Hey Romney, I can’t understand why young Americans would vote for Barack Obama either.

Daniel Blatt, over at Gay Patriot, posted this video.

The first thing I will mention is that it’s moments of this type, the no non-sense “what are you thinking?” “sorry if I’m offending you, but” sort of attitude, that really re-affirm my decision to support him in the primary and the upcoming election. (Because, please, we all know he’s going to get the nomination.)

Secondly, he’s absolutely right.

Money doesn’t grow on trees. (Seriously, it doesn’t. Even the material isn’t paper, it’s made from a blend of cotton and linen.)

So what is my generation expecting? That all of these programs and plans for our parents (and grandparents) generation are going to remain for our generation? So we will continue to rack up trillions of dollars of deficit, continue borrowing from China (thanks to Castle for pointing out, this season, how that could go HORRIBLY AWFULLY wrong at the drop of a hat.), just so we can let the government form a cradle to grave mentality?

Higher taxes won’t fix this. (We could confiscate the wealth of every “rich” person in this country and it still wouldn’t make a dent in our current deficit, not the mention the continued spending and the programs that my generation [hello there Sandra Fluke] would like to institute.)

More regulation won’t fix this. (Guess what happens then, the companies go somewhere else and make some other country successful.)

The only thing that will fix this is to cut spending and re-evaluate why so many people in my generation (and others) are shouting “please will you fix it for me?”* to the government.

This is NOT the country our founding fathers wanted.



*if you get that reference you win a cookie.


  1. Why would young Americans vote for any candidate of a party that denied them the right to marry someone they love, use drugs less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes, or abort an unwanted pregnancy? Our founding fathers, in addition to creating a country that denied rights to blacks and women, wanted a country that could evolve based on the will of the people. Those people — particularly young people — are making friends from Europe and realizing that socialized medicine doesn’t equal fascism and that regulations don’t equal less freedom.

    • First of all. The Founding Fathers hoped for slavery to be ended in this country, but they knew that it would take time.
      Women were not treated fairly in ANY parts of the Western world at the time, you can hardly blame the founding fathers for being products of their age. There was far more protection for women in America than there was in other countries. Try reading “Maria or the Wrongs of Woman” by Mary Wollstonecraft sometime for an accurate representation of women’s rights in the 18th century in Europe.

      Then there is Europe, which you bring up as if it is the bright shining light of civilization itself. Except countries there (Britain, Greece, etc) have experienced rioting in the streets and morbidly failing economies because of the very welfare state that you want in this country.

      Regulations do one thing, they regulate. The definition of regulate?

      To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.

      Regulations ALWAYS equal less freedom. Some regulation is necessary (like driving laws) but too much regulation is NEVER good for the freedom of a country.

      I have talked about my views on same-sex marriage before on this blog…extensively in fact. I direct you to a few blogs on my views here, here, and here. (There are far more. But that’s a start…I wonder if you will actually bother to read them.)

      I don’t have a horse in the race as far as drugs go. Personally I think that legalizing Marijuana would probably do more good than harm, but that’s HARDLY the most important issue at this moment in time.

      As for abortion, here’s a post I wrote on my views on that. And as a follow up to that, I will say that it’s not that I don’t believe in the individual rights of the mother…it’s just that I also believe in the views of the founders (Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness) and I believe that once a child is viable (24 weeks, give or take) that they are eligible for all those rights afforded to the mother…in this case the right not to be killed just because they are ‘unwanted’.

      • The Founding Fathers may have hoped for universal health care and to bring back Arrested Development for all we know. My point was, it’s insane to base our 21st century policies on the ideas of a dozen 18th century white land owners. They knew our science and customs would change, that’s why they let us make amendments to the Constitution in the first place.

        The US has had rioting in the streets since September because of our failing economy, protesting the excessive greed and the lack of regulations that have created two very different percentile groups. I’ll read your Maria book, if you read Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” to get a good idea about what our country could (and did) look like when corporations were given complete freedom to treat their employees like animals. “Regulation” is a dirty word in politics today, but it is really the lack of regulation that causes banks to give loans they know and hope will fail and causes old ladies to find fingers in their Big Macs. Freedom’s great, but the Lehman Brothers, Bain Capitals, Exxons, and Wal-Marts of America have enough it already.

        As a straight man, I don’t have the right to tell you you’re wrong for supporting a party that wants nothing to do with you. I just know that if Barack Obama were to say tomorrow that Jews could marry whoever they want as long they don’t marry other Jews, even the most secular, self-hating Barney Franks among us would tear up their voter registration cards. This, like marijuana, is by no means the most important issue of our time, but it is an issue. And for a party so interested in liberty and reducing the deficit, even republicans must know that legalizing gay marriage and marijuana could bring in enough tax revenue to fund 50 NPRs.

        Twenty-four weeks sounds like a good cut off date to me, but conservatives are getting bolder and bolder in saying that life begins at conception, no questions asked. They’re forcing rape victims to have transvaginal ultrasounds in Texas and they’ll soon let doctors lie to women if it can prevent an abortion in Arizona. It started out as a war on women, but everyday that Rick Santorum stays in the race, it sounds more and more like a war on sex.

        • I can promise you that A. The Founders did not want universal health care as almost all of them believed you should work for everything and expect to be given nothing…but I would love for you to find me a quote to the contrary..and B) as they were mostly men of good taste and intelligence I’m sure they would have wanted Arrested Development to come back but would not have passed laws to that effect.

          And it’s not insane to base our policies off of ideals from the past. Human nature has never changed, and because of that truth, right, good, and justice are pretty much a concept…which is why when they based their government on ideas of Plato, Aristotle and Cicero from almost 2 millennia before them, it still worked pretty well. Yes society changes it’s mores and understanding increases but the central nature of the pursuit of Happiness has not changed and as such the government relationship to the individual has not changed.

          I love how Meredith suggests you read a non-fiction book by Wollstonecraft and you respond with a piece of fiction by Sinclair (by the way do you know that Sinclair didn’t support any of the laws that came out of the outrage over his book?).

          I find it amusing how you seem to be confusing the conservative/capitalist call for lowered regulation for the insanity of anarchy. No capitalist or conservative wants to strip all regulations and laws from the economy, but we also know that as long as the government has the power to pick winners and losers then you will always see corruption involved in those regulations. So actually the regulations you seem to want so much are what give power to those corporations you hate so much.

          And your statements about social conservatives, when not pathetically farcical and random, are highly inaccurate. The Republican party is not the party psychotic social throwback you seem to suggest it is…if it were Rick Santorum would be leading in the polls, but he’s not, he’s going for a MASSIVE defeat and if his ego weren’t huge and intelligence non-existent he would have already pulled out. Instead the GOP is nominating Romney, whom last time I checked donated to planned parenthood and holds the same position on gay marriage as Barrack Obama. Oh yeah the GOP is just embracing knuckle-dragging social conservatism.

  2. If I were to be presented with two choices, increase government spending by 20 % vs increase government by 15% I exclaim, how about he reduce government spending? To me Obama is 20% and Romney is 15%, where is the government spending cuts? I don’t believe in a magical Romney hat that he is going to pull spending cuts out of. To me he seems like the next iteration of big government Republicans. Sure he can say “I am for capitalism, I am for smaller government” (although I honestly don’t hear that when his face shows up on TV) but I don’t see any plan on his behalf that will reverse course on increased government spending.

    • Romney is a product of good business management and capitalism, that’s how he and his family have made their fortunes. At the very least he is a better manager than Obama, who seems to think that money grows on trees. Which it doesn’t, as I pointed out.

      I personally (and I’ve done quite a bit of research on this) don’t believe that he is “the next iteration of big government Republicans”.

      Have you read his plans? The man has them all over his website. Now I usually err on the side of “how do you know when a politician is lying? When his lips are moving.” but I’ve seen no reason to doubt Romney yet.

      Of course I know that your support is going Ron Paul’s way…I just hope that when my candidate wins you will still vote for him regardless of that. We CAN’T take another 4 years of Obama.

      • You have a good point that if (and likely when) Romney wins I need to read his book. I find it very hard to have faith in pro-occupation Republicans such as Romney/Gingrich/Santorum. I am happy to keep an open mind so long as my mind doesn’t fall on the ground. There are angles to like about Romney I just don’t want to be suckered into voting for a person who is going to be just another Republican.

  3. Our country was created to garner to individual rights not to majority rule, incidentally, and honestly the founding fathers never intended for the people to whine to the federal government every time a private religious institution or state government upsets them, the states where originally designed to form a majority of their own laws regarding things not covered in the constitution (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. ) What i guess im trying to say is, your issue with gay marriage, abortion, drugs etc. is in no way a federal case, but in fact is the domain of the states,making these things federal because they are unfair (the liberal’s general M.O.) is what takes away freedom and power from the people… example: where i live a gay couple could not get married, they are perfectly within their rights to take their tax money, their income (which they spend on local businesses) to a state where they could get married, nobody is stopping them. In fact i dont believe there has ever been a federal outcry from a relevant (not insane) conservative group to stop gay marriage in a state where it has become legalized…Most conservatives simply do not want it made legal on a federal level. Also im pretty sure a regulation by definition has to mean less freedom…

Comments are closed.