After reading a transcript of Howard Dean’s acceptance speech for DNC Party Chair, I would like to consider a few of the things he said.

“We know that we’re the party for young Americans…working Americans… and we know that we’re the party for older Americans and veterans, and members of the Armed Services…”
So much is wrong with what he said here. But let’s start with what’s right. The Democratic Party is the party for young Americans, between 18-29. This age group voted for Kerry 54 to 45 percent. A clear victory for Kerry. The rest of what he says is absolutely false. Who knows where he got his information (it is likely he made it up.) Americans working full time voted for President Bush 53 to 45 percent. Even Americans who described themselves as not working full time voted for Bush 51 to 49 percent. His next statement - that the Democratic part is “the party for older Americans,” is even more absurd. Of those 60 and older, Bush won with an 8 point lead, 54 to 46 percent. Voters who described themselves as, “in the military or a veteran,” voted for President Bush 57 to 41 percent. (In case Dean is reading this, that’s a 16 point lead.) I realize it is difficult to comprehend what cold hard facts mean, especially in the form of numbers (maybe it is time for Democrats to concede the failure of public schools), but there it is, laid out plain and simple. I even took the numbers from a cable favorite for liberals, CNN.

“And we know that no matter where you live or who you are, what you look like or how you worship, ours is the diverse party that welcomes you.”
This might hold true if you are a Muslim, practice secular Judaism or claim to be atheist. But for those who - as Ann Coulter says, belong to “a small religious cult,” that worships Christ, be careful, the liberals would like to crucify you next.

In reference to the budget, Dean said, “Republicans cannot be trusted with your money.”
My immediate reaction to this is - “and Democrats can be trusted?” But then I realized that, to some extent, I agree with him. Yes, I - super conservative Stephanie don’t trust anyone, left or right with my money. I trust myself with it. The difference between the Democratic and Republican platform here, is that Democrats trust themselves with your money, and Republicans would like you to keep as much of it as possible. I think the underlying problem here, is that Democrats don’t trust Americans with their own money.

“Social Security is one of the proudest achievements of the Democratic Party…”
Really, I find this sad. I almost feel sorry for the Party, if their greatest and proudest achievement is a black-hole of American money. On the other hand, maybe they are proud of the fact that they single handedly created one of the biggest problems we face today. After all, we know Democrats love to wreak havoc. I guess they accomplished that goal. Today’s youth will inevitably bear the brunt of this massive liberal blunder.

“Republicans will not tell America what our agenda is. We will do that.”
Dean is right. Republicans won’t tell America what its agenda is. America has already decided what its agenda is. Americans voted for President Bush in greater numbers than any President in history has attained. (Again, this would be obvious if liberals had any concept of numbers.)

Finally, “I’ve found that the path to power, oddly enough, is to trust others with it. That means putting the power where the voters are.”
Amen, I agree! Now if only liberals would just act according to what they say. If they truly trusted the people they would trust their overwhelmingly united decision to back the Republican Platform. In case Dean isn’t informed, prior to the 2004 election, Republicans held more seats in both the House and Senate, and last November added again to those numbers. (Again, I realize that I’m asking for a basic understanding of numbers.)

Which Family Guy character are you?

That great crime against humanity, the sit down at Yalta between the communist Stalin, the socialist FDR and the only true hero in attendance Churchill, has defined geo-political relationships ever since. It is the treaty of Westphalia for our time and its effect has not been as positive as the history books will tell you. As a conservative I have always instinctively known this, but Arthur Herman, writing at NRO crystallizes the argument so well I would be remiss if I didn’t share it with y’all.

Bush is redefining the world order that has been in place since the end of WWII. I personally believe that Bush himself doesn’t realize how profound some of his actions are or how great their impact will be on the way future presidents structure their diplomacy. When viewed from the perspective of a rabid nationalist like myself, this is a step in the right direction, but we have much work to do if we intend to stop the Founding Fathers from the spinning in their graves they began some time ago.

Churchill left Yalta in a state of despair, and Roosevelt and advisers such as Harry Hopkins in a state of euphoria. Hopkins, Churchill’s doctor concluded, “is firmly convinced that a new Utopia has dawned.” Today, 60 years later, we know who was right and who was wrong.

I would like to think that this statement would put the nail in the coffin on whatever begrudging respect conservatives show FDR. Any man who left Yalta elated that he had folded to Stalin like a wet noodle, isn’t much of a man.

Russel Kirk’s Ten Principles with commentary by me… lol.
1. There is a transcendant moral order - We do not all neccesarily believe in God but we believe there is some greater truth and power above man.
2. Principle of tradition, custom, and continuity - Tradition, custom and the continuation of these is neccesary because we only stand on our ancestors shoulders and without their wisdom we’d be back at square one. Traidition is only changed after a long and thoughtful and largely slow process.
3. Principle of perscription - There is no one size fits all solution, instead of applying ideology to a problem one should look at it case by case.
4. Principle of prudence - Act wisely, slowly, and with careful consideration. Rash action by politicians ought to be discourage at all cost.
5. Principle of variety - Conservatives were the original diversity folks, but we were talking real diversity not the quota driven drivlel run by liberals. Indeed, the world is an intricate and diverse fabric of cultures that if one pulls the thread out of one will unravel the others.

They feel affection for the proliferating intricacy of long-established social institutions and modes of life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and deadening egalitarianism of radical systems.

6. Principle of imperfectability of man - Man is impossible of reaching perfection here on earth and thus utopian schemes to achieve such a position through politics, the market, or anythign else is farcical.
7. Freedom and property are intricately linked - Without protection of property, there is no true freedom.
8. Voluntary community as opposed to mandatory communism - People should associate freely and often, because it is these type of institutions that provide meaning to our lives, but should never be forced by the government.
9. Restraint on power and human passions - Ah finally the libertarian / conservative split emerges, as to some extent liberals and conservatives can agree on most of the previous eight points. (Though libertines, who tend to be libertarians also, go off the farm in that they believe utopia can be achieved through basically elimination of government and societal norms.) At the core this is the belief that man is not truly free if he is enslaved to his passions.
10. A society without change can not be preserved - Our ultimate goal is to conserve society and thus to conserve the whole we must adapt the details.

Which Family Guy character are you?

The sad part is, this is mostly true.

Which Family Guy character are you?

Nathan Humphrey graduated from Bryan College in 2003 with a degree in Political Communications and is currently finishing his graduate degree in Public Administration from Kennesaw State University in Georgia. Nathan is particularly passionate about preserving the ideals of Federalism and Republicanism (representative government). He is a strong supporter and proponet of tax reform using the Fairtax, as well as reforming Social Security. His heroes are Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Edmund Burke, Ronald Reagan, Russell Kirk, Neil Postman and Herman Cain.

Past Political Experience
• Intern with Georgia State Rep. James Mills (Spring, 1999)
• One of the founding members of the Political Society at Bryan College (2002)
• Recipient of the “Merits Achievement Award in Political Science” from
Department of Political Science at Bryan College (2003)
• Field Director/Political Aid for Herman Cain for US Senate (2004)
• Political Director for Robinson for Congress (2004)

Currently
• Teaching American Government and Economics, and American History at Heritage Academy High School, Gainesville, Georgia.
• Working on MPA at Kennesaw State University.