Who Am I, Why Am I Here?

After long leaving this page blank, I've decided to explain my political philosophy because someone here asked me who the hell am I and how can I think the way I do. So I will endeavor to explain for anyone who cares to read this.

The one primary principle of my personal philosophy is anti-ismism. That is, in all aspects of life I endeavor not to consciously join any movement or ideology that can in any way be described with a word that has the suffix "ism" or "ist." I call it My Ism Schism. I am a conservative who opposes much of Conservatism. I am a libertarian who opposes much of Libertarianism, a republican who scoffs at Republicanism, a democrat who cannot fathom the mindset of Democrats, and a liberal who seldom agrees with Liberals. I’m a fundamental person at odds with Fundamentalism, and a vegetarian who loathes Vegetarianism. I want to protect the environment, but I am not an Environmentalist. I am fanatically opposed to Fanaticism and radically anti-Radicalism. I’m a global thinker frightened by Globalist thinking. And while I’m sorry my white European ancestors wrought such havoc over the centuries, I am not an Apologist. I am a Christian, not a Baptist or a Methodist or a follower of Catholicism. And while I love the Constitution, please don't call me a Constitutionalist.

If I attack the veracity of Paula Jones or the moral hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich, I’m labeled a Clinton-loving liberal. If I speak out in favor of missile defense or an invasion of Iraq, I’m labeled a Neo-con. If I oppose the Department of Homeland Defense I’m called a Paleo-con. And while it is true that I vote for Republicans more than any other party, in every election I vote for Libertarians and Democrats as well. But I wouldn't want to be thought of as belonging to any of them. Libertarians claim they want to return to constitutional government, but they don’t want to acknowledge a fundamental right to life, and I'm not convinced they could organize a car wash, let alone a political movement. Republicans talk about smaller, less intrusive and less wasteful government yet champion a drug war—the largest, most invasive, and most wasteful governmental intrusion the nation has ever known. And Democrats? The policies of Democrats are in large part the reason for the problems we face in the first place.

To quote one of the great American philosophers of the last century, I am what I am and that’s all that I am. I hope this clears everything up for all you who wonder.

Let me introduce you to a few people I loathe:

There are more, of course, I'll add them later.

Have you seen this movie yet?

Hillary's Folly On:

The French: Is there any doubt why Chuck Jones made Pepe le Pew (the animated skunk who stunk) French? To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, in France, one must adapt oneself to the fragrance of a urinal. The French stink. Why should we take seriously the opinions of people who have such little regard for personal hygiene? The national bird of France is a Rooster. How appropriate that the national symbol of French pride is a cock. 

The Brits: I'm a self-admitted Anglophile, but I do tire of the incessant British whining about our president. Why don't these people go back to doing what they do best, spending their energies discussing whether Charles or Wills should be the next Queen of England?

In a perfect world America would be more like Britain and Britain would be more like America. Britain would have greater respect for an individual’s right to self-defense and self-determination, and America would have greater respect for history and an individual’s right to self-indulgence. But most importantly, America would have better beer and Britain would have better food.

The Canadians: The problem with Canada, as with much of the world, is the ruling French elite. It took the British 15 minutes to defeat the French on the Plains of Abraham and take control over what is now Quebec. Since 1763 Quebec has been liberated from the grip of Paris, but 240 years later, the French still seek to dominate and divide ("diversify") Canada along cultural lines. I think French-Canadians succeed in being more French than the even the French dare to be. The French insistence on bilingualism is the most obvious and trite of French impositions on the residents of Canada. Despite the fact that everyone speaks English, Canadians are forced to engage in a redundant game of institutionalized bilingualism that wastes time, money, and productivity that could be better served finding ways to teach the French how to assimilate and play well with others.

When one travels to Canada and mingles with Canadians, one comes face to face with the universal truth that not all governments, evenly freely elected ones, are representative of a nation.

The Germans: Andrew Sullivan once wrote: “By the end of Bush's term, the United States could well be the second-largest economic and political power in the world, playing second fiddle to a European behemoth powered by Germany, handled by France, with Britain as a mere province within. The United States will have lost its most critical ally and gained its most formidable competitor since the Soviet Union. And you thought China was a problem.”

It’s an interesting thing that is happening in Europe, the French and Germans plotting for the joint domination of Europe through peaceful means. But I have a hunch that Germany is toying with France. Germany is pushing the European Union, but it won’t be satisfied ruling Europe with the French. Methinks they will eventually decide they can do a better job ruling Europe without the French. And who will rescue the French then? I wouldn’t sacrifice Timothy McVeigh's life in the defense of France.    

The Russkies: Though over a decade has passed since the Evil Empire collapsed, the spoiled fruits of its wickedness threaten us to this day. Soviet environmental policy created lakes of oil two feet deep, but we can't drill in ANWR. Russian rivers that once teemed with fish now glow at night, but it is America’s refusal to accept Kyoto that summons the anger of so-called environmentalists.  While the American left combats any energy plan that includes the responsible use of nuclear power, tons of atomic waste and crumbling nuclear-power plants in the former Soviet Union are a time bomb they choose to ignore. The attacks of 9-11 are America’s fault because the CIA is responsible for training and arming Osama bin Laden, so the mantra goes. But without the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan where would Osama be today? How fortunate for the Soviet Union that its collapse spares it from blame.

As Ronald Reagan taught us, it was the Soviet Union that ran against the tide of history by denying human freedom and human dignity to its citizens. So complete was the control of Soviet Communists over their citizens that even underwear was issued by the government. And like most things the Soviets made, their standard issue underwear was poorly constructed, unattractive, and a pain in the ass. They wouldn’t have had it any other way. In a land of vast resources, the Soviets managed to rape, pillage, and plunder their way to obsolescence in only 74 years of rule.

As Ronald Reagan said of the Soviet Union, “The dimensions of this failure are astounding.”