Monday, February 25, 2008

An argument against the idea of supporting Hillary Clinton

The following is my response to a distant relative of my wife who lives in the L.A. Area.  He emigrated to this country decades ago, and has retired after a career in the Post Office. He is a great supporter of Hillary Clinton.  This puzzles me.

You came to this country because it offered something better than your home country, as did my mother.  What this country offered that appealed to you was not built on the policies of Hillary Clinton and socialists like her.  The strength of this country has always been that the government stayed out of the life of the common man, and allowed him to seek his fortune where he would.  This country did not become great because the government took care of its people.  It became great because, by and large, the government stayed out of the affairs of its people.
This concept has eroded in the last 60 years, in a slide that has been sponsored to one degree or another by both parties. The constitution has been shredded, most often by Hillary Clinton and her ilk.
By supporting her, you are demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of how our government works.  Clinton recognizes that social change of the sort that she envisions cannot be forced at the ballot box — the voters simply will not support her ideas.  Instead, they slide their social agenda through via the courts, by appointing activist judges who rule by judicial fiat from the bench, making rulings that invent law, thus sidestepping the legislative branch.  This is not the role of the courts envisioned by the constitution.  By voting for Hillary, you are voting to live in a judicial dictatorship which pays lip service to democracy, but effectively renders the executive and legislative branches irrelevant.
I am not a victim.  I got where I am by hard work and forward planning.  I see no reason why the government should be allowed to put a gun to my head and steal that which I have worked for and give it to someone who has contributed nothing to the society in which I live.  I am not against charity, but it should be my choice by free will, not forced on me by the government.
The “health care” crisis Hillary tries to sell is BS.  The uninsured minority that she wails about are often so by choice, for one reason or another.  A majority of them are young adults, who have little need for health care outside of accidents.
Global warming is also BS — a crisis invented to steer policy towards hamstringing the competitive edge of America, based on shoddy science and cherry picked data.  No recognized climatologist agrees with the global warming model, but you don’t hear about that because it’s too lucrative for the news to portend disaster rather than life as usual.  Thirty years ago the same folks were warning that we were on the edge of an ice age.  This crap is going to cost you and me a lot of money in higher costs, and it won’t have any effect whatsoever, because the problem it’s supposed to address is a figment of liberal imagination.
Our education system has deteriorated over the last 20 years or more, and we are nowhere near the power we should be when it comes to education in the world.  Hillary’s answer is that the government should be more involved.  This flies in the face of evidence that the more involved the government has become, the less effective and more expensive it has become.  The woman is an idiot.  Our education system has been morphed into a factory of useful idiots incapable of thinking for themselves who actually buy into the lies of big government and global warming.
We are in WWIII against radical Islam.  You may not believe it, but the radical Islamicists do, and I take them seriously.  Hillary Clinton is incoherent on this, taking both positions simultaneously, and with no rational approach to prosecuting this conflict.  I have a boy who will be of military age in 9 years, and I don’t wish to sacrifice him on the altar of the stupidity of today’s leaders, to preserve your freedom so you can vote to give it up to socialists like Hillary.
Hillary has no executive experience whatsoever.  She is not qualified solely on the basis of her resume to be a dogcatcher, much less the leader of the free world.
I spent a good part of my life as a soldier, defending this country against communism in the cold war.  I resent the fact that people who have not studied history, politics or economics are willing to vote in the very concepts which I spent so much time defending against.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only
exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from
the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the
candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the
result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always
followed by dictatorship. “
- Alexander Fraser Tyler,’The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic’.
A vote for Hillary is a vote for eventual dictatorship.  If this is what you want, please try it in your home country before importing it here.
Oh, I forgot.  You did that.  That’s why you came here. . . . .