Column for July 24, 2008

Usually, I am the one asking questions. Not today.

It is hard to believe that this column concludes two full years of writing this column here at "The Selma News". I wish to offer my sincere gratitude to you, the readers. Whether you like my opinions or hate them, I thank you. I have gotten a lot of feedback over the last two years. Much was positive, a lot was negative. All I care is that you have been reading, which is both humbling and stimulating to me at the same time. I also wanted to thank Rick Stewart, the editor of this paper, for the extraordinary opportunity he gave to this big, ol' opinionated shmoe.

Being what is commonly referred to as a conservative individual, I run across a good many people of like minded passions and beliefs. Since I am very active on the internet, I tend to interact with people from all over the country and world. Recently, I was contacted by someone who runs a web site that opposes John McCain's election to the Presidency. The owner asked to interview me about my views on John McCain. Since I have shared my view points on Barack Hussien Obama, I wanted to share some of my views on John McCain, for the sake of equality. Here is the content of the interview.

Q: How would you self-identify politically? What are your general opinions about the role of government?

A: I would identify myself as a classic liberal. The term libertarian could be used, just not referring to the political party so named. Some would use the term conservative. I am probably most closely aligned with the likes of Barry Goldwater in most of my political philosophies with a few exceptions. I am not affiliated with any party at present.

The purpose of government is fairly well enumerated in the preamble of the US Constitution at the federal level. "...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity". Other than that, there is not much need for government. Highways ensure liberty and the general welfare. Welfare programs do not. Courts ensure justice. Hate crime legislation does not, nor do laws such as Sarbaines-Oxley or McCain-Feingold. Maybe I just made that clear as mud.

However, I also find a good definition in Romans 13:1-4 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil."

Government is there for the purpose of ensuring that the evil doers are punished, protecting those that do good. Government is something invented by God himself and therefore should be taken as something sacred rather than for personal gain.

Q: What are your reasons for opposing the candidacy of John McCain?

A: John McCain is not a "conservative", if I am to pick a term. He may have filled Barry Goldwater's seat in the Senate, but he is no Goldwater. He tends to be weak on items such as border security, the farce of global warming, on free speech (see previous comment on McCain-Feingold) rights, and wants to grant amnesty to millions of law breakers who entered this nation illegally, thus opposing the justice and common defense issues of the purpose of government.

Q: Do you advocate any of the other candidates as an alternative? If so, why? If not, why not?

A: My main support would be for either Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin is on the Constitution Party ticket and will never win. Ron Paul will not win the GOP nomination and has little support from the mainstream of the party. Ron Paul, though I disagree with him on some policy issues such as our presence in Iraq, is the ONLY candidate who truly supported liberty and a return to the original values of the Constitution. Chuck Baldwin espouses the CP values, with which I find myself fairly closely aligned. However, most CP folks are disgruntled GOP who are arrogant and ineffective. At least this is the way at the state party level here in NC. Ergo, I have disassociated myself with them. I can elaborate more on my differences with Ron Paul later if you wish.

Q: Is there any Vice Presidential pick for McCain that could get you to "hold your nose" and vote for him? (If so, why? If not, why not?)

A: Nope. First off, who ever remembers the VP? I personally remember all the VPs since I first started paying attention to the government in my elementary school days. Does the general populace pay attention? Probably not. I have a hard time finding people who know who Dick Cheney is. How many VPs have actually ascended to the Presidency in my lifetime? Only one, and he was not elected to that office. Gerald Ford was appointed VP after Spiro Agnew resigned under the provisions of the 25th Amendment. That was over 30 years ago and is not in the forefront of the knowledge or remembrance of millions of Americans. Since the VP does not make policy except to act as President of the Senate, I do not find that VP candidates are a means of sway for my vote. We would still get McCain as President, our chief executive.

Q: At this point, who do you think will win the general election and why?

A: I believe that Barack Obama will win. Why? Voter apathy, ignorance, and seduction. There are so few people educated on Constitutional principles, know the history of this nation, that follow traditional Christian values, and believe that they should provide for themselves rather than be taken care of by the world's system, we are doomed to become a socialist nation. And yet we will have the same document called The United States Constitution to which we claim to adhere.