Let Them Go their Way

clipped from www.conservative.org A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

“Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand”

I see the election of Obama as a huge positive on many levels.

I can remember being bewildered a few years back when Dems suggested a hard turn to the left. They were right and I was certainly wrong about the success of this tactic. In retrospect, it makes a lot of sense. They basically followed the Reagan model and even picked up part of his mantra.
Maybe, just maybe, we are seeing the beginnings of a new 2 party system in America, where the right will shed off it’s progressive dead weight, as it did for most of the past 30 years.

We have truth. The Left has NEVER improved an economy anywhere on Earth and never will. Their aim is artificial equality, not growing an economy. Artificial equality, fascism, always comes at the expense of liberty.

Morals vs. Liberty

clipped from mises.org It is well to remind ourselves at this point that liberty as I have defined it is not a synonym for good; that any act of liberty may be either “good” or “evil” as another person judges it. This will be true until and unless infinite wisdom and universal perfection of conscience guide every act of every person in such a way as to be ap­proved by every other person. But universal agreement is far from a descrip­tion of real life; it is no more than a direction toward which to strive. And that fact is precisely why there is any problem of liberty at all. The concern of morals is to judge acts as either good or evil, right or wrong—“moral” or “immoral,” as we say in appraising them. Such a judgment has neither place nor meaning except for acts of choice. It follows, then, that no problem of morals can ever be resolved by removing liberty, in a degree either large or small.

Thomas Davidson expressed it this way: “That which is not free is not responsible, and that which is not responsible is not moral. In other words, freedom is the condition of morality.”
A interesting perspective that morality inevitably reduces liberty, yet without the liberty to choose, one cannot be moral.

More and more I believe the fundamental understanding of liberty is lost. This is brilliant clip but I think foreign to many if not most. As is the concept of fascism.