Monday, January 7, 2008

CHANGE........IS IT GOOD?

Rudy Giuliani said something yesterday that I thought was quite profound regarding the atmosphere if change. People think the change mood is anti-Bush and I would agree that it is to most people. However change is not always good. That is why I am CONSERVATIVE. I want to CONSERVE some old-fashioned values that I think are important to our society. There is Bush fatigue. But there is also Washington fatigue and that includes the Senate and the House. If the change you seek is higher taxes and a less aggressive stand against terrorism than I guess change is what you want. Social agenda can be argued all day long. But to me change is not always good. Progressives in America to me are oppressors with their philosophy of elitism and low expectations. So yes I fight change. Perhaps I do in my own life as well. What is true and right will always be so. Public opinion changing is not truth it is only persuasion. Just because abortion is pushed as choice doesn't make abortion morally right even if public opinion adopts the concept as acceptable. Pornography in all forms is a societal ill regardless of the public opinion that it is necessary to preserve free speech. The opinions we adopt by rationale ring true only until the consequence shows its ugly head. So be careful what you wish for you may just get it............and this is true in life and politics!!

10 comments:

Mike said...

Hey, Nikki. Another good post.

"If the change you seek is higher taxes and a less aggressive stand against terrorism than I guess change is what you want."

Yes. I also want the change that will restore the rights and liberties guaranteed us by the Constitution, but undermined by BushCo. I want the change that will take wars of Empire off the table. I want the change that will stop giving preferential treatment to the wealthy and corporations. I want the change that will restore fiscal responsibility and reduce the deficit and the national debt.

I basically want the change that will un-do everything Bush has done over the past 7 years. (And if they could un-do a few things Clinton did, that would be good, too.)

Nikki said...

I just wanted to provide another platform for you to let loose a little bit!! Nicely done you fell in to my trap.........just kidding I appreciate all comments!! and to my other bloggers Mike has a nice write up on the "fair tax" on his blog The Pluribus Driver check it out, he is a very good writer...N :)

Mike said...

Sorry, Nikki, I didn't mean to rant all over your blog. :) Thanks for the kind words, though.

Nikki said...

I welcome the rants!!! Don't stop!! keep them coming. I really do wish there was more of a dialog and people who are scared to make their opinions known seem to be a majority. I like opinionated people and especially those who aren't afraid to put themselves out there and you are one of the courageous ones!! I like that a lot!! keep coming back I like ALL challenges! :) N

ba and the boys said...

please please please tell me that you saw the clip of hillary crying...well, emotional, at least. it was today at a rally. i am certain that she thought that she had the whole presidency all tied up, until obama opened his mouth (and got oprah on his side.).

Anthony Palmer said...

About 65-70% of voters think the US is currently on the "wrong track." So that would suggest the electorate is looking for "change." Yes, this "change" might not be for the best, but these voters feel that things are so bad now that they're willing to take a chance.

Remember, Republicans have controlled all the levers of government in Washington for roughly 6 of the past 7 years. And there is still a Republican president. If voters want "change," it would seem to make it harder for Republicans to argue they can bring it simply because they are the ones who are primarily responsible for creating the conditions that made people seek "change" in the first place.

Yes, the Democrats control Congress, but they only have nominal control of the Senate and Bush is vetoing a lot of their agenda. So the Democrats really haven't had much of a chance to have any of their initiatives succeed.

Nikki said...

hey Anthony........I have issues with this type of polling. The question asked is do you think the US is on the right track......I would say no as a republican because to me it seems as though more and more people are liberal and fight against my beliefs. So I don't take this poll question as any sort of indicator of public opinion. Deoending on how you look at things that question could mean many things to many people. What hs Bush vetoed other than S-Chips that is now passed and of course withdrawl from Iraq? EARMARK spending? come on Bush has passed plenty of dem agenda even with a republican domination......of course people want change Americans get tired of the big movie star of the moment, they move on to fresh meat faster than a McDonalds drive through. I am not willing to credit the need for change to a flow against republican values......change of the bickering and partisanship in Washington is the poison most Americans are tired of....and that includes democrats. The President can't take all the heat. though he does. thanks for stopping by the place!!! come back soon.....:)

Nikki said...

ba........I am not sure what to think of Hillary crying, PMS, menopause, she just saw a hallmark commercial, the burden was just too much to be the ONLY person on earth to run this country properly, Beaches was playing on her iphone, she saw a puppy, She missed out on Oprahs favorite things, Angelina Jolie had a newly adopted child, she is so afraid for Britney, Dr. Phil said it would be good for her campaign, someone stepped on her foot or she just found out she might need to get fake boobs, collagen lips and some skanky clothes to actually win. It could be anything......hehe

Anthony Palmer said...

Here's something else to think about:

You could apply your logic of "change not necessarily being good" to almost any convenient political buzzword. For example, if a candidate were to run on "family values," most people would probably be happy with that. However, what if that person's "family values" include elements that are not shared by other families? Sure, one family may think it's okay to walk around outside naked and for parents and their teenage children to sleep in the same bed, for example. But another family might recoil in horror at that.

In my family, we could care less about gay marriage and see nothing wrong with it. That's one of our "family values." Surely if we decided to apply these "family values" to the general population, other people would be incensed about it. However, when someone says "family values," you *normally * think of traditional Judeo-Christian values. But that might not always be what a politician means.

The point of what I'm saying is that most people have a basic understanding of what these buzzwords mean. Rudy Giuliani is simply playing word games, in my estimation. All politicians of both parties do it, but ultimately the president is the nation's top politician and the face of the country. "Change," in most people's minds, means "an improvement over what we have now because it's different from what we have now."

You'll notice that even the Republican candidates are mentioning "change" now. But if Republicans are trying to run on change, then who are they trying to change from? I'll give you a hint: These candidates are quite happy talking about Ronald Reagan in their debates, but they have very little to say about the person occupying the White House now.

Nikki said...

Anthony......great conversation!! Aren't all political campaigns about change? Change is inevitable. We wanted change post Clinton, Change post Bush 41, it isn't a new concept. Even the President acknowledges that change is needed to stimulate the nation, it isn't always a negative to the exsisting administration........though I agree it is here, but to me it is not just about the President and Reublicans, it is also dems like Hillary. As for the republicans latching on to Reagan I understand that point, I am not saying Bush is not the reason for change I am saying he is not the ONLY reason. A big part yes. Obama to me is an idealist that appeals to a persons empathy......empathy doesn't get the job done. Your point about family values is what I am saying about the polling question about the direction of the nation....it means something different to me than it does to someone else. It is a dumb question as far as I am concerned. Family values to you and I are 2 different things......I like the way you make me think about my positions!! I am coming to your place in a bit to comment comment comment!!!!
N