What makes a conservative?
Traditionally it has been limited federal government based on a strong view of the Constitution and States rights. In other words decentralization along with more personal freedom. If I am correct then there is only one conservative running in the primaries and it ain’t Mike Huckabee.
Cal Thomas agrees with me so does Chuck Baldwin.
Don’t believe me? Check his record, his public statements, his stated platform.
I think this is one of the most refreshing Presidential races I can ever remember (I barely remember Reagan’s 1980 win) because of the web. We can see and hear what a candidate says and does straight from the source we the people are not relegated to hearing the creative sound bites that the networks want to feed us.
Because of this I strain to understand why Huckabee is getting so much of the homeschool support. He is not constitutionalist. He is no conservative. He is pro-federal involvment in education. Skeptical?
To be fair from everything I have read about Huckabee he is known to be strong on two important issues - he is pro second amendment, and he is pro-life.
He is also pro federal interference in far too many areas to count as a conservative.
Hey, don’t take my word for it. Check out the links and tell me what you think.
http://knowbeforeyouvote.com/
(oh and keep it civil 
)
If you're new here, please take a moment to introduce yourself! If you enjoyed this post, feel free to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
You loved it, right? Here's more like it:
Did you enjoy this post? Subscribe so you'll never miss a new post!
Filed under: Christian living, Constitutional Voting, Dad's corner, education, homeschooling, politicin', public schools
I, too, am completely dumbfounded why more homeschoolers aren’t supporting Paul. Especially HSLDA. Who would have thunk that wanting to adhere to our Constitution would be so “kooky”? Glad to see more homeschoolers like our family supporting Dr. Paul.
As with you and Amanda, I am also entirely confused as to why more home schoolers are not supporting Ron Paul. It’s taken nearly a month of researching, but I do believe my husband is now a supporter of Dr. Paul (I’m not an American citizen, so have no say… YET).
I really like Ron Paul. I read everything I could on his website and really like his position on the issues. It is so refreshing to hear a politician who actually believes in the constitution. I like what he said in the debates I have seen too. I was surprised to hear that HSLDA supported Huckabee after reading about some of his decisions regarding education. I think the reason some are not supporting him even though they like him is because of his “electability.” Even Fox News has pretty much made his electability an issue. A friend of mine said she likes Paul but will vote Huckabee because she doesn’t think Paul will win. Sad really. However, after looking at all of their records, Paul is the most “conservative” of the bunch. After all, his nickname is Dr. No because he votes against bills that will increase taxes and spending and expanding the government.
Apart from the fact that I think Ron Paul has some truly awful foreign policy theories, he just isn’t going to win. If he (by a miracle?) won the nomination, he would get trashed in the general election and we’d be dealing with Hillary or Obama for the next four years. This is a truly scary thought to me.
Although I will agree that all of Huckabee’s domestic policies don’t fall in the 100% conservative category, the fact is that he is the only reasonably viable candidate who is pro-life and pro-family. I can’t in good conscience vote for someone who is not, but I also can’t vote for someone who has no chance to win - to me that is the same as voting for Hillary Clinton.
I think it would be far better to get Huckabee in office, even with his somewhat less conservative policies, than to have a 100% liberal democrat in office.
Europeans love Obama and Clinton…. Really, with all the foreing US policy, it is a pitty we cannot vote… Lol!
I like most of what Ron Paul stands for but I cannot agree with his foreign policy stands. I also agree with those that state that he has no chance to win. I know in our area Arkansas/Oklahoma there are Ron Paul signs everywhere. However we are not supporters because of the main issue of foreign policy.
Hi Perry (again !):
Great question : what defines ‘Conservative’ ?
One thought, that might be a bit philosophical, but helpful to pose: Can ‘Conservatism’ be adhered to, in exclusion of Religious Principle ?
Meaning, if we try to adhere to ‘Conservatism’ or define it, without referencing immutable, unchanging standards like God’s Word, what do is the result ?
One could claim that by simply accepting yesterdays creeping Socialism, and shouting ‘Stop’, that one is a ‘Conservative’, ie one would be resisting the next liberal innovation towards the pit of perdition, but ceeding their prior gains & implicitly accepting their victories.
In this case, there is a total lack any objective standard with which to measure our progress, or regress.
“Our Constitution was designed for a moral & religious people (read: ‘Christian’), it is wholly inadequate to the governance of ANY other” - John Adams
The Founders intertwined our political Covenant, the US Constitution, with God’s Word, our Spiritual Covenant, so Mr Adams noted.
To Neglect one, is to Neglect the other.
To me, it seems this is where the modern ‘Conservative’ / GOP movement finds itself….divorce Conservatism from it’s Christian moorings and it’s merely secular traditionalism, moving leftward inexorably…..
David B.
PS: The Ron Paul movement’s appeal shows the hunger Americans feel to return to the foundations such as these.
We really like Ron Paul. We’ve been trying to become active in his campaign by becoming precinct leaders in our area (and what better learning opportunity for children than to get involved with the political process!). If you would like to the same, you can visit:
https://voters.ronpaul2008.com/grassroots/ to sign up- they are still needing lots of people to help with the effort.
Tracy
Love his Constitutionality, hate his foreign policy and “blame America first” rants. After considering him seriously for some time, I decided against supporting him.
However, I see no conservative left in the race after the departure of Fred Thompson and am unsure of which candidate I can actually bring myself to vote for. Dr. Paul will not be the party’s nominee, but I may find myself voting for him as a protest vote.
Politics is a trying topic! I hope the discussion remains polite.
I don’t like the “blame America first” stuff, either, but… what if America really is to blame? I believe it was Douglas MacArthur who warned of having the attitude of “My country, right or wrong.” And I think MacArthur was quoting Daniel Webster…
We Americans really have no right to vote for a guy who promises all the perks of federal welfare and beneficence. We are supposed to vote for the guy who promises to “protect, preserve, and uphold” the Constitution.
The cry “He can’t win” is a lousy reason to vote for the other guy. I suppose if fewer people believed this, the good guy might win. The only reason the media (including the “conservative” media) are ignoring Ron Paul is because he really CAN win, and they are terrified.
Did you realize that Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s and Bill O’Reilly’s radio network is Clear Channel (owned by a group w/Mitt Romney serving on the board)? That Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham are bought and paid for by GM? That Huckabee is being advised by the CFR? These are the groups who want to subvert our form of government. I think we Christians should be terribly alarmed, because as soon as our form of government goes, there go our liberties, and religious freedoms.
This is a very crucial election. we need to corporately throw our support to the BEST man not the most electable or the one with the biggest presents or the one who makes us feel good about our country. This is the time to have godly fear and holiness, and to be passionate about where our country is going.
I liked a lot that Paul had to say until he started to talk about our military. We have been over seas now for about 5 years. And we have not had anything happen on our own soil!! My husband is in the army and has been over seas. We would do another year apart if need be. Just to insure that our children can live the life of that we see as America. We are in the stations over seas for a reason. There is a threat and our military is keeping us safe by bring the battle to their area. Not just Iraq but having soldiers all over the world helps.
By the way, for those interesting in going beyond the media’s sound bites and half-truths about Ron Paul’s foreign policy, Dr. Paul has written a book, “A Foreign Policy of Freedom.” This book outlines his decades of research and convictions. His foreign policy is not at all unlike that of George Washington’s and Douglas Macarthur’s sentiments.
I highly recommend the book, especially if you rely on CNN, ABC, Limbaugh, and etc for your information. These media outlets are lying through their teeth about him.
Mrs. Mecomber,
Don’t you think that perhaps our current foreign policy might need to be a bit different from that of George Washington? GW had an ocean between him and the rest of the world, and it took months to cross it. Whereas we have terrorists capable of flying our own planes into buildings on our own soil, pretty much at their convenience. We just don’t live in the same world, and policy has to change to reflect that.
While I do think policies might need changing princiapls should not. Such as the principal of non-agression and the principal of non-tangling alliances. How about the principal of obeying the rule of law? Our Constitution says that only Congress shall declare war and yet we are in a pre-emptive war in a country we invaded looking for WMD that didn’t exsist all without a declaration of war. All the while our borders are unsecure, hostility is increasing toward the US, and we are losing more of our civil liberties all in the name of “safety.” And we think they only want to attack us because we are free and rich. The term is called “blowback” and our own governemnt’s 9/11 comission gave it as one of the causes we were attacked.
Having followed Ron Paul’s campaign, having my husband studied politics and international relations, and speaking as an “outsider” (Australian), I can vouch for RP’s stand on foreign policy. Much of the world is bothered by the interference that the US has had in other countries. No country wants to be manipulated by a big bully. I don’t say this to be hateful to Americans. There is much that I appreciate about you guys! I just don’t think your government realises how they come across to the rest of the world.
No tomatoes, please. As I said, I’m just offering an outsiders view and I mean no offense to any individuals.
In Him
Meredith
I appreciate your input, Meredith, and am following this thread with interest. I haven’t agreed with much of Bush’s action in the last few years, especially not locking down on the southern border, and tightening the northern border, but there has to be a balance between isolationalism (is that a word?) and “world bullying”.
Whatever happens, the Lord is lining up the players. We can trust Him to work things to His glory! Come, Lord Jesus, Come!
Here are two neat links for comparing the various candidates.
Family Education
Glass Booth
Momma said
“isolationalism (is that a word?) and “world bullying””
To which I reply … just so! Ron Paul’s policy of pulling back all of our troops and loosening up trade with many of these countries strikes just such a balance.
I agree with Meredith completely in that no one (not even the US) like to be bullied around. A point Dr. Paul makes frequently is that if other countries treated us the way we treat them we’d never stand for it.
As far a general foreign policy questions Amanda definitely hit the nail on the head. We must be bound by the Constitution. By original intent interpretations and not evolutionary/ evolving law theories that make the objective meaning of the document irrelevant. This is just what Dr. Paul does. So far I haven’t seen ANY other candidate describe his platform in terms of the limitations the constitution places on the office. Frankly they don’t even understand the constitution.
Look at this voting guide put out by Wall Builders
http://wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=5386
On 2 issues “Human life amendment” and traditional marriage amendment” Dr. Paul is given a “no”.
Why? Because he favors abortion and gay marriage? Nope although I think the chart is written to lead the casual reader to infer that. He opposed them because he argues here http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/86/respect-for-life-begins-with-respect-for-the-constitutional-rule-of-law/ and here http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html that the principles of limited government and respect for the rule of law will inescapable lead us there _ WITH OUT NEW LAWS.
Unless we base our foreign policy first on the limitations of Scripture (read just war theory here) and second on the limitations of the Constitution (like Congress declaring war on a country not on a concept) then we are courting nothing short of tyranny. The rule of law means that law has transcendent meaning and not that we obey whatever rule the king makes.
The founders and Ron Paul’s cry is Lex Rex not Rex (or arbitror) Lex.
Emily said “Although I will agree that all of Huckabee’s domestic policies don’t fall in the 100% conservative category, the fact is that he is the only reasonably viable candidate who is pro-life and pro-family. I can’t in good conscience vote for someone who is not, but I also can’t vote for someone who has no chance to win - to me that is the same as voting for Hillary Clinton.
I think it would be far better to get Huckabee in office, even with his somewhat less conservative policies, than to have a 100% liberal democrat in office.”
Emily and any other person who is struggling with the viability question I challenge you to read the following article.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north536.html
It was Stonewall Jackson who said ““Duty is ours; consequences are God’s.”
I think David Bazley hit the nail on the head when he said
“One could claim that by simply accepting yesterdays creeping Socialism, and shouting ‘Stop’, that one is a ‘Conservative’, ie one would be resisting the next liberal innovation towards the pit of perdition, but ceeding their prior gains & implicitly accepting their victories.”
This is exactly why this year’s conservative is more liberal than the liberals were in the 60’s.
BJK said “I liked a lot that Paul had to say until he started to talk about our military. We have been over seas now for about 5 years. And we have not had anything happen on our own soil!!”
There is a threat and our military is keeping us safe by bring the battle to their area. Not just Iraq but having soldiers all over the world helps”
King David said
“10 Now therefore, be wise, O kings;
Be instructed, you judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear,
And rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son,[b] lest He[c] be angry,
And you perish in the way,
When His wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.”
and again in Psalm 20
7 Some trust in chariots, and some in horses;
But we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
8 They have bowed down and fallen;
But we have risen and stand upright.
9 Save, LORD!
May the King answer us when we call.
I remember others like Hezekiah, Ester, and Gideon who did not rely on the strength of their hands for safety.
With all due respect to our servicemen they are being led by a foreign policy that is shaped by expansionists and globalists we need to observe our written covenants and constitutions first and then a humble (before the Lord) foreign policy would do wonders for our safety and our children’s future.
Hi Perry C: Great insight on your part. Especially where you advise us that it is, ultimately, God the LORD who makes us safe, as David in the Psalms exulted in Him who watches over us. To wit:
“Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchmen waketh but in vain…”
I’ve been a Ron Paul fan since about 1992, when I began reading his economic free market writings. I suspected he was a devoted Christian from his cause / effect & reap / sow & respect for the Law of God. (not to mention the Constitution)
But to grasp Dr. Paul, folks must S - L -O - W down, turn off the ‘microwave mentality’, read, ponder & think deeply. Just like studying the Scriptures. Generally, we can’t go deep quickly.
One thing I’ve noted: The other candidates supporters switch around quite easily - less so now the field has narrowed, of course.
But Dr. Paul’s depth helps folks ’stick’ to him - once you’ve been intellectually & ehtically fired up by him, nothing shallower will suffice.
Perry, as you did, I strongly urge others to visit the site http://www.KnowBeforeYouVote.com - it’s a very complete survey of the most important issues, of all the candidates & most imortantly, the issues / questions it asks are of serious substance.
Yes, Ron Paul fans (I suspect) wrote that site. Even so, it’s not pandering or shallow - it perks up our citizenship meter just reading the issues covered.
But take the ‘worldview’ test: read those positions they list and ask yourself if you can live with a candidate that is on the wrong side even a few of them - the media ‘darlings’ are all on the wrong side of most every issue.
McCain scores same as Hillary, Romney & Hucabee almost as bad.
Our nation is at a crossroads; we must devote ourselves to the hard work of liberty. For Christians who have Christ working in them, this should be a natural drive; our challenge is to comprehend that Christ sits now, on the throne (as Perry quoted in Psalm 2) and in Psalm 110:1 “….henceforth waiting till all his enemies are made a footstool for his feet.”
With these assurances, we have every expectation that God will meet us in our duty, causing Kings (senators, presidents, reps) to either ’serve him with Fear’ or be (in time) destroyed by His wrath.
With this assurance, we need not ‘vote for the lesser of two evils’, but rather choose the Greater Good, despite appearances.
Daniel 4 “The most high God rules in the army of heaven & amongst all the inhabitants of the earth, and there is none that can stay his hand, or say unto Him, what doest Thou.”
We are also joining up as Precinct Leaders to help Dr. Paul win & also to teach poltical science & biblical statesmanship to our 13 year old daughter & 12 year old son.
Thanks Kim & Perry for hosting this - y’all are great,
David B.
Nacogdoches, TX