a Christian, then a human being, a scientist, a friend, etc., and somewhere down the line, gay. Being gay is part of who I am, and I embrace that. But it does not define me.
With this blog, I want to show the diversity of views within the gay community. I want to counter the anger from the gay community towards republicans, conservatives, fundamentalists, and Christian churches. I feel that the gay community responds with the same hostile attitudes that these groups are accused of displaying.
Lets restart the dialogue. Somewhere along the way, it got very one-sided.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)