Can we make grand compromises?

35 Questions

This is part 27 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


27. Can we make grand compromises? Voter ID, but Early Voting/Nat. Holiday. Abortion restrictions but free birth control/welfare

No.

There is nothing unreasonable about requiring someone to prove who they are in order to vote. I’m not a big fan of early voting or absentee voting, but I understand the requirement for absentee, especially in the case of our military service men and women. I have considered a national holiday for voting, but I think that simply requiring businesses to allow time for voting should be sufficient. I don’t think we need to shut the country down.

Abortion is murder (the premeditated killing of an unarmed, defenseless human being) and should be treated as such. Abortion doctors are akin to a hired hit man.

Free birth control isn’t necessary to curb pregnancy. It’s simply another program/service that someone is paying for. If you’re going to fool around, be responsible, and buy your own damn condoms. They’re not that expensive. If you fool around, take responsibility for your actions. In other words, if you’re not ready for the kids, you not ready for the sex.

Unless you’re married, stop having sex.

Related Posts:

Will GOP Congress or Trump admin consider a basic universal income?

35 Questions

This is part 26 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


26. Will GOP Congress or Trump admin consider a basic universal income, whether as a replacement or supplement to entitlements?

I doubt it, but if they do, I hope it’s only to thoroughly squash the idea.

The goal should be to reduce entitlements, if not eliminate them. The goal should be to create an economy where businesses thrive and need workers. The goal should be putting Americans to work, not providing more ways to get money/goods/services without earning them.

Entitlements are ultimately paid for by hard working Americans who pay taxes, and the only way to provide that much money is to raise taxes, and every time you raise taxes, you raise the cost of living which hurts the poor. It’ll be a vicious cycle of raising the basic income to keep up with the rising cost of living. College tuition costs are a perfect example of how this works: schools raise tuition, guaranteed loans cover the rising cost, schools raise tuition, etc. What keeps it in check? Nothing. You’ll have runaway basic income and cost of living. Squash the idea like an ugly beetle.

Related Posts:

Are you at all concerned that Trump is undermining our national security?

35 Questions

This is part 25 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


Do I think he’s currently undermining our national security? Simply put, no.

I think the the Kremlin links are exaggerated by leftist mainstream media organizations such as the Communist News Network (CNN). Ha ha! See what I did there?

I also think the Australia fight was exaggerated.

And let’s face it. NATO needs to be looked at, just like our UN involvement. That doesn’t mean we turn on back on allies, but we do spend way more in money, resources, and manpower than we should be. There is nothing wrong with reassessing our involvement, especially if other countries are not pulling their own weight.

But when it comes to national security, to be honest, I think Democrats are a bigger threat–open borders, poorly vetted immigrants and refugees, refusing to acknowledge Radical Islamic Terrorism. How many times have we been told that climate change is a bigger threat than ISIS? Really? I haven’t seen “mother nature” chopping people’s heads off.

Now that doesn’t mean he couldn’t undermine our security later, but I don’t see it happening how. I also believe that he loves this country, whether you like the way he shows it or not, and I don’t think he would intentionally undermine it. I think that he’s doing what he thinks is best for the U.S. in the long run, and I happen to agree with his stated plan of attack. No pun intended.

Related Posts:

Why do conservatives have a problem mixing smaller government and a competent government?

35 Questions

This is part 24 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


24. finally it seems like conservatives have a hard time mixing smaller government with a desire for that gov. to be competent

I’m not sure exactly what this question is implying, so I’m taking John Hawkin’s lead on the topic.

Conservatives believe that government will never be as efficient or as competent as free market enterprise. Why? There’s no competition, so there’s no need to be. Not only that, the more complex the system, the easier it is for people to take advantage of.

Another reason, and the main reason, that government should not be involved in anything it’s not supposed to be involved in, is because of Constitutionality. There is a very short list, provided by the Constitution, that the government is supposed to be involved in; everything else is supposed to be provided by the States.

”The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” – The 10th Amendment

By using that simple line of reasoning, anything the government is involved in that is not specifically allowed by the Constitution, needs to be shut down, and as programs shut down, the government will become less complex, leading naturally to a more competent government. That’s how you make the government smaller __and__ more competent. It really isn’t that hard.

Related Posts:

Why don’t conservatives utter the phrase “voting rights”?

35 Questions

This is part 23 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


23. Why don’t liberty loving conservatives ever utter the phrase “voting rights”?

People don’t have a right to vote. It is a privilege granted to citizens, and as such, the privilege can be taken away, for example, in the case of a convicted felon. There are also stipulations, for example, you have to be 18.

Non-citizens Don’t Have A Right

Non-citizens should not be allowed to vote at all, at any level, in U.S. elections whether they are here legally or not. It is an affront to those who are actually citizens. Why should a person who is not a citizen have a voice in the way this country is run? Answer? They shouldn’t. They don’t have a right.

18 Year Olds Don’t Have A Right

“They possess a great social conscience, are perplexed by the injustices in the world and are anxious to rectify those ills.1” – Jennings Randolph

The voting age should be returned to 21. It doesn’t matter that they “possess a great social conscience.” They are typically led by emotions instead of reason, and haven’t really lived life. I actually wouldn’t mind seeing the voting age moved to 25, or even 27 since they’re legally able to be dependent on their parents until then. The only exception to the voting age is a member of the military. Show your military ID, along with your state identification card, and you’re good. There is no right to vote at 18, or 21, or whatever. It’s a privilege provided by law.

If You’re Not Registered You Don’t Have A Right

It’s not much to ask that you prove you’re a citizen to vote, and if you can’t prove that, you don’t get to vote. Some of the responsibility lies with the individual, and if you don’t have the responsibility, I don’t have a problem turning you away. Actually, if you’re not responsible enough to take care of your business prior to showing up, then it may be that you’re not responsible enough to vote. I have a hard time that many people don’t have IDs with the amount of things you need an ID for.

Maybe instead of asking conservatives to utter the phrase “voting rights,” we should ask why liberals don’t ever utter the phrase “voter fraud.”


  1. The 26th Amendment. History.com. A+E Networks. 2010. Accessed: 24 Apr 2018. Web. 

Related Posts: