Ask a Conservative

Obama brings in the young voters.  Obama's the new face of politics.  Obama likes babies.

That's all well and good, but how does it help?  Why is he putting so much emphasis on getting the young adult vote, especially considering their spotty attendance at the polls?

I don't have an answer for you.  As a "young adult," I know full well that the people of my generation put on a stunning display of apathy.  Even those who supposedly support someone, and may even work on a campaign of some kind forget to go to the polls, or just don't care enough to make the time for it.  I remember working at my university to bring the election to the students, and bring the students to the election.  We had registration drives, passed out flyers, and even had a trolley to take the students to their polling place and bring them back to campus.  Yet when I availed myself of this service, I was the only person on the trolley.

So, with this track record of apathy and selfishness on the part of the younger crowd, why put a large part of your hope in that age group?  For that matter, why bank upon other groups that have a poor attendance record?

Let's face the reality of who shows up at polls:  middle America.  No color, no religion, no creed or sexual orientation shows up with any reliability more than Average Joe Schmoe.  So who's catering to that crowd?  Well, Hillary was a bit, but she goofed it up by saying it aloud.

Because of the way certain people have commandeered certain words in our language, it's not PC to state that middle America is largely white, and largely understands and responds to their civic duty.  I'm not saying only whites or anything like that (I made that point earlier), but that's who is largely encompassed when talking about "middle America."  Hillary's mistake was that she mentioned the word "white" in a race that has been and will be largely about race.  Not because Obama's opponents want it to be, but quite the opposite:  Obama wants it to be about race.  He wants people to always remember that, if he is elected, he will be the very first black president.  He'll make history, people!  Who cares about policy, when he can go down in history just by existing?

That, in a large way, is why he's poking and prodding at the young crowd.  Who else feels that driving need to make an impression on the world quite like the newly-minted adults? Who else would understand his passion to be taught about in the schools than the ones who have big dreams they want to fulfill as well?

Obama goes after the youth vote because he thinks he understands them and can get them because he can show them that he's just like them.  The trouble is, he may end up giving the cold shoulder to the people who will actually put him in office or keep him out.

Coming up:  Obama courts those gun-toting, Bible-thumping wackos he was so disdainful of just a short while ago.

Sorry it's been a while; I've been busy doing not-political things.  But while I was in my car on Friday, I heard the tragic news that Tim Russert, the host of Meet the Press among other things, had died suddenly of a heart attack.  Although I've never seen his show and I doubt I would have agreed with him on any point, it's always sad to see a relatively young man and father with young children pulled away from his family.  My sincere condolences go to his family and his coworkers.

But this brings me to something that has really bothered me for a long time.  Rush Limbaugh calls the unadulterated and unexplainable hatred for George Bush the Bush Derangement Syndrome.  I don't have a better name for it, so I'll use that for now.  Now, please keep in mind, George Bush has not been the greatest president since Lincoln by any stretch of the imagination, but he's been a good president.  But there are a lot of people out there (I'm sure you can think of one person) who loathes the President with every fiber of their being. 

In many of their cases, they can't really explain why they hate him so much; if you ask them for a specific reason, they'll just sputter and say something about blood for oil and staging 9-11.  But when it comes to arguing his policy, they have no idea.

I can't decide whether to despise these people or just feel sorry for them.  But when I do decide, I'll be sure to let you know.

 

Coming up:  Why it's a bad idea for Obama to bank on the youngin's.  Askaconservative is answering your questions now!

I've been hearing this for about a week now from the Obamalamas (ooh, cool new name):  Are you going to condemn Obama because of the people he associates with?  Do you believe in guilt by association?  The short answer is yes.

Most people have gone to some form of school, or even just a place where people gather together fairly regularly (church, school, playground, jail).  In these places of gathering, people tend to group together and become acquainted.  When this happens, a person has a choice:  they can stay there and get to know those people better, or they can walk away.  In most cases, what a person decided is based largely on what their acquaintance said.  If the other person said something offensive, stupid, or uninteresting, a person wouldn't stick around.  After all, an acquaintance has very little hold, not the way a friend (or pastor) does.

Most of us have been children on a playground at some point in our childhood (and if you never got to experience a playground during childhood, go now--it's never too late!), and we've all seen how children group together according to likes, dislikes, or even something as basic as bodily safety.  Who we associate with depends on no one but ourselves.

Obamalamas can shout all they want about Obama not believing in the same things as Wright et al, but this is putting his hopes on the idea that Americans are irreparably stupid (which, let's face it, some are).  But most of us know that freedom of choice is highly valued in our society:  if you don't like someone or don't like what someone has to say, we have the freedom (and the God-given right) to walk away.  Obama didn't until he couldn't see another way out.

Nazis tried to claim that they were guilty by association, and they were hanged during the Nuremberg trials.  Scots were killed for being associated with those who fought for Bonnie Prince Charlie in the 1700's.  Black people were lynched simply for being black and associating with other black people.  The World Trade Center had planes flown into it, because it was associated with progress--something the terrorists hate. 

I don't say this to be controversial (ok, maybe a little), but to make a point--as sucky as it sometimes might be, people are guilty by association.  Who we are is determined by the company we keep, as the saying goes.  And the company Obama keeps doesn't exactly make me feel safe at the end of the day.  In fact, it makes me want to cling to my guns and religion just a little bit more.

The first question has been answered!  Who's up next?

First, let me be perfectly clear:  I am not a fan of John McCain.  I appreciate what he did for our country as a soldier (how could I not? After all, I'm not Jane Fonda), but he is not the best idea in terms of who should be our next president.  He's a short skip away from Obama, not the giant leap we need.

But I still enjoy watching campaigns being run; forgive me, but I'm something of a masochist.  That's why I inwardly grin yet outwardly grimace when I hear McCain talk about these town hall meetings he wants to have with Obama.  Sure, McCain thinks he would wipe the floor with Obama.  After all, he's said that that's the forum he's most comfortable with.  And we all know that Obama is less than stellar when he doesn't have someone around to write his "I am the second coming of Christ himself" speeches.

Here's where this can go all bad for Johnny boy.  When contemplating Obama, you have to take into account the Obamafreaks.  You know, those people that swoon and wet their pants when they're in the presence of the all mighty Barry.  Do they care if he doesn't have a clue what he's doing?  Do they care that he has the 8th most liberal voting record in the Senate (except for all those times he votes only "Present," a slap in the face to those who put him there), despite only having been a member for four years?  Do they care that he surrounds himself with racists, homophobes, terrorists, and anti-Semites!  No!

It seems incredibly hard to believe, but none of this matters to them.  All they care about is that he's black (yes, I went there), he's a Democrat, and he gives a good speech.  Never mind that he doesn't write them; never mind that his speechwriters steal from other people's speeches.  He's young (something McCain hasn't been able to claim since...well...ever), he makes with the pretty talk, and he's set himself up as the long awaited Messiah.  So no matter how well McCain does against him in these town halls, even if he verbally thrashes Obama like Tyson did to Holyfield's ear, it won't matter.  Worse yet, these people are so obsessed with how someone looks (remember how Obama's so excited to be drawing the younguns?  What do you think they do all day?), that McCain will always look like a crusty old white man (aka "Establishment") to Obama's fresh-faced color.  And we wonder what will happen with the hippies.

Coming up:  Guilty by association?  Ask a Conservative is taking your questions now!

So today Hillary sold her soul in hopes to become the Vice President--she bowed out and endorsed Obama.  To be honest, I was rather surprised.  I thought she would at least take it to the convention, and would have been only mildly surprised if she had pulled a Tonya Harding on Obama's Nancy Kerrigan.  I mean, it wouldn't be the first time.

But for you diehard Hillarians, have hope.  It's still possible for Obama to be "rubbed out."  If you know what I mean.  After all, who takes power in the event that the President becomes unable to perform his duties?  You guessed it.  Perhaps that's why she's eager to get the number two spot.  The number one spot wouldn't be that difficult to get ahold of.

I personally don't see the point in wanting to be Vice President, especially if you're already a Senator.  After all, the Vice President doesn't even vote in the Senate, unless it's a dead tie (something Obama is a little too familiar with for my taste.  The lack of voting, I mean)!  So I can't help but have this creeping feeling at the nape of my neck that, should Hillary become the Veep, she won't be in that capacity very long.

In short, Obama is now between a rock and a hard place.  The difficult part is just deciding which one is Hillary as VP (which could bring about his demise) and Hillary as not VP (which could cost him the election).  Decisions, decisions.

Got a question?  Ask away!