All American Blogger Remains Firmly Rooted on the Right – A Response to Johnson and Sullivan

By Duane Lester - December 7, 2009 - 12 Comments -

There was a little bit of a hiccup in the rightosphere recently with Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs shuffling off his right wing coil, followed closely by Andrew Sullivan also renouncing his righty credentials.

In both of their posts, they detailed why they had chosen to turn away from the conservative movement. It was not surprising to most. Chuck and Sully had been attacking the right more and more, finding fault with just about everything they could.

These two rightosphere icons, (yes icons), have turned to the dark side.

I cannot see myself ever doing the same.

I understand the importance of the individual over the collective.

I understand the sacrifices our military makes to ensure our safety and liberty. I have respect for them and will never compare them to Pol Pot or other mad men.

I refuse to believe in so-called science that refuses to accept feedback from scientists that disagree with the “consensus.”

I refuse to surrender the property of Americans to countries with a smaller carbon footprint.

I cannot support a philosophy that trusts in an all powerful government.

I understand the importance of limited governments and the dangers of powerful central governments.

I understand the Founding Fathers, their goals and what they intended with the Constitution. And I understand why the Left wants a “Living Constitution.” They want to re-write it to suit their collectivist goals.

I understand that the left believes individual liberties are not as important as the “common good.”

I refuse to believe that a man is safer when the government is armed, but he is disarmed.

I refuse to make another work for my benefit without some form of compensation for him.

I refuse to create millions of government dependents.

I refuse to limit another’s freedom of speech to only what I agree with.

I refuse to think animals are as important as humans.

I refuse to think the United States is responsible for everything bad in the world.

I refuse to endorse the seizure of property for redistribution.

I believe in the right to an equal start, but not the right to an equal finish. Each man must choose his own path and accept the consequences of his choices, not blame the system and demand another’s property.

I believe in the power of charity. I believe it is more powerful than the power of welfare.

Having seen the beating hearts of five unborn children, I understand they are not fetuses, but babies, and have a right to life that supersedes a woman’s right to choose. I also believe the solution to ending abortion doesn’t lie in abolition of the act.

I believe that a person has a right to do whatever they choose to themselves, as long as it doesn’t harm another.

I trust Americans, but not the American government.
I see the role models of the left. They are Mao, Lenin, Marx and Castro. The role models of the right are Reagan, Goldwater, Madison and Washington. It’s an obvious choice.

I cannot believe that America became the greatest country in the modern world because of liberty and individualism, but will become even better without it.

I believe in capitalism. I am no looter.

I believe in God, and that salvation is found in accepting Jesus Christ. I don’t believe that everyone should be forced to believe exactly as I believe. Faith is a personal decision. Choose wisely.

I have seen the results of experimenting with collectivism and the results of experimenting with freedom. I choose freedom.

I understand that the right wing is a diverse community, with disagreements on many individual issues. But I also understand that the foundation of conservatism and libertarianism is limited government, personal liberty and free markets. I cannot turn my back on that platform because I disagree with some in the movement.

If you turn your back on the right, you are facing left, regardless of your rationalizations. This is something I refuse to do.

As usual, I’m interested in what you think. Add your part to this article below.

[196]

David Baker

Right on brother. I swear this crazy society will bind us in chains if not closely watched. The scariest part is the absolute disconnect with factual history. State run school is doing more to dilute intelligence and breed ignorance than most people know. Washington said it was every Americans duty to safeguard the sacred fire of liberty. We have a lot to be ashamed of, but people are receptive to the philosophy they just need to be introduced to it. It is vital that old school republican and libertarian values and principles be voiced and eventually freedom and self sufficiency will spread like wild fire. When it does we must remember this time never to stop feeding it.

Knowledge is power. It’s time to end the government monopoly on education. Embrace the revolution.

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. – Samuel Adams
David Baker

Right on brother. I swear this crazy society will bind us in chains if not closely watched. The scariest part is the absolute disconnect with factual history. State run school is doing more to dilute intelligence and breed ignorance than most people know. Washington said it was every Americans duty to safeguard the sacred fire of liberty. We have a lot to be ashamed of, but people are receptive to the philosophy they just need to be introduced to it. It is vital that old school republican and libertarian values and principles be voiced and eventually freedom and self sufficiency will spread like wild fire. When it does we must remember this time never to stop feeding it.

Knowledge is power. It’s time to end the government monopoly on education. Embrace the revolution.

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. – Samuel Adams
Rod Newbound

Well said, Duane, and I concur.

Happy New Year!
Rod
Rod Newbound

Well said, Duane, and I concur.

Happy New Year!
Rod
Matthew Phillips

Saying Mao is a role-model for the left is like saying Hitler is a role-model for the right. It’s absurd. You picked out a number of role-models for the left that hold a very clearly negative connotation and picked for the right a number of (somewhat) positive ones. What about this list:
Left: Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton
Right: James I, Francisco Franco, Joseph Goebbels, Richard Nixon

Wouldn’t seem fair, would it?

Furthermore, individualism is most stifled by culture, not government. What about the individuals that were burned by the Spanish Inquisition? Or in the Salem Witch Trials? What about the individuals that were persecuted during the red scares? In point of fact, the left has produced more “individuals” than the right ever has; the right has the strongest party-line vote, and conservatism is historically responsible for just as much suppression of the individual will as communism.

Collectivism is not opposite to freedom, necessarily. In fact, I’m not sure what collectivism even means. It seems to me that our republic functions collectively, whether we like it or not. Ron Paul’s recent essay (I think it was called “Democracy is not Freedom”) should shed some light here.

Who on the left is limiting freedom of speech? Historically, the left has been more concerned with individual liberties than the right. Recent trends towards libertarianism on the right are perhaps moving in a good direction, but the fact is that civil rights are originally a leftist idea (see Rousseau or the Magna Carta).

Freedom has rarely been limited by the left except in cases where large corporations and banking interests have taken advantage of their overwhelming power over the economy and the rights of their laborers. In fact, I’m not quite sure what freedoms you’re talking about. The most recent rightist government (the Bush/Cheney regime) has done more to limit the freedom than perhaps any other this century (if not longer). For example, they have largely done away with the implied right to privacy; they have revoked the right of Habeas Corpus if you are arbitrarily deemed an “enemy combatant;” they have escalated the cash-guzzling war on drugs (talk about personal freedom to choose); they have authorized warrantless search and wiretapping at least in terms of data if not in terms of physical property. Great role models, right? These wealthy businessmen have taken you all for a ride and convinced you to drive the car and pay for the gas.

Cut the rhetoric. In the end, the so-called right wants freedom no more or less than the so-called left. Attributing false motives to the left is no way to gain real, intelligent support of your ideas. At best it’s propaganda and at worst it’s stupidity. I applaud these individuals for recognizing where their beliefs differ from the party-line and for exercising their individualism in “turning their back” on the right. It’s stuff like this article that makes me wonder why more people haven’t done so already.
Matthew Phillips

Saying Mao is a role-model for the left is like saying Hitler is a role-model for the right. It’s absurd. You picked out a number of role-models for the left that hold a very clearly negative connotation and picked for the right a number of (somewhat) positive ones. What about this list:
Left: Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton
Right: James I, Francisco Franco, Joseph Goebbels, Richard Nixon

Wouldn’t seem fair, would it?

Furthermore, individualism is most stifled by culture, not government. What about the individuals that were burned by the Spanish Inquisition? Or in the Salem Witch Trials? What about the individuals that were persecuted during the red scares? In point of fact, the left has produced more “individuals” than the right ever has; the right has the strongest party-line vote, and conservatism is historically responsible for just as much suppression of the individual will as communism.

Collectivism is not opposite to freedom, necessarily. In fact, I’m not sure what collectivism even means. It seems to me that our republic functions collectively, whether we like it or not. Ron Paul’s recent essay (I think it was called “Democracy is not Freedom”) should shed some light here.

Who on the left is limiting freedom of speech? Historically, the left has been more concerned with individual liberties than the right. Recent trends towards libertarianism on the right are perhaps moving in a good direction, but the fact is that civil rights are originally a leftist idea (see Rousseau or the Magna Carta).

Freedom has rarely been limited by the left except in cases where large corporations and banking interests have taken advantage of their overwhelming power over the economy and the rights of their laborers. In fact, I’m not quite sure what freedoms you’re talking about. The most recent rightist government (the Bush/Cheney regime) has done more to limit the freedom than perhaps any other this century (if not longer). For example, they have largely done away with the implied right to privacy; they have revoked the right of Habeas Corpus if you are arbitrarily deemed an “enemy combatant;” they have escalated the cash-guzzling war on drugs (talk about personal freedom to choose); they have authorized warrantless search and wiretapping at least in terms of data if not in terms of physical property. Great role models, right? These wealthy businessmen have taken you all for a ride and convinced you to drive the car and pay for the gas.

Cut the rhetoric. In the end, the so-called right wants freedom no more or less than the so-called left. Attributing false motives to the left is no way to gain real, intelligent support of your ideas. At best it’s propaganda and at worst it’s stupidity. I applaud these individuals for recognizing where their beliefs differ from the party-line and for exercising their individualism in “turning their back” on the right. It’s stuff like this article that makes me wonder why more people haven’t done so already.
David Weaver

Matthew are you serious about your picks for role models of the left. Yes Jefferson and Franklin were more liberal in their time period, but by no means would they currently endorse the tact or the path that the “left” has taken. If JFK were alive, I don’t honestly think he would recognize the “left” as it is now. If anything he would be more centrist. As for Clinton, yeah he could be a role model for the left, if they want someone who traded in his word for a second term.

The left has only been concerned with “individual” liberities and freedom of speech for those that agree with them. When it comes to the opposition, they try to shut it down quickly as possible, because they don’t want to discuss either the flaws in their own logic, or their ultimate goals. The left has as much interest in big government and big corporations as the right. In that regard they are one in the same. The difference is how they want to control those entities. But they do want control.

Cut the rhetoric indeed. Take your own mandate to heart. Stop letting the left do your thinking. Think for yourself.

Oh and the wealthy have taken us for a ride. Wasn’t it the government who decided to get involved in private business? Talk about being taken for a ride. Now we have to pay taxes to keep companies alive that couldn’t do it themselves. Talk about being taken for a ride.

As far as the right rhetoric I’m sick of it too…. Most Americans are centrists whether they want to admit it or not. They want their freedoms, don’t want to infringe on their fellow man, and don’t want the government lording over them… Seems we fought a revolution for those goals…. But I may be wrong.
David Weaver

Matthew are you serious about your picks for role models of the left. Yes Jefferson and Franklin were more liberal in their time period, but by no means would they currently endorse the tact or the path that the “left” has taken. If JFK were alive, I don’t honestly think he would recognize the “left” as it is now. If anything he would be more centrist. As for Clinton, yeah he could be a role model for the left, if they want someone who traded in his word for a second term.

The left has only been concerned with “individual” liberities and freedom of speech for those that agree with them. When it comes to the opposition, they try to shut it down quickly as possible, because they don’t want to discuss either the flaws in their own logic, or their ultimate goals. The left has as much interest in big government and big corporations as the right. In that regard they are one in the same. The difference is how they want to control those entities. But they do want control.

Cut the rhetoric indeed. Take your own mandate to heart. Stop letting the left do your thinking. Think for yourself.

Oh and the wealthy have taken us for a ride. Wasn’t it the government who decided to get involved in private business? Talk about being taken for a ride. Now we have to pay taxes to keep companies alive that couldn’t do it themselves. Talk about being taken for a ride.

As far as the right rhetoric I’m sick of it too…. Most Americans are centrists whether they want to admit it or not. They want their freedoms, don’t want to infringe on their fellow man, and don’t want the government lording over them… Seems we fought a revolution for those goals…. But I may be wrong.
Li

If only more conservatives thought and behaved as though they believe everything you listed…if we could get people who think like that into office, this country could be saved from the hole it’s digging itself into. We need conservatives and liberals in office to balance each other – but far more centered ones who actually give a damn about people individually AND collectively. We need balance.
Li

If only more conservatives thought and behaved as though they believe everything you listed…if we could get people who think like that into office, this country could be saved from the hole it’s digging itself into. We need conservatives and liberals in office to balance each other – but far more centered ones who actually give a damn about people individually AND collectively. We need balance.
vesey

I agree emphatically. Sadly the people that need to read this and think about it’s truths will never do so, so the march toward the ultimate tragedy will continue. A cynical view but i believe an accurate one…………..
vesey

I agree emphatically. Sadly the people that need to read this and think about it’s truths will never do so, so the march toward the ultimate tragedy will continue. A cynical view but i believe an accurate one…………..