Milo Nickels
Infowars.com
February 16, 211

There was an article recently on FoxNews.com that made my blood boil.  Let me share the article with you.  Usually, I will post a whole article and then comment afterward, but this one is simply too overflowing with nonsense.  I’m going to have to comment far more frequently than usual to handle this one.  My comments on the article will be written in bold italics.

Disrespectful Libertarians Hijack CPAC Poll — And Its Mission

Kevin McCullough

Published February 14, 2011

FoxNews.com

The top three winners of this weekend’s CPAC straw poll will not win the 2012 presidential nomination. And if any of the top three do break through to prove that prediction wrong, none of them will go on to win the White House in 2012.

First off, Kev, are you some magical being, a visitor from the future, or the great Miss Cleo?  You must be, to make such absolutely certain predictions about the future.  The fact is, if any of those people do prove your first prediction wrong, you are only helping the liberals to prove your second prediction right.

This year’s top three placeholders in the poll were Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Gary Johnson. Ron Paul and Mitt Romney repeat their standing from the 2010 poll as No. 1 and No. 2, respectively.

If the results of this straw poll do not sufficiently demonstrate the bizarre nature and overall oddity of this year’s gathering of “conservatives,” nothing else can.

Notice how McCullough throws the word “conservatives” in quotations, as if to say that the winners of the CPAC poll aren’t really conservatives at all.  This is the root problem of McCullough’s train of thought.  He apparently thinks that HIS definition of conservative is the only plausible definition.  Before we get into McCullough’s definition, however, let’s see what the Merriam-Webster dictionary says:

Conservatism:

2a – disposition in politics to preserve what is established.

2b – a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change.

Ron Paul, though technically still a Republican, has given up his GOP identity to embrace the chance to be the poster child for the more libertarian streak that has run rampant through CPAC, largely unabated for the past two years (as if it should be). Mitt Romney, the virtual author of Obamacare, and 2008’s third-place finisher for the GOP nomination, is weighed down by the fact that his universal health care mandate in Massachusetts has largely failed – with the exception being the $50 state-subsidized abortions. Gary Johnson was only added to the lineup at the last minute, his presence stoking the flame of immoral libertarianism that actually advocated for legalized pot and the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual unions.

Now we start to see McCullough’s true colors.  He’s not motivated by political opinion, but by religious virtues;  “immoral libertarianism”?  What is that?  Where is the Constitution does it say anything about the government enforcing morality?  It doesn’t, because morality is not the realm of the government.  Morality is the realm of the church.  Our government only exists to protect liberties of the people to say what they like, do what they like, and worship how they like, and to stop anyone else (including the government) from infringing on those freedoms (even if those actions are labeled as immoral by someone else).  One man’s morality is another man’s sin.  Our government was never intended to make those distinctions unless one man’s actions harmed the freedom of someone else.  Isn’t it funny that “conservatives” (like McCullough) are so concerned about morality when it comes to smoking weed, or prostitution, or gays getting married, but they see no problem with denying health care, stopping social programs, or collateral damage as we bomb the hell out of Third World countries (all of which are considered moral issues by liberals).

In other words, this year’s CPAC wasn’t about advancing conservatism. Rather, it exposed the radically disrespectful element of the libertine.

When did it become more important to advance conservatism than individual liberty?  When, in America, did it become disrespectful to have differing opinions?  This is the fabric of our society.  If McCullough wants a completely respectful environment, maybe he could move to a country where the president always wins with 100% of the vote.  I hear those countries, with all of their “uniformity” are lovely this time of year.

It has been the inclusion of the libertarian aspects of the past two years that has thrown the message of conservatism askew in a widely disproportional way.

It is the libertarian in attendance that produced the free pornographic calendar passed out to attendees in 2010. It is the libertarians in attendance who openly promote the inclusion of groups like GOProud, largely as an attempt to silence groups who would speak in strong support of traditional moral values. It is the libertarian in attendance who slandered President George Bush, by claiming his appreciation for the Constitution was best summed up as a “damn piece of paper.” It is the libertarian in attendance that proclaimed the war to prevent terrorists from regathering strength and coming after our homeland as “illegal.” And it is the libertarian in attendance that eschewed, booed, cajoled and screamed “war criminal” to Vice President Dick Cheney, a man who served his country with commitment and still attempts to help the world understand the threat of the radical Islamic element devising plans to eliminate us and our allies.

Isn’t it ridiculously ironic that McCullough will so quickly speak out against radical Islam — and probably fears countries with Islamic governments — but he’s disgusted that some politicians don’t want religion-based morality to be the foundation of our laws?

Now the libertarians stuffed the ballot box of the CPAC straw poll, and for the second year in a row made it the laughingstock poll in the eyes of the voters. (This year’s voters are perhaps more engaged, more aware and more plugged in than ever before.)

In head-to-head polling going back a full year to last year’s CPAC, neither Ron Paul nor Mitt Romney has consistently topped a head-to-head match-up against a greatly weakened President Obama.

Romney has only topped the sitting president once in that 12-month period. Gov. Mike Huckabee, a no-show at CPAC for the past years, has beaten the president head-to-head in nearly every poll taken.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • {openx:49}

David Keene, the American Conservative Union’s outgoing president, gave a lengthy discounting of this year’s poll in the lead up to it. That should serve as a very clear indicator that next year’s CPAC needs some significant changes if it is to become the great conference it has been in past years.

Libertarians and Conservatives are as different as Libertarians and Liberals. The truth is libertarians are the worst form of political affiliation in the nation. Combining the desire of economic greed, with the amoral desire to promote any behavior regardless of its cost to our culture is a stark departure from the intent of the Founding Fathers.

“Libertarians are the worst form of political affiliation in the nation”???  WOW . . .  just wow.  Because our nation doesn’t have any socialists, nazis, communists, green partiers . . . they don’t combine “the desire of economic greed, with the amoral desire to promote any behavior regardless of its cost to our culture”.  They combine a philosophy of financial responsibility in a free market with a love of individual liberty to live life as people see fit.  Allowing people to live freely is not a cost to our culture, it is the foundation of our culture.  To insinuate that these philosophies differ from the intent of our founding fathers is simply ludicrous.  Our founding fathers did not write the Constitution to steer and direct our morality as a people, but to limit the government from doing so.

And it is not consistent with the average conservative voter in America.

The fact that so many faith-based conservatives were missing from CPAC, and are also arguably the most dependable conservative voter in the country only added to the confusing, bizarre, disrespectful and, in many ways, off-putting memories of this year’s event.

FAITH BASED CONSERVATIVES.  McCullough bemoans their absence from CPAC.  He never even considers that FAITH based conservatives are a major problem in our country.  He claims that libertarians grossly deviate from our founding fathers.  I say that FAITH based conservatives deviate grossly from our founding fathers.  Our founding fathers were strong advocates that there should be a separations of church and state.  They believed that our government should not interfere with our freedom of religion, and that our religious beliefs should not shape our government.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Sharia Law the product of “faith-based” politics?  I’m pretty sure McCullough wouldn’t support those “faith-based” politicians.  His religious beliefs apparently trump all others and should be enacted as laws . . . that’s the foundation of our country isn’t it?

Yes, CPAC enjoyed its largest attendance ever. But one could possibly argue that it was smaller than it would have been if the third leg of the conservative stool — social conservatives — had been the key player they have traditionally been in the past.

One COULD argue that . . . but they’d be dead wrong, and probably laughed at.  With the dollar collapsing, wars being waged, the national debt rapidly nearing $20 trillion, food and gas prices sky-rocketing, unemployment out of control, billions of dollars being spent every day on wars (where we don’t even really understand our objective anymore), the government increasingly interfering in our lives, TSA molesting our travelers, the Patriot ACT continuing to snoop on us, Janet Napolitano encouraging us to all spy on each other, etc., “social conservatives” (i.e. religion pushers) are focusing on some pretty irrelevant issues.

And given the fact that the Ron Paul-toting, uber-disrespectful and, in many ways, disruptive ballot stuffing has wrecked the straw poll results, pinging completely unelectable candidates in two of the top three slots, perhaps more significance should be paid to the straw poll to be conducted by the conference that happens in the fall called the “Values Voters Conference.”

If social conservatives are the largest portion of the conservative discussion, no attention should be paid to a poll that virtually eliminates their presence all together.

CPAC leaders did the best they could to put on the best conference possible. It wasn’t their fault that the libertarian elements within the attendees equate free speech with animalistic expressions, especially when visiting someone else’s “house.”

Show me one instance from the recent CPAC conference where libertarians acted like animals?

Libertarian elements, because of their strange combination of policies that add up to anarchy without moral limits, don’t mix with conservative ideals. And, because of that, perhaps they should have their own conference and let all the pot-smokers and gay marriage supporters come and complain about how the U.S. shouldn’t be fighting terrorists, while they slander public servants.

Again.  Libertarian policies DO mix very well with the Constitution.  They don’t mix very well with religious morality.  Fortunately, none of the libertarians I’ve ever met want to run for Pope.

At the very least, the winner of their straw poll would be somewhat reflective of the title of who they are, and what they believe.

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of “The Kevin McCullough Show” weekdays (7-9 a.m. EST) & “Baldwin/McCullough Radio” Saturdays (9-11 p.m. EST) on 265 stations. His newest book from Thomas Nelson Publishers, “No He Can’t: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change,” will be published March 2011.

In summation:

Ron Paul for president?  HELL YES!!!

Ron Paul for pope?  apparently not…  who knew?

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)As far as morality goes, libertarians come from all religious belief structures.  Many libertarians, due to their religious beliefs, are personally opposed to drugs, prostitution, and gay marriage, and don’t engage in those activities.  What separates those libertarians from “Faith Based Conservatives”, however is the strong belief that morality is not an issue to be decided or controlled by government.  Faith-based conservatives do as much for the advancement of liberty as faith-based healers do for the advancement of medical technology.  I only hope that, if a libertarian faces Obama in 2012, morons like Kevin McCullough will promote the party that actually endorses individual liberty, personal responsibility, and philosophical consistency.  Would you really support Obama’s tyrannical, all-controlling agenda, simply to stop people from possibly smoking weed, and gays from getting married?

Milo Nickels writes for Activist Post, where this article first appeared.


Related Articles


Comments