Chan Lowe & Conservatism

Chan Lowe

Chan Lowe proves cartoon after cartoon and column after column that he either has no clue as to what conservatives believe or that he doesn't care what they believe and will just make it up to suit his narrow view of the world.  Choose to be a liberal Mr. Lowe, if that makes you happy, but stop misrepresenting conservatism.

In a recent column Mr. Lowe opined on a sex survey distributed by the State of Florida.   I agree with Mr. Lowe that the Florida sex survey is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money.  However, I don't agree it is representative of conservative thinking anymore than I think Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Al Gore, or Gary Hart's treatment of women is representative of liberal thinking.

Whoopi Goldberg

I also don't agree that words spoken by certain candidates for senate represent the views of all conservatives.  If I did then I would also have to believe that Whoopi Goldberg speaks for all liberals when she said of 43 year old Roman Polanski's raping and sodomizing of a 13 year old girl, "I know it wasn't rape-rape. It was something else but I don't believe it was rape-rape."

Larry Flynt

I don't pretend to know, as Mr. Lowe appears to, the level of fascination that conservatives have with the topic of sex.  I don't pretend to know the liberals fascination with the topic of sex either but if the adult entertainment industry is an indication of the satisfaction level then it would be my guess that liberals are the more fascinated ones.  Larry Flynt, to the best of my recollection, never offered a bounty for dirt on a liberal.

The conservative concern on these matters, and all matters, centers around the powers of the Federal government.  The intent of the framers of our Constitution was that our Federal government should have limited powers.  They enumerated the specific powers in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.   Then they added what turned out to be the 10th Amendment that says all other powers not in the Constitution are reserved to the states or the people. Despite Supreme Court decisions to the contrary, the reality is there is nothing in the Constitution about sex, abortion or contraception. There is not an enumerated power granting the Federal government any voice whatsoever on these matters. Constitutionally, each state is responsible for its laws governing sex, abortion and contraception.  The states are not required to make any laws on these matters.   Absent any state laws, sex, abortion and contraception decisions would be left to the individual.

Conservatives don't believe women (and men) are incapable of making these decisions or any decisions about their lives.  To the contrary, conservatives believe in individual liberty and self determination.  People should have the freedom to make their own decisions.   Some of those decisions will turn out to be good, while others may turn out to be bad.  In a civil and moral society the results of those decisions accrue to the individual.  There is no obligation for the individual to share the results of their good decisions with others, nor is there an obligation that others shelter the individual from their bad decisions.   However, we know from experience that Americans freely share their success with others, while others freely provide support to those that are truly in need.  We the People do this better and more efficiently than any government, not matter how large or how small.

Conservatives believe that there is a need for a Federal government but it is not the bloated out of control government that makes laws for abortion, contraception, marriage, light bulbs, shower heads, vending machines and school lunch menus.   Conservatives believe in a responsible and constitutional Federal government with specific enumerated powers.   All powers not enumerated are vested with the States or We the People.

So, Mr. Lowe, if you didn't know what conservatives believe you do now. Please stop with your misrepresentation and dishonesty.   If you want to know more about conservatism might I suggest you put down your National Geographic and pick up the book Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin.

Fluked!

While motoring along on a major highway you notice in front of you enough red lights to light up a certain district in Amsterdam.  You curse because you know this usually means there is an accident somewhere up ahead and one or more lanes of traffic are likely closed.

Inch by inch the traffic moves forward. Ten minutes. Fifteen minutes.  Twenty minutes.  Finally you can see the flashing lights of police and fire rescue vehicles up ahead on the left.  Traffic continues to slowly crawl forward.  You are now almost to the location of the accident.  You look over and discover the accident is on the other side of the highway on the road that is traveling in the opposite direction of you.

You curse the rubberneckers.  It’s thirty minutes of your life that you will never get back.  It’s some amount of gas and wear and tear on your car that was unnecessary.  Maybe the delay has caused you to be late for a meeting, a meal or a performance.  All these people in front of you, because they needed a brief glimpse of the tragedy on the other side of the road, have robbed you of your time and how you were going to use it.  They got distracted.  They forgot the goal of driving on a highway is to get to their destination safely and in a timely manner.

Rubbernecking is not the only example of people being distracted from their goal by a desire to see a disaster. In fact, it happens in politics all the time.  It happened again this past week.  I predict in a few years from now my name for the political version of rubbernecking will appear in the list of new dictionary words as follows:

fluking (fluhking) v. A technique used by American Marxists to distract the public's attention from noticing the Federal government is shredding another section of the United States Constitution.

The people in this country that are interested in fundamentally transforming America are going to use every tactic ever used by every thief that has ever lived, to steal our Liberty.  The American Marxist is cognizant that if he or she knocked on our door, smiled and said please hand over more of our Liberty that we will slam the door in their face (and/or show our willingness and ability to exercise our Second Amendment rights.)  The only time the American Marxists have been successful in stealing our liberty is when they have succeeded in distracting our attention.  They find a person, place or thing of some extreme interest and then spin the rhetoric, many times using outright lies, to communicate the message that if we don’t allow the American Marxist to enact their new law, regulation or rule, then the person, place or thing will be irreparably damaged.

Until now this tactic was nameless but thanks to the Democrat party we can call this strategy “Fluking” (pronounced flucking).  See the definition above.  This term joins other recent political strategies including Borking and Swift-boating.  How ironic that the birth of Fluking was the result of a dialog on contraceptives and abortifacients.

This most recent Fluking began when the Federal government announced its mandate that all employers that provided their employees with health insurance, including Catholic hospitals and schools, include the availability of free contraceptives and abortifacients.  The church and conservatives pushed back (but for the wrong reasons.)  Enter 30 year old Sandra Fluke (pronounced fluck) a graduate of Cornell University with two degrees, one in Policy Analysis & Management and a second in Feminist, Gender & Sexuality Studies and who is now attending the Georgetown University Law Center. By the time she was done playing her role she had successfully turned the discussion into a show Sarah Jessica Parker might star in, “Sex in the Georgetown Dormitories.” 

Fluke’s script, which she read during a fake congressional hearing, included the following:

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy.

“One told us about how embarrassed and just powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter and learned for the first time that contraception was not covered on her insurance and she had to turn and walk away because she couldn’t afford that prescription. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception.

“Just last week, a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn’t fit it into their budget anymore. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same choice.”

She went on to describe several alleged instances where woman were denied or experienced difficulty obtaining birth control pills for treatment of other medical conditions.  If this is true, each individual State, as it is the states that currently regulate insurance companies, might want to look into this. 

Unfortunately, a lot of conservatives got distracted by the sex and sex became the issue.  The affordability of birth control became the issue. The merits of her argument became the issue.  The validity of her commentary became the issue.  It was a complete and total Fluking!  As an observer all you can do is sit back and marvel at how adeptly the left can take over an issue. 

News Flash! Co-ed sexual activity at a Jesuit school is irrelevant to the issue.  The amount of sex people participate in is not the issue.  The affordability of birth control is not the issue. 

There is only one issue and there is always only one issue to be discussed when the American Marxist tries to create any new law, regulation or rule.  The issue is:

Where in the Constitution, a document that was intended to limit the size and scope of a central government through the enumeration of specific powers (with the caveat that 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) where in the plain language of this remarkable document is the Federal Government delegated the power to do whatever it is they want to do.

The specific question on this issue is, where in the Constitution is the Federal Government delegated the power to tell ANY private company what it must sell and how much it should sell it for.

Let me say restate this the way a Marxist might understand it:

1.   Read the Constitution. It’s only about 20 pages.

2.   Find the section of the Constitution that says the Federal government is delegated the power to mandate to private companies what products it must sell and how much it should sell the product for.

3.   If you cannot find these words or something very close to it, it is time to Fluke.

Conservatives, I implore you, from now until you breath your last breath, be Fluked no more!  Trust me, another Fluking is already in the works.  There will be many Flukings between now and Election Day. Be alert.  Don’t slow down to view the disaster being perpetrated by the party that is trying to take the country in the wrong direction.  Remember to stay focused on the goal, the goal of shrinking the size and scope of government and the restoration of our constitutional republic as envisioned by our Framers.  If we fail, if we continue to allow ourselves to be Fluked, it is our country that will be getting screwed.