I know it's been a LONG time since I last wrote an entry, but with Yahoo closing their blogs down, I'll be here a lot more frequently. Besides, there are things which bother me, and sometimes writing about them helps me to understand them a little better. Such is the topic I've chosen for today.
I describe myself as a Constitutional Conservative, but some of my friends describe me as a libertarian. There are areas where Constitutionalists converge with libertarians, and areas where we diverge...and sometimes, the convergences arrive from very different starting points.
A little history is in order. The Libertarian Party was formed in 1971 from a strange mix of anti-Vietnam War and pro-drug legalization elements. The economic liberty and governmental minimalism elements of the party came later. In the context of the early 1970's, Libertarians were oddly left wing, as opposed to the right-of-center aspects they now display. Constitutionalism as we know it now, was not truly present in the early seventies. Eventually, the Libertarian Party began to attract anti-tax elements, as well as followers of the Austrian school of economics, and the Libertarian Party/movement as we know it came to be. Thus the slow development of Constitutional Conservatism.
I know people who seem to think that if a person is a Conservative, therefore, he MUST be opposed to equal rights for all Americans, he MUST be anti-drug, pro-religion to the point of shoving it down peoples' throats, a moralist, culturally blue-nosed, and essentially a Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson disciple. Boy are THOSE idiots wrong!
Social "conservatives" aren't Conservative in the least. They're an aberrant form of moralist hypocrites who like to tell other people how to live (think Laura Ingraham) while doing the opposite in their own lives. I mention Laura Ingraham because she's typical of the moralists: She advocates intact families, but has adopted two trophy kids while remaining unmarried herself; says women should dress modestly, while showing her own body off regularly (look at the hemlines on the skirts she wears in her publicity photos...nice legs, but hey! Where's the modesty, Laura?); she bloviates about the "elites" and "regular people," while she attended an Ivy League school as an undergraduate, and an elite law school after...as well, she regularly cavorts with Republican higher-ups, has been a White House staffer and a clerk to a Supreme Court justice. Yep, she's just plain folks...and Barack Obama is a Reaganite. Ingraham is a typical media creature who says what she thinks her audience wants to hear, but isn't of her audience. (I WILL have a post dealing with media Conservatives a little later down the road)
So what the hell IS a Constitutional Conservative? The short answer is that a ConCon believes the Constitution means what it says, provides a means to modify it IF THE PEOPLE SO DEMAND IT, and places restraints which are proper on both federal and state governments. Some have called us "Tenthers," as a subtle slam toward people who want birth and other personal records on Barry Hussein Soetoro to be released, but we're far more than just people who want to see the Tenth Amendment to be followed.
The Constitution is the framework of our government. I realize you probably already knew that, but plenty of people have forgotten that. It does not guarantee "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," despite what Schmuckie Schumer or your local town know-it-all might proclaim...that comes from the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution doesn't give you your rights...those come with being born. The Constitution GUARANTEES your rights by placing restraint on the powers of the federal government. YES, it IS a "charter of 'negative rights'," as our Dipshit-in-Cheat has called it, because it says what government cannot do to you and doesn't say what it can do "for" you. Apparently, the "smartest man in the room" is unaware that the revered founder of his party, Thomas Jefferson (although now you'd think it was Karl Marx or V.I. Lenin), said "A government powerful enough to give you all you need is powerful enough to take all you have," or else he doesn't give a shit. Bluntly, if government "gives" you something, it took it first from someone else, and then, like a favor from a Mafia don, you owe the government...and they WILL collect, just as the Mob does ("...THAT'S the 'Chicago Way'!").
"All right, Conn! What the hell are the differences you were talking about?" I'm glad you haven't forgotten, because I'm getting there. Libertarians want to be left alone, ConCons want the government to be back within its Constitutional limits...that's the main difference. The others come from direction at which we look at the Constitution.
Constitutional Conservatives believe that the federal government should operate within the limits imposed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. These amendments read as follows:
I describe myself as a Constitutional Conservative, but some of my friends describe me as a libertarian. There are areas where Constitutionalists converge with libertarians, and areas where we diverge...and sometimes, the convergences arrive from very different starting points.
A little history is in order. The Libertarian Party was formed in 1971 from a strange mix of anti-Vietnam War and pro-drug legalization elements. The economic liberty and governmental minimalism elements of the party came later. In the context of the early 1970's, Libertarians were oddly left wing, as opposed to the right-of-center aspects they now display. Constitutionalism as we know it now, was not truly present in the early seventies. Eventually, the Libertarian Party began to attract anti-tax elements, as well as followers of the Austrian school of economics, and the Libertarian Party/movement as we know it came to be. Thus the slow development of Constitutional Conservatism.
I know people who seem to think that if a person is a Conservative, therefore, he MUST be opposed to equal rights for all Americans, he MUST be anti-drug, pro-religion to the point of shoving it down peoples' throats, a moralist, culturally blue-nosed, and essentially a Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson disciple. Boy are THOSE idiots wrong!
Social "conservatives" aren't Conservative in the least. They're an aberrant form of moralist hypocrites who like to tell other people how to live (think Laura Ingraham) while doing the opposite in their own lives. I mention Laura Ingraham because she's typical of the moralists: She advocates intact families, but has adopted two trophy kids while remaining unmarried herself; says women should dress modestly, while showing her own body off regularly (look at the hemlines on the skirts she wears in her publicity photos...nice legs, but hey! Where's the modesty, Laura?); she bloviates about the "elites" and "regular people," while she attended an Ivy League school as an undergraduate, and an elite law school after...as well, she regularly cavorts with Republican higher-ups, has been a White House staffer and a clerk to a Supreme Court justice. Yep, she's just plain folks...and Barack Obama is a Reaganite. Ingraham is a typical media creature who says what she thinks her audience wants to hear, but isn't of her audience. (I WILL have a post dealing with media Conservatives a little later down the road)
So what the hell IS a Constitutional Conservative? The short answer is that a ConCon believes the Constitution means what it says, provides a means to modify it IF THE PEOPLE SO DEMAND IT, and places restraints which are proper on both federal and state governments. Some have called us "Tenthers," as a subtle slam toward people who want birth and other personal records on Barry Hussein Soetoro to be released, but we're far more than just people who want to see the Tenth Amendment to be followed.
The Constitution is the framework of our government. I realize you probably already knew that, but plenty of people have forgotten that. It does not guarantee "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," despite what Schmuckie Schumer or your local town know-it-all might proclaim...that comes from the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution doesn't give you your rights...those come with being born. The Constitution GUARANTEES your rights by placing restraint on the powers of the federal government. YES, it IS a "charter of 'negative rights'," as our Dipshit-in-Cheat has called it, because it says what government cannot do to you and doesn't say what it can do "for" you. Apparently, the "smartest man in the room" is unaware that the revered founder of his party, Thomas Jefferson (although now you'd think it was Karl Marx or V.I. Lenin), said "A government powerful enough to give you all you need is powerful enough to take all you have," or else he doesn't give a shit. Bluntly, if government "gives" you something, it took it first from someone else, and then, like a favor from a Mafia don, you owe the government...and they WILL collect, just as the Mob does ("...THAT'S the 'Chicago Way'!").
"All right, Conn! What the hell are the differences you were talking about?" I'm glad you haven't forgotten, because I'm getting there. Libertarians want to be left alone, ConCons want the government to be back within its Constitutional limits...that's the main difference. The others come from direction at which we look at the Constitution.
Constitutional Conservatives believe that the federal government should operate within the limits imposed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. These amendments read as follows:
Ninth Article of Amendment- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Tenth Article of Amendment- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Tenth Article of Amendment- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Folks, those are the reserved powers and enumerated powers amendments. From there stems Constitutional Conservatism. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
(In my opinion, Article the First should be ratified ASAP...and note, that since two articles weren't ratified, we only have ten amendments in the Bill of Rights today)
Constitutional Conservatives believe that since the Constitution has been raped for the past century by the federal government, we need to restore the Constitution to what it was (perhaps we should be called "Restorationists"? Might be a thought...), and restore the proper balance between the states and the federal government. Although some well known libertarians, such as Andrew Napolitano, espouse this idea, the majority of libertarians just say "get the government off my back," which is a condition to be desired, and NOT a foundation for an ideology.
I'll go deeper into this topic in my next posting.
