Hypothetical Social Conservative Screenplay

Are Social Conservatives Destroying America?

Justice Dakota

02/27/12

Act 1; Scene 1:

The actor is on a stage in front of a crowd representing the Real Conservative Movement (RCM).

The actor emerges from behind a curtain and paces the stage until the audience is silenced.

The actor positions himself center-stage and addresses the crowd: 

"Imagine, if you will, a candidate who can solve the economic problems of America. Imagine a candidate who can put in place policies that will make the next generation of Americans wealthier, more educated, more secure, and more free.

"Imagine this candidate will balance the budget and pay off our national debt within six months of being elected President of the United States. He wins, almost over-night, the "war on terrorism," stops illegal immigration, and, by virtue of his genius, discovers the first-ever clean, green, oil deposit somewhere in Nebraska.

"This new clean, green oil can be delivered to market within days, and, guess what? America has so much of this clean, green, new oil -- we become a net exporter of oil, and the revenues allow the federal government to have a financial surplus for the next 1,000 years, and the ability to send each and every American an annual check for $35,000.

"Let's say this candidate's policies increase our international influence and prestige, and that our military becomes even more dominant. This candidate revitalizes free-enterprise in America and unemployment drops to 0! Stay with me people!

"Let us imagine no more poverty in America, no more racism -- unbelievable economic prosperity, AND -- no more disease! This candidate never breaks the law and defends the Constitution. This candidate is also a humanitarian, philanthropist, and one of the most caring and generous people on Earth.

"Now, let us imagine that this candidate was a Deist and/or not religious at all. Imagine this candidate, because he is virtually ideologically agnostic on all social issues, tells the nation that all social and religious issues involving morality should be left up to the states and parents.

"Pretend this candidate says he does not care what people do in the privacy of their homes as long as no person is being harmed. Let's say this candidate has been divorced 12 times and has numerous children with a plethora of women (all of whom say he is a wonderful and caring father) throughout the world."

The actor pauses for a long while. He puts his thumb under his chin pretending to look intellectual.

The actor walks closer to the audience and asks (in a loud, motivational tone): "Who among you would vote for the candidate described above?"

The crowd briefly pauses, seemingly shocked! Then a chorus of boos echo through-out the auditorium.

The boos turn into yells: "Never! Never!" Many in the audience rise to their feet and chant, "Not me, not me, not me ... "

Scene ends with actor running off stage as peanuts are hurled in his direction.

Cut!  

President Cotton Mather? OMG!

What will Senator Santorum do After Michigan Loss?

Justice Dakota

02/25/2012

According to Senator Rick Santorum (2008): "He (SATAN) was successful. He (SATAN) attacks all of us and he attacks all of our institutions. The place where he (SATAN) was, in my mind, the most successful and first successful was in academia. He (SATAN) understood pride of smart people. He (SATAN) attacked them at their weakest, that they were, in fact, smarter than everybody else and could come up with something new and different. Pursue new truths, deny the existence of truth, play with it because they're smart. And so academia, a long time ago, fell."

So, WOW! The "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" as promoted (explicitly and/or implicitly) by famous RCM talking-head (Sean Hannity) and radio-head (Rush Limbaugh) have devolved the Republican Party to the point where we are back to the future ... er, uh, or is the future back to the past?

Has the RCM become the Super-Pac: Restore a Future For The Past (Cotton Mather)?

“That there is a Devil, is a thing doubted by none but such as are under the influences of the Devil.”
― Cotton Mather (Sometime before 1728!)

“If we admit instrumental musick in the worship of God, how can we resist the imposition of all the instruments used among the ancient Jews?—yea, dancing as well as playing, and several other Judaic actions? or, how can we decline a whole rabble of church-officers, necessary to be introduced for instrumental musick, whereof our Lord Jesus Christ hath left us no manner of direction?”
― Cotton Mather (Again, sometime before 1728!)

Santorum in 2008: "This is not a political war at all. This is not a cultural war. This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies (SATAN) has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies (SATAN) would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan (SATAN), who would you attack in this day and age. There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost two hundred years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers."

Mather before 1728: “Ah, children, be afraid of going prayerless to bed, lest the Devil be your bedfellow.”
― Cotton Mather (or Santorum 2008?)

OMG! Senator Santorum (and the RCM), with all due respect -- WOW! What the Hell (SATAN) is happening to the Republican Party as controlled by the Establishment RCM?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDNCkcC47eQ

Senator "Pre-Natal" or "Church Lady"?

Did Senator Rick Santorum Officially Become the Church Lady?

Justice Dakota

02/21/2012

Many have warned the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" to "cool their jets" with respect to articulating that their neighbors will burn in Hell for eternity.

For some reason, the RCM (primarily supported by Conservative Talk-Radio hosts) prefers to talk about wombs, Satan, genitals, porn, marriage, Gays, Satan, genitals and porn. Stop it! Oh, and they like to talk about sex as well.

What about Capitalism? What about Thomas Paine's "The Age of Reason?" What about William F. Buckley Jr.?

What has the RCM done to the Republican Party? What are they doing to the country? And what the heck is Santorum doing being the Church Lady?  

Sincerely,

Justice Dakota

Obama Can Still Win -- Easily!

Easy Win for President Obama?

"I Ain't Got No Quarrel With The Viet-Cong... No Viet-Cong Ever Called Me Nigger" —
Muhammad Ali, 1966

Justice Dakota

02/18/2012

The Republican "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" should be careful. Many moderate Republicans and Independents agree with Muhammad Ali! (In the following sense:) --

"The Peeps ain't got no quarrel with President Obama! Obama never said we will all burn in Hell for eternity!"

Too much "Republican Religiosity" during the Primary process will get Obama re-elected!
Duh!

Word to the Wise!

Sincerely,

Justice Dakota

Maybe We Are All Independents Now?

I Never Thought I Would Become an Independent ...

Justice Dakota

02/18/2012

I became a Republican because of President Ronald W. Reagan (during my teens), and because my subsequent study of political and economic history demanded that I intellectually embrace American Conservatism as the best ideology for continued American Greatness. That type of conservatism, however, is not embraced by the majority of post-Reagan Republican Presidential candidates. Not Bush, not Dole, not Bush, not McCain, and not the majority of the pack this time around.

Republican primary voters appear to have abandoned American political and economic conservative theory. (I am so lonely.)

A word to the wise (and to the talking heads of the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM))", Reagan was not a Social Conservative Ideologue!

Who turned Reagan into Aunt Bee, and when did this happen? Was it former Speaker Newt Gingrich? Was it Kenneth Starr? Was it Monica Lewinsky? Maybe it was Pat Robertson's presidential bid? Who the hell turned the Republican Party (at the Primary process) into the Amish Party? 

Was Newt going after President Bill Clinton because of Lewinsky while he was having an affair with a staffer? Did Starr seem to smugly enjoy the illicit SEXUAL secrets of Clinton while attempting to prosecute him?

Did Pat Robertson believe God wanted him to be President until he failed to become President -- then God changed His mind? We know that a significant number of Republican Primary voters tend to be hard-core Christian Evangelicals and Fundamentalists.

We also know that nine of our Founding Fathers were Freemasons (including Benjamin Franklin, Grand Master of Pennsylvania), and that George Washington became a Mason in 1752. Washington had this to say about Masonry:

"Flattering as it may be to the human mind, and truly honorable as it is to receive from our fellow citizens testimonies of approbation for exertions to promote the public welfare, it is
not less pleasing to know that the milder virtues of the heart are highly respected by a Society whose liberal principles must be founded in the immutable laws of truth and justice.

To enlarge the sphere of social happiness is worthy of the benevolent design of a Masonic institution; and it is most fervently to be wished that the conduct of every member of the Fraternity, as well as those publications that discover the principles which actuate them, may tend to convince mankind that the great object of Masonry is to promote the happiness of the human race." George Washington

We also know that many "Conservative Republican Evangelicals and Fundamentalists (CREFs)" agree with Pat Robertson's view on Masonry (In his book, In The New World Order, Robertson warns readers that Freemasonry is an evil, Luciferian conspiracy).

Now, you don't have to be intellectual and/or a genius to appreciate the internal contradictions CREFs experience when they proclaim that our Founding Fathers intended for the United States to be a Christian Nation. If George Washington was a candidate for the Republican Presidential Nomination in 2012, would CREFs consider the "Father of our Country" evil and Luciferian? Ouch!

How did the CREFs mess up the Republican Party so much when the First Amendment to the United States Constitution is so clear: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the
United States"?

CREFs love to talk about our Founding Fathers and our Constitution. But do they enjoy mythology more than reality? I don't know ... Can someone tell me who or what destroyed American Conservatism? I know that it was not William F. Buckley Jr., that's for sure!

Is it possible that contemporary, conservative religious practice is destroying American Political and Economic Conservatism -- and the Republican Party? Again, I too struggle
with ironies ...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/18/us-usa-campaign-santorum-idUSTRE81H0M220120218

Romney/Paul Defeat Obama/Biden

Could Romney/Paul be the Moral/Ethical Ticket?

Justice Dakota

02/17/2012

Have you noticed that political candidates (everywhere) like to talk about their faith when they think their faith will help them get votes?

A Christian wise man once told me, "God is not a political whore. Exploiting the Lord for political purposes is the definition of blaspheme."

So, in the context of the above quote -- I have noticed that Congressman Ron Paul and Governor Mitt Romney do their best not to "exploit God for votes." Am I the only one who respects their discipline? The same person quoted above once postulated that: " ... if you attribute to the Lord his approval of your ideology may have you not used his name in vain?"

Whoa! I know most Real Conservatives (RCs) who consider themselves part of the Real Conservative Movement (RCM) probably never thought about the spiritual and religious egotism associated with the assumption of knowing God's political ideology. So, let's not peel the RCM onion any further. This blog is not about freaking anyone out! It's all good ... Just relax ...

The superior morality of the religious politician who has the faith and discipline to not exploit God for votes should be obvious. However, some (percentage of the population  unknown) religious peeps somtimes need a little validation (I have young children, trust me -- validation works). And, to get elected, most politicians will, at some point, use the Lord's name in vain. (And that really sucks!)

RCM-types who are religious egotists (like Palin, Perry, Bachman) are legion. They are joined by President Obama who recently indicated that Jesus Christ endorses his political and economic world-view.

They all do it -- political and economic ideology does not matter. They must be thinking, "If the Lord can get me some votes, I will use him." Wow! That would make me uncomfortable. Needing validation and/or needing to validate others must put a person in a horrific moral dilemma when God is used as a Notary.

So, given this particular context, is it potentially interesting that Paul and Romney seem to be mocking God the least? It's a question! If they are not exploiting the Lord for political purposes, are they the two most moral and ethical presidential candidates? Don't worry, ironies freak me out too ...

What Mitt Needs to Do ...

... to become the Next President of the United States --

Justice Dakota

02/16/2012

Dear Governor Romney,

Sir, you are playing it really close to the margins -- and time is of the essence. Whoever your "Advisers" are ... uh, well ... Snore!

So, here is how you become POTUS in a nutshell:

1) Stop using words and phrases that most Americans don't use in their daily lives (for instance, "... for Pete's Sake"). Just stop doing that and your numbers go up several percentage points.

2) For God's sake, man -- stop being defensive!

3) Dude, you're Mormon. Talk about it; talk about the horror of religious bigotry. Talk about the Founding Father's disgust of a religious litmus-test to hold public office. Governor, you know bigotry. Does your campaign demonstrate a fear of the bigots? Put religious bigotry to rest ... send it to the "ash-heap" of history.

4) Don't shower for several days.

5) Give the "kid-folk" something. We all know you can't be "hip" -- but give the youngsters a "policy-bone." A little imagination, Sir, goes a long way ...

6) You may consider getting "radical" about something. "Radical Reform of the Tax Code" (Oh, and propose something radical). Here's a good one: "Radical Re-investment in Freedom and Prosperity."

With Respect,

Justice Dakota  

Opie Not Ready for "Prime-Time"

Sorry "Opie" -- America Can't Afford Santorum This Time Around!

Justice Dakota

02/14/2012

The not so secret, secret about President George W. Bush is that the only "Real Conservative" stripe he earned was a result of his aggressive, lean-forward war on terrorism. On virtually every other issue, Bush governed as a big-spending, moderate-to-liberal President.

In the beginning, Bush articulated Social Conservative beliefs, which made the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" happy; however, as a practical matter, his domestic policies were no more conservative than those of President Bill Clinton, and probably would have been on par with Vice President Al Gore's domestic agenda had he won the White House. (Bush even came close to politically validating "Global Warming"). We all recall how much he loved "switch-grass" as a bio-fuel alternative to oil. Snore ...

Let's be respectful and simply surmise the war years took a toll on W. Also, let us not forget that Bush was the RCM candidate at the time he was first elected! Recall that Bush stated that his favorite philosopher was Jesus Christ. (I'm not sure, but that may have been the beginning of the RCM movement -- a point in American History when words, sentiment, and beliefs became more important than deeds and policy (?)) I said, "I'm not sure!"

But, we all know that at some critical moment in recent American political history, "saying" stuff became A LOT more important than "doing" stuff.

A manipulative Republican candidate can get a crowd to roar in the same manner Professional Wrestlers (yes, I capitalized that) get their audiences fired-up (you know, the people who think the performance is real (?)).

Former Speaker Gingrich, I am convinced, laughed at how easy it was to be the "Puppet Master" of the RCM at the debates. All Gingrich had to do was say stuff -- implementation of policy be damned -- "Now watch Newt smash this folding chair over the reporter's head." Who cares?

I hope Newt is pleased with his skill in manipulating the political process for future book sales, and that he is morally comfortable with knowing that his campaign funds will stay in his
"war-chest" long after he terminates his "goofy" campaign for President (free travel, publicity, and hotel rooms?). Good for you, Newt! Thanks for caring ...

So now that Newt is gone -- in comes Senator Rick ("Opie") Santorum: The George W. Bush (less the leadership qualities and attitude that comes with being a former Governor of a State) of this election.

Santorum is the "Compassionate Conservative Guy (CCG)" who says stuff. But, unlike Bush in 2000, Santorum is is a former FED! He not only said (and says) stuff -- he has a FED record of
voting for stuff.

Santorum's record, interestingly, appears compassionate ... yet, somehow conservative ... as if he likes to say stuff that appeals to "Social Conservatives," yet ... somehow ... in some odd
way, the Senator likes to vote for stuff that increases the size of government. Weird? Or, not?

Maybe Santorum learned from how the RCM defined W? Maybe the Senator knows how to win the RCM vote? Santorum, if he is as smart as I think he is, may currently be thinking, "I need to say stuff like a professional wrestler, and bomb stuff so the RCM peeps don't care that I am growing the federal government."

"Opie" can not lose. He will ultimately sell more books! The longer he stays in the race, the more money he will have in his "war-chest" to travel and stay in nice hotels (as long as it is not for
personal purposes.) Congratulations, Opie ...

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/santorum-and-the-chiropractor-lawsuit/?fb_ref=.TzrKBnqRZml.like&fb_source=home_oneline

Note: Photo and/or Cartoon of Opie Taylor will be posted post-haste!

A Letter to Santa

A Hypothetical Letter to Santa

Dear Santa, I Deserve Free Condoms!

Mr. Claus: I believe that I deserve to have free condoms. I do not want to go to Wallgreens and purchase them. Can you please mandate that my employer gives me a Health Insurance plan that guarantees free condoms?

Also, can you mail them to me so I don't have to drive to the store. This way condoms will be Green! Green Condoms -- Greendoms -- Oh, ya! It could be a new industry that creates jobs.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

Justice Dakota

At Least Santorum is Legitimate

Justice Dakota

February 8, 2012

At Least Santorum is Legitimate!

Senator Rick Santorum easily won the caucus states of Minnesota and Missouri and has earned "Contender" status. The fact that he won Colorado, according to the pundits, indicates a problem of "enthusiasm" for Governor Romney among the Republican "base." What is missing from the current analysis is that Speaker Gingrich is vanishing as a viable candidate. He seems to have ordained himself "Commentator and Chief."

After his smashing defeat in Nevada, Gingrich held a bizarre "Press Conference." He sounded more like a distracted Fox News analyst than a presidential candidate. How many viewers watching his "goofy" performance had a brief flashback to historical video clips of President Nixon's self-destruction?

The Speaker subsequently put his pundit hat on again and told the media that Romney would not do well in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri. Newt did not offer an analysis on his impending thumping. He was completely rejected in Colorado and Minnesota, and was he too intellectual to get on the ballot in Missouri? His campaign no longer seems viable -- not because he can't win future delegates -- but because he will become increasingly pissed off that Newt is not loved as much as Newt wants to be loved.

So, it appears that it is finally a legitimate two-man race between two conservative, Christian Republicans -- Romney and Santorum.

I mention the conservatism of Romney and Santorum because the Real Conservative Movement (RCM) is obsessed with the mythology that Ronald Reagan never compromised. Have they morphed Reagan into an anti-moderate for their own radical purposes, or do they just hate the subtle facts of history?

The RCM would be better off if they stopped applauding angry "Red-Meat" zingers mumbled by calculating, bitter, manipulative, core-less politicians -- and simply read more about American History -- and truly appreciated the greatness of President Ronald Reagan.

Case in point:

August 01, 2004 —

Review of Jack F. Matlock Jr.'s book, Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended.

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2004/0801russia_talbott.aspx

"Reagan himself went even farther. Asked at a press conference in Moscow in 1988, his last year in office, about the role he played in the great drama of the late 20th century, he described himself essentially as a supporting actor. "Mr. Gorbachev," he said, "deserves most of the credit, as the leader of this country."

This quotation was much cited at the time as an example of Reagan's graciousness, tact and self-deprecation. But Matlock's book bears out his former boss's judgment. The 40th president of the United States emerges here not as a geopolitical visionary who jettisoned the supposedly accommodationist policies of containment and detente, but as an arch-pragmatist and operational optimist who adjusted his own attitudes and conduct in order to encourage a new kind of Kremlin leader."

How does the word "pragmatist" sit with the RCM? In their tiny universe of ideas, being pragmatic is being a sell-out of Reagan Conservatism. Is it possible that Ronald Reagan would take the RCM to the wood-shed and tell them to grow up?

Those who care deeply about this country can hope that the Republican Primary race may soon get down to two rational, conservative, Republican pragmatists -- finally, hopefully!

Prez. Obama Crushes Newt!

Prez. Obama Re-Elected -- Crushes Newt (60 to 30-percent)!

On first report, 10-percent of the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" stayed home to watch a re-run of D***s of H*z**d (The Georgia Episode). 

Experts suggest the RCM's potential help of an extra 10-percent inconsequential as 60-percent is greater than 40-percent!

The RCM Cries Foul!

They Love Newt and Bless His Ex-Wives!!

How the Newt, "I'm a Ronald Reagan With a Persanality Disorder" Paradigm Failed ...

The First Presidential Debate between President Obama and Speaker Newt Gingrich:

President Obama looks at Speaker Newt Gingrich and asks, "Speaker, where is your core?"

Gingrich says something about the "Star Spangled Banner" and Fancois Scott Key.

President Obama says, "Francois, or as I remember him from my historical studies at Harvard, 'Sir Scott Key;' well Mister Speaker, Sir Scott Key wrote the greatest poem ever over-layed upon an English musical anthem."

Newt looks up at the President, burps, attempts to hide his belly, and says, "F*** you!"

Ideology, Rationality, and Romney

"Romney Defeats Obama -- Becomes 45th President of the United States! Conservative Talking Heads Riot! Everyone Else Applauds"

Do not be suprised if you see the above headline in some form on November 7, 2012, the morning after ailing America changes prescriptions. The general sense will be that President Obama is a decent man who did his best -- yet failed by almost every objective measure with respect to the economy. The American people will appreciate his efforts, and they will recognize he was partially a victim of historical circumstances.

The American people are fair. Either in their minds or in their guts, they knew that the 44th president, whoever he or she was, would have struggled given the macro-economic condition of Western Capitalism at the beggining of 2008.

A Romney win brings hope for better, more focused economic management. A chance to be pragmatic and practical -- less bold and more realistic. No moon colonies and no free lunches. No new federal programs. A leaner, meaner, necessary economic and federal-spending paradigm will replace the "Flying Carpet" and "Magic Dust" approach of the Obama Administration.

It is fair to suspect that POTUS and his Administration were so over-whelmed by the virtual collapse of the global financial system that they crossed their fingers and hoped, prayed, and spent alot of money -- a potentially disasterous amount of money. Contrary to the narrative put forth by the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM), they did not borrow, print, and spend all those trillions to destroy America -- they simply did not know what to do and reverted to a Liberal, Keynesian economic model. Given their world-view, they were not going to cut federal spending because, according to their economic belief-system, that would have caused a Great, Great Depression. (I'm not positive about this, but didn't President Bush in 2008 say he had to side against capitalism in order to save capitalism?)

Here is the rub: economists are divided with respect to how to save a capitalist economy in crisis. Increase or decrease the role of government? They don't know. I don't know. And, you don't know.

Enter President Romney, Stage Right! No, not the stage way over on the right side of the theater -- Romney emerges just a little bit right of the center stage. And while that does not get a standing ovation, the audience politely applauds as they appreciate the rationality of his presentation.

The RCM people walk-out of the Romney performance, disgruntled and feeling tiny. They wanted to fight Obama's Flying Carpet and Magic Dust with Fairies and Unicorns. That makes it more fun, and makes them feel better about themselves. I think it means ideology and rationality are inversely related.      

What's Wrong with Those who Endorse Newt?

Justice Dakota

02/01/2012

What is Wrong with Those who Endorse Newt?

Governor Sarah Palin almost did it! Herman Cain, Fred Thompson, and J.C. Watts did it! Did Chuck Norris actually do it? Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh do it in their dreams so when they
are awake they walk around with a Newt-(you know what). "Is that an iPhone in your pocket, or are you just glad to see Newt?"

Palin suggests we just keep the process going by voting for Newt. Rush has essentially said the same thing. Let me get this straight: the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)" is telling Republicans not to vote for the candidate they support; instead, Republicans should vote for the guy who will keep the Republican primaries close? In other words, the RCM is telling Republicans to play head-games with Republicans because it's fun?

And, don't give me the "vetting process" argument. The remaining Republican candidates are currently more "vetted" than any Republican field in history. The RCM types refuse to consider they may not represent the majority of Republicans. They are acting like misfits who are mad that they are not as popular (in terms of votes) as the other guy who people like more.

So, because RCMs know they are most likely not going to get a "Newt-Surge" somewhere, they cry and pout, and they come up with reasons why never-ending fighting between Republicans is good. What they are really saying is: "We hate Romney, and we hate ourselves. We will endorse one of the most flawed Republican presidential candidates ever because Romney intercepted our pass and ran down the field and scored the winning touchdown. We quit!"

Boo-freaking-hoo, RCM! Stop crying and grow up! Just because most Republicans don't agree with you is no reason to take your ball and go home crying to your mommy!!

Previous "Newt" Show
http://www.photoshow.com/watch/Qa5VM3qf