Skip to main content

Being Moderate Is Not A Sin

Being a moderate is not the sin some people seem to feel it is.  Often, moderates are labeled people with no backbone, not engaged in the process and purely in the game for self-serving reasons.  I am being nice by saying only that and not some of the other things that polarizing, tasteless individuals might hurl.

Once a pretty liberal Democrat, I have evolved into someone of a more conservative nature -as I have had time enough on this planet to see what works and what doesn't work.  On some issues, I'm still of two minds.  In a reactionary move a couple of years back, I registered as a Libertarian when I moved to the town I live in now.  I'm not sure I make a great Libertarian, though, because on many issues I see the urgent need to compromise -- something most Libertarians don't care much for.  On top of that, I am more likely to vote Republican the upcoming election than for any of the Libertarian candidates.  I know, I know... outrageous.  Maybe I should have taken the plunge and registered as a Republican?  I never thought I would say that.  Can I be a Republican with Libertarian leanings?  Why not?  Many people are starting to identify themselves as such, because it seems to be the trendy thing to do among conservative intellectuals these days.

A lot of people probably already understand my reasoning for voting Republican versus people who are more in line with my beliefs and values without my needing to explain, but I'll offer it anyway in one word: elect-ability.  Moreover, I cannot fully embrace certain viewpoints held by Libertarians, knowing that they cannot be realistically implemented in our modern society -which is already accustomed to certain things being a certain way.  Example;  there is nothing wrong with Social Security -- it's just not handled well and has been ripped off countless times over the years and probably has way more people on it than really should be.  The failure is not its own, it is that of those we elect to manage it.  I am sure Libertarians would be happy to abolish it.  I am sure I would have felt that way, too, if I were who I am now when it was first conceived.  However, the fact of the matter is that I have paid into it all of my adult working life and am entitled to my share when the time comes and I retire.  That supplemental income will be vital at that time, I am sure.  What about Medicare?  There's another entitlement I am due at a certain age.  These are important investments I have personally made of my income to society and am therefore entitled to receive.  Some act like the word "entitlement" is dirty.  I don't.  I'm talking about services I have paid for and expect.  I get the connotation that "entitlement" is a bad word when people [who do nothing for themselves or others] somehow think they are entitled to benefits society offers paid for by working people just because they exist.

I laid out a bunch of stuff in the preceding paragraph that might seem to be "off topic" a bit -- but, in reality, I don't think so.  There is a need for many of the social programs we have like Medicare, Social Security and such.  But they are abused and greatly argued over.  The Democrats accuse the Republicans of "pushing granny over the cliff" and the Republicans accuse the Democrats of creating a lazy, shiftless society of people dependent of government hand-outs.  Libertarians are sure their liberty is being swept away with the penning of each new piece of legislation.  Some elements of truth may lie in all of these assertions, if one takes the time to sift through the political hype and spin.  Nobody wants to take the time to sit down and honestly have a give and take.  The operative word here is dialogue.

In 2010, the Tea Party came to Washington in a big way.  I agree in principle with many of their anti-big government points of view.  However, they have effectively crippled Congress's ability to get anything accomplished in tandem with left-wing ideologues like Senator Reid.  Both sides appear to have some trash to take out.

Who will be my choice for President of the United States?  It's looking like Romney, but I'm not ready to make any sort of endorsement of my own.  Just saying I'm leaning that way.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Slavery

Jesus responded, “I assure you: Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. -John 8:34 (HCSB)

All too often, Christians may feel constrained by their faith and what they know to be the expectations of their Heavenly Father. Sometimes, in certain churches, the list of "don'ts" may seem longer than the ancient laws of Israel. Occasionally 'religious' people will sadly get caught up in that sort of thing. That can be a turn-off for many people and a valuable asset to the enemy, who wants you to feel bound by law and a slave to some sort of religious creed. The God I know and love is a God of freedom. I am freer as a slave to Christ than I ever was as a slave to sin. How about you? Are you free in Christ or bound by sin?

Hate Speech

The amount of vitriol directed at President Trump seems to be unprecedented. At least, that is what those on the right seem to think. Of course, I remember plenty of criticism and hate speech hurled at President Obama during his time in office, as well. I don't think I really need to mention President George W. Bush, do I?

There has never been (in my lifetime) such a level of animosity between opposing viewpoints as I see in today's America. Democrats hurl murderous accusations against the Republicans for their healthcare proposals and those of a conservative view sling accusations of incompetence and hypocrisy back at them. Of course, either side is generally pretty good at documenting their accusations with freshly spun 'facts.'

No matter where you fit into the political spectrum, it is important to note that such contention is counter-productive. Whenever people react at the behest of their emotions, clear-headed and rational decisions are nowhere to be found. Moreo…

Treason or Patriotism?

Many years ago, the Democrats couldn't wait to get all of the facts surrounding Watergate out in the public eye. The Washington Post has been celebrated as a bastion of the free press recently in a movie (which we have yet to see, but plan to).


Now, the idea of releasing a memo that may indicate wrong-doing on the part of the FBI and DOJ is hailed as treasonous by some who would prefer the secrets remain secrets. I have seen or heard of nothing in the recently released memo that would appear to compromise national security -- have you?