Although I have no desire to have a political blog, I have no intention of shying away from such topics as would be especially prominent. Now, the very purpose of starting this new blog, as agreed between the former Elizabeth Green and myself, was to provide a forum for those things positive, enlightening, uplifting, and beneficial. I believe this meets at least a few of those criteria.
Take a look at this chart, if you would. This is from some lengthy test that provides a visual representation of one’s overall political position. I have taken similar tests over a number of years, going back at least nine years, and I always seem to have similar results.
As you can see, this places me roughly halfway to the Left and a third of the way to libertarian on positions; a gross simplification of course, but somewhat useful nevertheless.
Which is to say, this graph has charted me squarely as a conservative. I am but a mere halfway to the Left on positions, and with notable libertarian tendencies (that’s the Westerner in me showing). In fact, there is no other option for me other than to be a conservative, as I am more to the Right than the last three squares to the Left.
Here’s how I match up against the 2008 primary candidates:
This shows that I am right about where Ralph Nader stands, although he is a bit to the Right of me and a bit less libertarian. I know practically nothing of Nader’s political views; only that he has outlived his usefulness.
I liked Kucinich and Dodd to a far lesser extent. I voted for McCain. I felt he would be the better president, and that the Republican Party would do well under his leadership. I felt that Obama would be a better administrator, and particularly in the area of cabinet assignments. I like Obama as President. I felt that Richardson had the best energy policy.
To be fair, I know practically nothing about Tancredo, Hunter, or Gravel. I know little of Keyes, but I consider him to be a wacko. I would vote for Giuliani’s opponent, regardless of who it might be.
Now, the old-style principled liberals I can deal with; but I consider the new wave of ‘progressives’ to be the most amoral and corrupt of persons — and for good reason. I say ‘amoral’ rather than ‘immoral,’ due to the fact that one is required to possess some form of morality in order to be properly immoral.
I have no use for supply-side economics, and hearken back to the elders of the Reagan and Nixon administrations —David Stockman, Peter G. Peterson, and Bruce Bartlett. I consider the Chicago School to be aberrated as well.
At one time, I considered myself to be quite to the Left. My first great falling out with them had to do with their insistence that the denial of equitable representation for racial minorities was not only acceptable, but preferable in staking out their policy positions. I call that horrific.
I no longer refer to myself as an “environmentalist” because I abhor what that word has become. Instead, I prefer to call myself a “naturalist” or a “preservationist.” As far as I can tell, environmentalists are nothing more than a group of morons incapable of anything other than asinine opinions and opposed to practical action, all the while berating others, supposedly in the name of their God, “Science,” of which they know little.
So, briefly, it would be fair to expect that, from time to time, a short essay might appear explaining my position on various matters to the end of providing an explanation as to why it is quite impossible for me to be anything other than a conservative. I was going to do that here, but the preamble became a bit lengthy. Fancy that.
But to be clear, when someone that far to the Left can be nothing other than a conservative, then the Left has already met their doom. The rise of conservatism is inevitable.
Take a look at this chart, if you would. This is from some lengthy test that provides a visual representation of one’s overall political position. I have taken similar tests over a number of years, going back at least nine years, and I always seem to have similar results.
As you can see, this places me roughly halfway to the Left and a third of the way to libertarian on positions; a gross simplification of course, but somewhat useful nevertheless.
Which is to say, this graph has charted me squarely as a conservative. I am but a mere halfway to the Left on positions, and with notable libertarian tendencies (that’s the Westerner in me showing). In fact, there is no other option for me other than to be a conservative, as I am more to the Right than the last three squares to the Left.
Here’s how I match up against the 2008 primary candidates:
This shows that I am right about where Ralph Nader stands, although he is a bit to the Right of me and a bit less libertarian. I know practically nothing of Nader’s political views; only that he has outlived his usefulness.
I liked Kucinich and Dodd to a far lesser extent. I voted for McCain. I felt he would be the better president, and that the Republican Party would do well under his leadership. I felt that Obama would be a better administrator, and particularly in the area of cabinet assignments. I like Obama as President. I felt that Richardson had the best energy policy.
To be fair, I know practically nothing about Tancredo, Hunter, or Gravel. I know little of Keyes, but I consider him to be a wacko. I would vote for Giuliani’s opponent, regardless of who it might be.
Now, the old-style principled liberals I can deal with; but I consider the new wave of ‘progressives’ to be the most amoral and corrupt of persons — and for good reason. I say ‘amoral’ rather than ‘immoral,’ due to the fact that one is required to possess some form of morality in order to be properly immoral.
I have no use for supply-side economics, and hearken back to the elders of the Reagan and Nixon administrations —David Stockman, Peter G. Peterson, and Bruce Bartlett. I consider the Chicago School to be aberrated as well.
At one time, I considered myself to be quite to the Left. My first great falling out with them had to do with their insistence that the denial of equitable representation for racial minorities was not only acceptable, but preferable in staking out their policy positions. I call that horrific.
I no longer refer to myself as an “environmentalist” because I abhor what that word has become. Instead, I prefer to call myself a “naturalist” or a “preservationist.” As far as I can tell, environmentalists are nothing more than a group of morons incapable of anything other than asinine opinions and opposed to practical action, all the while berating others, supposedly in the name of their God, “Science,” of which they know little.
So, briefly, it would be fair to expect that, from time to time, a short essay might appear explaining my position on various matters to the end of providing an explanation as to why it is quite impossible for me to be anything other than a conservative. I was going to do that here, but the preamble became a bit lengthy. Fancy that.
But to be clear, when someone that far to the Left can be nothing other than a conservative, then the Left has already met their doom. The rise of conservatism is inevitable.
