A Few Comments About bin Laden Death and Obama's Speech

I want to join with the rest of the nation as we celebrate the defeat of one of the most evil men of the past century. He stands there with Hitler, Stalin and Mao. The only difference between Bin Laden and these others was he did not have the ability to carry out death on the level as a Hitler, but his intent was just as horrific. It has been a long fight, and has hurt this nation as it tore it apart along ideological seems. This morning the nation seems united once more, in a similar if smaller version, of what we saw in the years after 9/11. I wish I was hopeful that this could start to be an end in our war against terror, but I am not. There is still a radical element within Islam that will not rest. I am encouraged by what I am seeing in the middle east, but I will write on that in a different post, but our war on terror will not end with the death of Bin Laden, others will set up to replace him.

As excited as I was last night as I watched the news, I was equally disappointed when I watched President Obama give his address. I was not surprised, I have ceased being surprised, I fact I expected it. Obama, as expected, used Bin Laden’s death for political gain. I was hoping for a short statement, but instead he took credit. He also used the occasion to rewrite a bit of his own history:

“We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda — an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.”

Obama knew how exited we would be and he wanted to celebrate with us, be one of us. He is correct that we united as a nation and were committed. Almost every Congressman and Senator voted to support President Bush and voted for a declaration of War. Almost every Senator, one of the very few who did not was Obama. He was not part of us then, in fact he was against it. He made his campaign that we were wrong and promised to end the war if elected.

The President continued, “Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we’ve made great strides in that effort.” Here he seems to be giving a nod to President Bush but in the next paragraph said,

“Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world. And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.”

In other words, I did what Bush could not. I made Bin Laden a priority and so now we got him. I guess I feel for Bush, he fought an unpopular war to get bin Laden, yet Obama takes all the credit and gets American support, all the while retaining liberal support by saying this is a war we should have never fought. Throughout the speech Obama used rhetoric straight out of Bush’s speeches, the same rhetoric he condemned Bush for as grandstanding, he is now using.

Lastly I was put off by his arrogance. He needed to tone down the use of “I”. The whole speech was I did this and I did that. Here a few examples

“I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority”


“I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden”


“I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation”


“Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation”


“Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was.”


“These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded.”

I was getting prepared for him to say that he personally after making all the plans actually flew over there and led the mission and that he personally pulled the trigger for the kill shot.

Just to be open, I am not a fan of the president. If you read old posts you will see I tried, I hoped he would be the man he wanted us to believe. So maybe I am just jaded, but in a moment of triumph I was disappointed that the President took the time to make a campaign speech

Book Review-Team of Rivals

During my blogging hiatus I was fortunate to read a few really great books that I thought I would catch up writing a review on. I decided to read Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Goodwin is a popular writer, but I have never read any of her books before, but because this one was on Abraham Lincoln I thought I would give it a try. I was pleased that I did. I found her analysis of Lincoln fascinating. I have read many books on Lincoln, but where this one made its mark was looking at how he dealt with other people. I came away from this book with a new appreciation of the man, and in fact I found that this book made me want to be a better person. Goodwin brilliantly documents how Lincoln had a knack of making enemies into friends. Instead of just getting angry at every slight towards him, and there were many; he found a way to get those making the slights to eventually support them. Bridges that most people would have burned down were not by Lincoln; so later in life he was able to cross them again for his own benefit.




I will give one example. Lincoln early on had difficulty getting along with his Secretary of War Cameron. Several times Cameron threatened to quite if he did not get his way, knowing Lincoln would never accept. Or so he thought. During one disagreement Lincoln accepted his offer by writing him a letter saying he had accepted and planned on nominating Cameron as ambassador to Russia. Cameron was crushed by the news and considered himself fired and worried what the public humiliation would do. Cameron had treated the President very badly while in office including publicly insulting him. Now that Lincoln had a chance for revenge, he did not take it. In letters to the press Lincoln set himself up for disgrace, taking all the blame on himself. He even brought Cameron in and asked his advice on his replacement. Cameron suggested Edwin Stanton, who Lincoln had already decided on, but let Cameron leave thinking Stanton was his idea. Cameron was a man who detested Lincoln, who was fired by Lincoln, yet as Goodwin writes, “Cameron would never forget this generous act. Filled with gratitude and admiration, he would become . . . one of the most intimate and devoted of Lincoln’s personal friends. He appreciated the courage it took for Lincoln to share the blame at a time when everyone else had deserted him. Most other men in Lincoln’s situation, Cameron wrote, “would have permitted an innocent man to suffer rather than incur responsibility.” Lincoln was not like most other men, as each cabinet member, including the new war secretary, would soon come to understand.” (Goodwin, 413)



This is just one example of the kind of man Lincoln was. He allowed himself to look foolish when it came to dealing with his leading General, George B. McClellan. As long as little Mac was the best man for the job, he would keep his job. It was not the constant insults that got Mac fired, it was his ineptitude on the battlefield. Lincoln was not a perfect man. In my own book and recent article I wrote about the Kentucky governor’s election in 1863, Lincoln restricted civil liberties to the point of being unconstitutional. It is hard to judge him, he was trying to save the nation. Goodwin bring to life this extraordinary president with her ability to tell a great story. The book is 755 pages, but reads easy and her writing style makes it easy to finish. In the end it was one of the more enjoyable book I have read. As I said it made me look at my own life and my dealings with people. If I could try to be more like Lincoln, life would be just that much easier.

One exciting note is that I believe they are making the book into a movie, possibly staring Daniel Day Lewis.  We are due for a good Lincoln book, but no matter how good it is you still need to read the book.  There is no way any movie can cover all the information.

I'm Back

Not that anyone but me cares, but I am back writing my blog. It has been much longer then I planned before starting again and I miss it. I have found blogging to be therapeutic, I feel like my brain is always on, never allowing any rest. What I have found is that if I write down what I am thinking I can move on. For anyone interested, let me explain why the long break. I graduated in 2008 and since then I have been on the job market. I have been a lecturer at my current University for the past five years. It has been an excellent opportunity to experience an entirely new culture in South Texas, but being a lecturer is only about one step up from slave labor at my University. While I have been on the hunt for a tenure tract position, I decided to stop blogging. It is unfortunate, but true that many in academia would not hire a new professor with conservative views. The bleeding heart liberal community of scholars who claim to be so open to everyone else’s views did not mean conservative views. I felt it was best to not advertise my political views.

Now, however, everything has changed. This week I was hired as an assistant Professor at a liberal arts University in Oklahoma. My family and I are very excited about the move. It is a small town but I like small towns and we are only half an hour from the city which is perfect. What I am most excited about is how much they seem to love me. I had to give a sample lecture to a group of faculty and students while I visited the University on my interview. When I met with the VP of academic affairs afterwards he told me I gave one the best lectures he had ever seen. About an hour after I got home the next day I received a call offering me the position. I was surprised how fast it came, but I was told they were so impressed and it was a unanimous decision of the committee that they did not want to wait. I am not sure exactly when we are going to move, but I am excited about the next phase in my family’s life. Our journey has taken us from Virginia to Arkansas to Texas and now we will begin our next chapter in Oklahoma.

I have had some requests to share my thanksgiving cooking experience. My family did something that I have wanted to do for many years, cook a full thanksgiving meal outside over the fire. Being in South Texas it is finally cool enough to be able to camp and with the kids having a few days break we decided to go camping. We drove five hours up to a state park

called Enchanted Rock, named after the large rock formations. It was a great place to camp and the kids had a lot of fun, but the important part was the meal. We did not want to skimp on anything, so we planned the full thanksgiving spread. The turkey was excellent; because of limitations we did not do a full bird. Our friends who came with us marinated the turkey breasts in basically 7up and soy sauce and slow cooked it over coals. The flavor and moisture were excellent with a smokey flavor. They also made the sweet potatoes by boiling them and making them into a puree. Melissa made her grandmothers mouthwatering stuffing and we cooked it using a Dutch oven. We made mashed potatoes on the camp stove, cranberry sauce, and roasted corn on the cob over the fire. For dessert we made a peach cobbler in the Dutch oven. The dinner was perfect, I do not think we could have done a better job at home in our kitchen. It was one of the best thanksgivings I have ever had. The work was not too difficult and in fact it seemed less stressful than normal and the clean up much easier. We even had leftovers for thanksgiving sandwiches the next day. Add our dinner to the whole camping experience and it was a trip that I believe we will try again soon.

Welcome Home Lt. Ellis

I just want to take a few moments to welcome home my cousin Jason who just finished a six month tour in Afghanistan. I am very glad he came home safe and am excited for his family who missed him greatly while he was gone. His wife writes a blog and has pictures of him surprising his kids at their school you can read it here. I have written about my cousins before, but I am very proud of them, both Jason and his little brother Cameron who is currently serving in Iraq. We pray for you both and I am glad to know you are doing so well. I do not get to see Jason very much anymore, but there was a time in our lives when we were very close. I still think of him often and cannot wait until we can hang out in the future. Thank you Jason for all you do.

Book Review-Alexander Hamilton

Alexander Hamilton, by Ron Chernow

After finishing Chernow’s brilliantly written book about Alexander Hamilton I want to endorse it to anyone who enjoys history or who wants to learn more about the founding of our nation. This book is so much more than a biography of Hamilton, but a biography of the early years of our nation. I have written before that I believe that Hamilton is the most important of our founding fathers when it comes to our government structure. John Adams was the brains of the Revolution, Jefferson the pen, and Washington the sword and father, but if we move past the Revolution and want to understand the forming of the nation then Hamilton is the man. The book describes Hamilton as “an illegitimate, largely self-taught orphan from the Caribbean, Hamilton rose with stunning speed to become George Washington’s aide-de-camp, a battlefield hero, a member of the Constitutional Convention, the leading author of the Federalists Papers, and head of the Federalists party. As the first treasury secretary, he forged America’s tax and budget systems, Customs Service, Coast Guard, and central bank.”

With a man so important, why do we not know more about him? Why do we not heard candidates or political parties claim the legacy of Hamilton the way they do Jefferson? There are two answers, one that his party lost and when it did their legacy was removed, even though in reality it was Hamilton philosophies that that govern our nation today. Secondly, we do not like what he had to say, even though he was right in most cases.

America’s first two presidents were federalists (though Washington would never refer to himself as such). With the election of Jefferson in 1800 the Republicans would come to dominate the White House by controlling it for the next 28 years during which the Federalist party would die away. With the Republican triumph and the Federalists demise, Federalists legacies would disappear over the next 30 years as leading Republicans would exaggerate their importance while diminishing the importance of Federalists. Of the three leading Federalists Adams and Hamilton will be largely forgotten, while Washington was too important to ignore and his own legends will grow. I am even convinced that most Americans today think Jefferson was the second president. We talk so much today about Washington and Jefferson and everyone forgets Adams was in the middle and as for Hamilton he was not ever a president and is ignored.

The larger issue that no party will ever claim Hamilton as their predecessor was his philosophy of government. Hamilton’s problem was that his beliefs do not sound very American, not the kind of thing we put on government building walls. Hamilton believed in order for our nation to last it must be tied to the wealthy and elite, they had to have a rooting interest. In order to understand Hamilton you much understand how all the founders saw our nation, as an experiment. We today have over 200 years of experience and knowledge, we know our nation will be become a mighty and great country. They did not have that insight. Most of them saw the possibility of failure as probable. At their time not a single other government in the world was a democracy. In fact in the history of world only the Greeks and the Romans even tried a democracy and they both failed. Why would America be any different? Hamilton believed we had a greater chance of our little experiment failing then succeeding. The only way our government would make it is if the wealthy and elite wanted it to succeed. Who cared what the poor wanted, they did not have the time or the ability to guarantee the success of the Constitution, they were busy tried to keep their families from going hungry. If the poor supported the government but the wealthy and powerful did not, our government would not have stood a snowballs chance in hell of survival. Anyone who takes a few moments to comprehend this will know that Hamilton was correct; the problem is it does not sound good. We do not want to admit that Hamilton was right. Hamilton also had problems with democracy which does not endear him to modern politicians.

The thing about Hamilton is that today we are a Hamiltonian nation. What created the first political parites in this country were different versions of what we should become. Jefferson and his Republicans wanted a land full of small farmers where everyone would own land. Land ownership in early America was essential for freedom, hence why the founders made land ownership criteria for voting. If you did not own your own land or were your own boss then you rented and were under the control of someone else. In the days before the secret ballot, if you did not vote the way your employer told you to, then you might be out of job or kicked off your farm. In other words land ownership made you free. With this in mind a nation of small yeoman farmers to Jefferson would make us the freest and greatest nation on earth. Jefferson also believed the federal government should be weak and that that state government should have most of the power.

Hamilton and the Federalists however saw things different. Hamilton saw that England was the most powerful nation and wanted to model us after then. To be great Hamilton wanted America to become an industrial power. He believed our survival depended on a strong federal government that could protect American industry and growth. These two men and their parties fought viciously against each other with the understanding that if the other won, our national experiment would fail. Jefferson and the Republicans did win the elections, but as anyone who is reading this has to realize that Hamilton won the struggle. American is not a nation of small farmers, but the greatest industrial and most powerful nation in the world. We do not have time to cover this now, but Jefferson talked one way, but acted another. The Hamilton governmental policies he put in place during the Federalists presidencies were so effective that the Republicans did not dismantle them and actually built upon them.

Jefferson will always be more famous than Hamilton, everyone loves a good sound bite and Jefferson had some of the best, but you really want to get to the heart of our government it is Hamilton not Jefferson who needed to be understood. Why I like Chernow’s book is because he gives a great history of nation building but in the medium of a biography. Instead of a straight forward history we have a story to follow, a story of love, betrayal, affairs, war, feuds, and a very famous death that capotes our attention. In the end we know a lot about the man, but through him we know a lot about the nation.

Obama's problem with Iran

I think Obama’s biggest issue in his presidency will not be health care, but Iran. He might find himself in the difficult position of either losing the trust of the American people if they feel he cannot protect them or isolating himself from his own party if he acts aggressively. This is a serious issue and so I hate to say I told you so, but I predicted his back in Oct of last year. Instead of hashing it out again, feel free to click here and read how what I said before he was elected might just come true. Dropping another nuclear weapon is closer than I think most people believe. I do not believe Israel will allow Iran to build a bomb. I think they will drop their own bomb first. I am not pro nuclear bombs, but I would not blame Israel. If Iran builds a bomb, they are in grave danger, for their own protection they may act first. Unlike our president, Israel does not ask what everyone thinks before they act, they act out of self preservation, they do not care about being popular.

Carter-America is racist

Well it has finally happened; my only surprise is that it took so long. In an interview today on the Today Show, ex-President Jimmy Carter said the reason Obama is being criticized is because we are racists. There are two major points that need to be made, first Carter needs to shut up, and second this statement is absurd and offensive.

First things first, Carter needs to shut up. There is an unwritten rule in politics that ex-presidents stay out of politics. You have not heard any of the other ex-presidents weigh in on this issue. We know how each of them stands; they do not need to be critical of those who took their place. Of all the people, they know how hard this job is, and so usually have dignity and leave their thoughts to themselves. Well until lately. Carter came out a while ago and began to bash Bush while he was still president. I wrote about it then how it makes Carter look classless. But now he is still talking and sounding senile. One reason Carter needs to remain quiet is well who is he to criticize anyone. In case anyone is reading this and do not know about the Carter Presidency, let me fill you in. Carter may be the worst president we have ever had. If you do remember the Carter years I will not have to tell you that. Even Democrats when they are honest have to admit he was ineffective. You might really love the guy, but he was not a good leader. What right does a guy like that have to criticize anyone else? The thing about Carter is that he has redeemed himself in the eyes of most Americans. He does a lot of good for many people, especially with organizations like Habitat for Humanity. He is seen now as that kind old Uncle who had some problems, but is old now and a nice guy and so we just forget about all the mistakes he made as president. If he does not stop making such stupid remarks, people just might start remembering why Reagan beat him 489 to 49 in 1980. Part of the blowout was Reagan was just that good, but a big part of it was that Carter was that bad. I actually have some respect for Carter. I do believe one of the reasons he was ineffective as President was that he had strong moral values, he was a very religious man. In fact he was so religious that he was not willing to make the kind of compromises Presidents are forced to make. You have to sell your soul to be the President today by making a deal somewhere along the way with someone bad. Carter never would and it cost him, I respect him for that. Yet I am quickly losing my respect for him, I may have to start teaching my students a different story about Carter, maybe he was a bit more calculated politically than I thought.

The bigger issue is the actually statement. This is absurd, but expected. I wrote back during the election my fear of voting in a black president. Does an African American have the ability to lead, most definetly yes. Are they smart, I believe Obama has proven that. My fear was that the first time things went bad the race card would be played, and here we go. So the President has proposed a very radical plan. Now whether you support or oppose the plan you must agree that it is radical. As with every radical plan there are going to be many who have strong opposition to the plan. But yet when Obama purposes a radical plan and people fight it, they are racists according to Carter. So does he think that if a white man asked for government takeover of health care the entire population would openly embrace it? If it were a white president when he gave his press conference would he wink in the camera as a sign that it’s OK to vote for his, it’s OK (wink) I’m white. No, there would be as much resistance against this whether it is a white or black president. It’s not the president, it’s the plan. It is bad and even dangerous. How can he call us racists? The majority of this nation less than a year ago voted for a black man to be president, were we racist then? So when we vote for a black man it is fine, but when we disagree with anything he proposes we suddenly turn to a nation of racists. Carter’s statement would be funny if racism was not such a serious topic in this nation. He called the Rep for S.C. racist. That is the most damming accusation you can make in politics. You are better off being a drunk or womanizer (Kennedy is being honored everyday since his death) or a tax cheat (half of Obama’s cabinet is that) or even have it whispered you were involved in a murder or selling out your country (these may not be true but both Clintons were accused of such crimes), but call someone a racists and you might as well quit (ask Bob Dole who resigned as Senate Majority leader after making a slip about supporting Senator Strom Thurman during his 1948 presidential run where he supported segregation). Carter could ruin this man’s career for a statement where he had no proof other than his own crazy ideas.

Carter made one more statement in a speech that I want to make one comment on. Carter said “The president is not only the head of government, he is the head of state. And no matter who he is or how much we disagree with his policies, the president should be treated with respect." I could not agree with him more, I just have to wonder where Carter has been the past four years, Oh yeah he was criticizing the president.

The Story of Obama's New Clothes and Socialism

It has been a long time since my last post. I kind of burned out and so took the summer off. We had a great summer traveling around the west and visiting AZ, NM, CO, and UT. Now I am back and starting a new semester and had an interesting conversation today. This year I am assigning Looking Backwards by Edward Bellamy. Bellamy was a socialist who wrote in the 1880. His novel was about a guy who fell asleep in 1880 and woke up in 2000. This new world in which he now lived was a perfect world according to Bellamy. The point of his novel was to compare all the problems of his day and contrasting them to this perfect society. What made the world in 2000 so perfect was that the government had taken over all business, so that everyone made the same amount of money and every just did whatever job made them happy. Bellamy spells out in detail how this new society works. What is interesting is that all my students realize that this would never work. That this guy in the 1880s had no idea about how people today think. What I find interesting is that these are the same kids who support Obama. I had to explain to them that Obama is trying to do just what Bellamy wanted, health care is just the first step. So when they read this novel they saw it as impossible when they took out the current political impact. If I said this book was written by Obama they would love it, but in its historical context they all criticized it, not one student thought Bellamy’s plan would work today, but most think Obama is right on tract. To me it proves that Obama’s plan is not practical, but political. This is why the founders so feared a dema-gog, or a president who wins solely on popularity and not his political views. For that president can put forth a plan with no merits and pass it based on his appeal. Our best hope is that more Americans can see though the Hollywood persona of Obama and finally realize once and for all that the Emperor has no clothes.

Lets Bring Back the Whig Party

I know it has been a very long time since I have written, but I have been so overwhelmed by our political situation that I have given up. I also did not want to be a basher of the President without giving him time to accomplish something. But he has had his 100 days now and I cannot remain silent. I have no idea where to start; Obama has hurt us so badly in such a short time that I do not want to list everything. If you think the same as me then you agree and if not I will not be able to convince you of anything. So instead I want to make a proposal.

The Democrats are taking the nation down a bad path. In a very short time they will own large amounts of some of our biggest companies such as Chrysler. There is only one word for this type of government and that is socialism. The Democrats deny that they want to be socialists, but by definition when the government owns the means of production they are socialists. Secondly, this week Obama has proposed a national sales tax similar to Europe and Canada. I am waiting to see how the public will take it. Obama promised he would cut taxes, but cutting taxes and raising sales to around 25% would be the greatest bait and switch ever. I would think the public would be outraged over this plan, but so far they are accepting it hook and sinker. There is no way that I can support the Democrats

So what is my alternative, the Republicans? Right now that does not seem to be a viable option for my political beliefs. The GOP is being divided into two wings, and neither side bring me any confidence. One wing is the Michael Steel side. Steel is the new head of the GOP and wants to build the party by being the big tent party. He has said if we do not make the party more “Hip Hop” then they will die. What he and other men like General Powell are saying is that we need to become more moderate, or open to different ideas and lifestyles. They are listening to the media that are saying if the GOP does not expand they will die. Why they are listening to the media, I do not know. Who in the press keeps giving the GOP advice, the Democrats. Why would the Democrats want to the help the Republicans, the answer is they do not, they just want the GOP to be more like them. My fear is that many Republicans are buying into this. All they hear is that the party is in real danger and needs to change. The problem is that yes the party is in danger. It is in danger of losing people and me who are truly conservative and will not support Steel. Why would anyone support a party that is liberal light when they can just be a Democrat and be real liberal? By the way why was Powell so upset when Cheney said we was no longer a Republican. If I remember right, Powell came out and openly supported Obama in the election. When someone campaigns for the Democrats I just assume he is one, but I guess not in Powell’s world.

The other wing of the party is not much better, the Rush Limbaugh/Dick Cheney wing. The thing about them is that I agree completely with their ideas. I do believe we can best grow our party by giving voters a true alternative, a real conservative voice. The Republicans have based their victories over the past 40 years on the silent majority. The reason they are called silent is because they don’t say much, but are conservative. I believe the party will come back if we stand for something, and stand up to Obama. The problem with this wing is the spokesman. I like Rush’s ideas, but I struggle listening to Rush. Rush will fight against the Democrats just because they are democrats whether or not the ideas are good or not (yes the Democrats did the same thing, but lets be bigger than them). For every good argument he has he spends hours ranting against minor things so you lose his more important ideas. I like Cheney, I trust him when he speaks. I trust him more than anyone I have heard in the past 10 years. He is unpopular, because he does tell the truth. But Cheney like Rush is very controversial. They will not have the ability to pull in new members, even if their ideas are sound. Yet no one else has stepped up.

So what is the alternative, I have decided to leave the GOP. The Libertarians are too radical for me. I do believe there is a role for government oversight. As a 19th century historian I do not believe true Laissez-Fair government is the answer. You could follow the outline for the American dream, like work hard day and night for years, but in the age of the Robber Barons you could work as hard as you want and not make progress. Some government regulation is necessary. So if the Democrats, the Republicans, and the libertarians do not fit the only answer is to start a new party, or maybe bring back a new one. There have been some great parties in the past like the Populists, the Bucktails, or the Anti-Masons. Some have had great names like the Bull Moose Party, the Know-Nothings, or Loco-Focos. Each of these parties has good qualities, but also would not capture my beliefs. However there was one dominant party in the early 19th century that is perfect, the Whig party.

In 1838 Andrew Jackson ran against the incumbent John Quincy Adams. An odd aspect of this election was that both men were running as Republicans. For the past ten years or so America had been in a political age known as the Era of Good Feelings when we had a one party system. The problems was even though by name they all agreed, in theory they were still divided. In 1838 the Jackson/Van Buren wing of the party began calling themselves Democratic Republicans to distinguish their beliefs (the Jeffersonian Republican ideas) from the Adams/Henry Clay Republicans. With the victory of Jackson in 1838, the American government would never be the same. It was Jackson who would make the president powerful. Jackson vetoed more bills in his presidency than the previous six had combined. Unlike the other presidents Jackson vetoed bills not because he felt they were bad for the nation, but simply because he was not in favor of it. Jackson took power for himself that many thought were dangerous. Those that opposed Jackson started calling him King Andrew. In England the party that opposed the King were the Whigs, so Henry Clay and all those who opposed King Andrew followed suit and began referring to them selves as Whigs. By the next election Jackson had dropped the Democratic Republican label for the just the Democrats while the other major party were now organized as Whigs.

I believe it is time to bring back the Whig party. With King Obama taking more power for himself than any president has the right to, once again we need a party that will stand up to him. By standing up to King Obama, I mean more than just fight against him and his programs, but give voters a real alterative. I want a conservative party who stands for what Americans like me believe. A party that believe in families and conservative ideas. A party that will not fold to political correctness or toleration. The Steel wing of the Republican Party believes we need more tolerance, but I believe we should never tolerate what is wrong. As our nation goes down a dark path, I believe more Americans will ultimately crave someone or a party that will stand up for what they believe.

So my call is to bring back the Whigs. We do not want old Republicans who do not believe and think like us, they can stay in the GOP. I do not believe there is anything wrong in saying that. Why do we want people in our party who do not believe like us? That does not make us bad people, we are not saying they can’t vote or join a party, just not join ours. Why would you want to be a member of the New Whig Party if you have different ideas then us? The Pope does not make Protestants or Jews Cardinals, that would not make sense and no one seems to have a problem with it. But if we don’t want pro-choice people in our party than we become closed minded and wrong.

I have considered myself a Republican as long as I can remember, and it is not easy to leave my party, but our current third party system is the longest one in American History and needs a change. I am sure the first two American party systems—the Federalists and Anti-Federalist, or the Whigs and Democrats never thought their parties would die either. Yet they did and for the better, a new parties would always grown out of the old. I think it is time for the fourth American party system, the socialists and the Whigs. The Republicans and Democrats will not agree, but lets not ask them. We are a government of the people, not parties and I think the parties have forgotten that point. Unfortunately parties are a way of life, but we can take back the parties and make them represent us, they should fit our needs not us fit theirs.

This will not be easy, but lets give it a shot. Start talking to your friends and see if we cannot get a grass roots movement. If we can get enough buzz for the right kind of change then we can try taking the next step.