The Midnight Hour

In my recent post “Seven Questions for McCain Voters” commenter Jay Season proposed the following question:

“…maybe some time you would care to share attributes / examples of the conservative you would support with your vote?…Jeff, you are analytical and precise. So, let’s hear it sometime: Who is THE “conservative” you’d vote for (real or imagined)?”

Jay, that’s a fair question.

In the 2008 Republican primary I supported Ron Paul. I believe he was the best GOP presidential hopeful since Reagan. I don’t think he is perfect, but I think he was head and shoulders above every other candidate. On that note, I’d also vote for Reagan were he running.

To show you that I have a little flexibility, I would have voted for Mitt Romney were he the GOP nominee. I buy the fact that he essentially had an awakening and changed many of his values to conservatism. I believe it’s OK and healthy for people to change their minds in the face of new facts and experiences. I also like businessmen in government. I think they are generally more fiscally conservative because they know how to run a business. I’m sure there are examples from both sides of that, but either way, it makes sense to me with all other things being equal.

Primarily, I want a candidate that is grounded in principle and bases his positions out of that principle. The Constitution has been our government’s guiding principle, but modern politicians are not concerned with it.

When is the last time McCain quoted the Constitution when talking about government reform? When is the last time he challenged Obama’s position on the grounds that the Constitution doesn’t authorize it? I can’t remember it ever happening, and I’ve been paying attention for the past 18 months.

Have you listened to Reagan’s speeches on capitalism, limited government, and individual liberty? He mentions these ideas often and refers to them as the backbone of our government. He obviously believes in them very strongly. Ron Paul makes similar speeches and videos on government, economics, and foreign policy. He tries to educate voters on why his position is supported by economic fact and the Constitution.

I think McCain, like most politicians, forms his position on a topic based on how he feels as a result of several other positions. The left hand shakes the right. I don’t think he is grounded in principle. Essentially, I think he is a semi-conservative guy that supports what feels right at the time without any real basis in principle.

During the last debate Obama and McCain clashed several times on some particular fact where one would say, “My opponent did/believes/said A.” The other would then retort, “That is absolutely false, I did/believe/said B.” A and B are often polar opposites, so to be blunt, WTF? How about a little education from one of the candidates saying, “OK, when he says A he means ____. He’s distorting the facts in ______ way. When I say B….” Actually one candidate does do this to some degree: Obama. I greatly respect him for trying to help voters cut the BS.

To do this means you are grounded in principle and you are willing to peel back the layers to disclose the hows and whys of your decisions. I believe Senator Obama is an honest and well-meaning public servant whose values border on socialism. He is grounded in values that he really believes. I respect that. I disagree with him vehemently on almost every issue, but I’m not afraid to acknowledge that he is grounded in principle (the wrong principles).

I think Senator McCain, on the other hand, has principles rooted in modern semi-conservative ideas, and he evaluates every situation based on what feels right at the time, such as the $700 Billion bailout. Because he leans to the right, he sometimes gets things right. However, it’s akin to a blind man that limps to the right picking his values off a wall in front of him. He sometimes ends up with a conservative stance because of blind luck, but this means he often stumbles onto a non-conservative position. He doesn’t really have any rhyme or reason to the way he votes and proposes policy (else it would be more consistently conservative).

Illegal immigration.
Financial bailouts.
Bloated departments of government.
Social security reform.

These are issues that should require politicians to look their constituents in the eye and tell them, “I know this hurts, but if I don’t do the right thing then we’ll all hurt much worse in the end.” That means that if the constituent is an emotional moron you lose his/her vote. Accept it. Let it go. What we’ve seen in the past 20 years is politicians that will say and do anything to ensure they piss off as few voters as possible. That’s not principled decision-making.

We need a candidate grounded in the principles that founded this country as expressed in our Constitution which is our nation’s binding definition of government. These principles create a society of free, independent, and self-determined individuals with equal representation under the law, free from government tyranny. I want a decision-maker that uses the Constitution as a ruler by which he measures all his positions– not a politician that tries to read the ruler in such as way that his positions measure up.