Barbie Attack

Barbies are America’s next big weapon against Iran it seems. “A top Iranian judiciary official warned Monday against the “destructive” cultural and social consequences of importing Barbie dolls and other Western toys” today. While part of me wants to laugh, I can’t really blame him for being concerned. The sexualization of American culture has impacted even the sacred icon of American childhood, the doll, and Barbie.com does not exactly present an innocent image of virtue and purity. Alas, where have all the children gone?

Published in: on April 28, 2008 at 7:02 pm Comments (2)
Tags: , ,

Three Rings Circus

The “Super Tuesday” primaries were supposed to help bring clarity to the presidential race. And in the Republican race, it did a pretty good job: placing Senator John McCain far ahead of Governor Mitt Romney and leaving the realistic options for the candidates fairly limited. Governor Mike Huckabee, after a decent showing in the South has vowed to continue in his bid to represent a Christian America in the White House, while Romney—ever the businessman—read the forecast and “suspended” his campaign yesterday. McCain is the last man left standing, a conservative who many people thought was thrown out of the party years ago, a conservative who is desperately trying to make peace with certain branches of his more-conservative party. Beside McCain, the hopes for Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul look grim indeed, as McCain will likely be able to gain enough grudging trust from most Republicans to win their votes.

 It isn’t like they have a choice, however. The presidential race has effectively been reduced to a three circus, with McCain emerging the ringmaster of a massive Republican brawl, bruised but standing tall. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton continue to compete however, with no clear leader after the virtually fifty-fifty percent split of the vote on Tuesday. One of them will ultimately emerge victorious to face McCain, but not without great anger and animosity for both sides. Huckabee and Paul will continue to appear as side shows, drawing some attention and applause, but ultimately unable to take the main spotlight from the showdown of the big three: McCain, Obama and Hillary.

John McCain can only hope that Obama and Clinton fight on as long as necessary. Each is deeply committed, and their candidacies have divided the Democratic Party into two very opinionated camps. Obama brings change, Clinton experience; and never shall the two met it seems. If you thought being a conservative this election is hard, just remember the Democrats who have it worse. McCain can only benefit from a long, protracted Democratic fight, allowing him to focus on wooing the many skeptical (and sometimes even hateful—Ann Coulter, anyone?) conservatives who he will need to win the election.

 I’m fairly confidant McCain will be able to bring people to his side, if only through the sheer fear of Clinton or Obama in the White House. And despite his many positions that conservatives bewail as liberal and socialist (campaign finance reform, immigration), many of his positions are actually inline with mainstream conservatism (Iraq especially). This is of course the rub: how mainstream is conservatism, and what is mainstream conservatism? Personally, there are many things I disagree with my party on, whether in scale or scope. And yet I still support the party because I know that my views are limited in their popularity. Many of my friends with similar views are currently Ron Paul supporters, a candidate who I agree with on many things but have remained very skeptical of through the campaign. My objections to a vote for Ron Paul have been erased by McCain’s new position as the presumable nominee, however—a vote for Ron Paul (in the primary, at least) is no longer a vote of indifference to the party, but now an actual statement of discontent with current Republican policies. This I cannot object to, although I still would have reservations about an actual Paul presidency.

The circus has passed the first act, the crazy carnival of pre-primary noise where dozens of candidates try to outshine each other, and has suddenly neared the end of the primary season, the second act of seat-gripping suspense where the many are reduced to the few. Soon, the final act will be upon us, with McCain facing the Democratic nominee and the true battle beginning. And that will be the biggest act of all.

Published in: on February 8, 2008 at 9:58 am Comments (2)
Tags: , , ,

Conservative Confusion

A lot has happened politically in the last month that I have not been able to comment on here. The election landscape has changed quite dramatically, with McCain coming from behind; Giuliani, Thompson and Edwards dropping out, Huckabee showing poor performances in relationship to his Iowa win and Romney sitting about where he has been sitting the whole time—with something good but not much of it. For all practical purposes, the race on both sides has been reduced to duels: Romney verse McCain and Hilary Clinton verses Obama (excluding a possible Huckabee win in the South). On the Republican side of the ticket, 3 days out from “Super Tuesday,” I find myself very confused and unsure of whom to support, and wavering between positions faster then Bill Clinton himself.

Admittedly, I have not been one to get excited in this election. None of the candidates thrill me, and the only one I was reasonably happy with (although not very optimistic about) was Fred Thompson, who has since quit the campaign (too soon in my view, but probably the right move). Unless I jump on the Ron Paul wagon (which I really don’t want to do) I have three options: Romney, McCain or Huckabee; none of whom I fully trust or support. My support is purely symbolic however, as I cannot vote in my state’s upcoming caucus while attending school in another distant state. This fact alone has at times made me apathetic to whoever wins, since I am a party man and will support whomever the GOP selects.

But assuming I had some say in the matter, I wouldn’t know quite where to begin. McCain, I’ve always had problems with, and still do. He is a man who has his ideas and sticks with them, but I usually don’t agree with them and frequently don’t find them conservative. His years in the Senate have given him many years demonstrate some of his awful ideas, including the infamous McCain-Feingold election campaign laws and a failed immigration plan. He is a strong leader however, someone who isn’t afraid to go out on his own (only if its beneficial of course) and who people like to follow. I think on the Iraqi war his position is about as good as we can hope for, and I won’t have trouble sleeping at night with him in the Oval Office like I would with Barack or Huckabee. I can vote for him if I have to, I still have much more in common with him then I do any of the Democratic candidates, but he is definitely not my first choice.

Romney is someone whom I have always been okay supporting, a fallback candidate who can get the job done. But I’m not exciting about him or his campaign. It seems like he is trying to win the election by appealing to a Reagan coalition that doesn’t exist anymore. He is pro-business and pro-life, but shall the two groups meet? Christians are suspicious of his flip-flops over social issues, businessmen think he wasn’t pro-business enough while he was Governor of Massachusetts. In short, he comes up mediocre in all areas but still manages to remain acceptable, offer little but a lack of offense. I can’t get excited for him, nor can anyone else based off his only fair performance so far. People seem to be looking for someone else, some going to John McCain (seniors) and others to Huckabee (Christians) leaving Romney with some fiscal conservatives and Mormons. What’s more, I don’t know if he can win in a national election against Hilary or Obama—his campaign has run very conservative in some areas (especially immigration) and will have a hard time reaching out to the coveted moderate vote.

Huckabee is someone that I haven’t been able to get my head around. On the one hand, he is a nice, likeable guy with excellent communication skills and a knack to getting straight to what people are concerned about. On the other hand, his campaign is disorganized, his foreign policy is lacking, and many of his domestic ideas seem only half-baked (the Fair Tax for instance) and definitely not conservative. Now, in many ways he could be my perfect candidate: a Christian who takes a softer view of things, who isn’t afraid to think outside the box when necessary. But when he does go off the beaten path, he takes directions that I find difficult to accept, from health care to a seemingly contradictory foreign policy platform. He seems so right, but yet so wrong. What’s more, I am fairly convinced that (a) Mike Huckabee cannot win a national campaign, and (b) his candidacy would destroy what remains of the Republican Party. George W. Bush won with Evangelical support, but lost support from more traditional elements of the party in doing so, and another candidate in the same vein may well be the final straw that breaks the elephants back.

What to do? Wait for the primaries to be over and support the last man standing, or select the least offensive candidate and try to get him elected so I may have a small margin of discomfort? Neither seems very appealing at the moment, and I will likely have fewer options after this Tuesday. I vainly hope they are good ones.

Published in: on February 2, 2008 at 1:45 pm Comments (5)
Tags: , , , , ,

Briefly

I hope to write a complete explanation for my recent move to supporting Fred Thompson this weekend, but in the mean time this excellent article will have to do. More on his website at Fred08.com—if you are still undecided in this race I’d recommend a good hard look at Senator Thompson.

Published in: on January 17, 2008 at 3:00 pm Comments (1)
Tags:

Huckabee and Populism

The other day as I was running an errand I heard Rush Limbaugh calling Mike Huckabee a populist, someone who panders to the popular opinion to keep the people happy so as to maintain or achieve power. The dictionary definition of populist is someone “who seeks to represent the interests of ordinary people” (Merriam-Webster), but modern political lingo has assigned the word a meaning slightly less sinister then that of a socialist, someone with no backbone or principle except that of seeking power. While I can see the reasons for Mr. Limbaugh calling Governor Huckabee a populist, I must disagree.

I do not claim that Governor Huckabee, like so many politicians, operates without a finger in the wind. In fact, I am fairly sure he does, and has most likely changed or moderated some of his positions because of popular trends. But I do not think that his entire election platform is designed this way, rather, it seems to me to be based on his sincere beliefs and desire to help people. These beliefs come from his Christian faith, something which I share and sympathize with. But it is the enactment of these beliefs that we seem to disagree on, and lead to the charges of Mr. Huckabee being “a pandering populist.”

Calls for universal health care, lenient immigration policies and the like are not based of idiocy or a desire to grow the government and bankrupt the state, as Republicans are frequently prone to suggest. Rather, they are based on real concern and compassion(however unfirm the foundations for such ideals are), which tends to blind people from the more practical and policy issues of their proposals. I would like as much as the next person to have free (or affordable) health care of all, to see no one left hungry, and every child in a good and safe school—but I also know the state of mankind and his ability to succeed in such endeavors. I know the ideas of individual liberty and personal responsibility this country was founded on, and see an incompatibility between social medicine and the Constitution. It is therefore not because I am heartless that I oppose such things, but because I am practical in policy and ideal to the founding principles which have served this country so well.

And this is then the conflict between heart and head, between the role of government and the role of the individual. Fundamentally, a Christian idea of God demands that each individual do his utmost to help those around him, not that the government do it. From a worldview without God, or one that is lacking in the personal aspect of him, all means are acceptable to help the most people. The Christian view (in my understanding at least) does not exclude government help, but it makes individual action the first and prime obligation.

I genuinely believe that Governor Huckabee wants to help people, and even suspect that the general feeling in America is one that sees a significant need for people to be helped. If that is the case, you may cast Governor Huckabee as a populist or as a caring, concerned person; and both will be true.

Published in: on January 10, 2008 at 7:39 am Comments (2)
Tags: , ,