Posted by
Cal Samuel August on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 11:38:38 AM
I am not one who supports the idea of Evolution in science, believing that we are fearfully and wonderfully made, but "evolution" is a useful word when used to denote "change over time."
In a way, people go through political evolution. Sometimes in various posts I have been accused of being a partisan. I make no claim on being objective, because everyone has a perspective and viewpoint. For example, if the "fairness" doctrine is ever reimposed, it will be one of the most hypocritical things politicians in recent years have done. No one can deny that he or she is free of bias. A bias is a preference, and EVERYONE has his or her preferences: politically, socially, religiously, etc.
I have often considered myself an Independent, though oftentimes being more partial to the Republican side than the Democrat side, mostly because Republican ideas make more sense to me: when I reason things out, Republican ideas usually appear to make more sense.
In previous years, I had more political skepticism. I was more predisposed to distrusting politicians. In more recent years I have tended to place more trust with the Republicans. Having reasoned the situation out, I am returning to I think a healthy skepticism with a tinge more distrust for all politicians. Politicians are a slippery, slidey brand. When it comes to political maneuverings, we should always have out our baloney detectors.
In the last few days, it seems more Republicans are falling from supporting the war in Iraq, basing their attitudes more on what seem to be prevailing attitudes in the media, the "Beltway," what have you, rather than doing what they think will be best for a people (the Iraqis) who are depending on us and our own people (the contituents) who are depending on them to make political decisions that will be best for our interests as well as theirs.
We cannot take a complete laissez-faire approach to the Iraq situation. We must support our troops and their mission. We must allow them to utterly humiliate and annihilate Al Qaeda and other organizations like it wherever they rear their ugly, evil heads. Some believe that taking action (as opposed to being laissez-faire) means that we should pull out and cut our losses. If we are to do so, the consequences for a people who are caught in a bad situation (the people of Iraq) and our nation's international interests could be quite dire. I think it quite reasonable to suggest that Al Qaeda is hemorrhaging heavily. Rather than stanching the flow, I think it our duty to bleed this organization and others like it to death.
Questioning my line of thought here? I know I don't go into a lot of evidence here, but if you are wavering yourself, please go and check out the podcast or listen on your computer to Hugh Hewitt's broadcast from July 10. Listen to the President's speech, and the speeches of those supporting the war. Winning this war is imperative!
If your politicians are getting weak-kneed, and wishy-washy tell them you will be voting for the opponent with the strongest stance in the next primary. Keep the pressure on them, keep out your baloney detector, and reserve the right to a healthy political skepticism. And truly support our troops and their mission. Had the original Revolution been cut off because war was hard, we would not be the United States of America--we might even be French, Spanish, or English held today--instead of this present great nation. -Cal Samuel August