The Young Reaganite

a bit of a hiatus

2008-01-24T11:15:00.000-05:00

Hey guys, i want to thank all of for reading and keeping up with the Young Reaganite. As of late I have started writing for the George Mason College Republican Blog. I am the creator and lead blogger of that blog as well. Because of that, I am going to stop writing on this blog for the time being and focus my efforts into the GMU College Republican Blog.

The goals of that blog are the same as this one, the dedication to freedom and conservatism.

You can visit the GMU CR blog at georgemasoncr.blogspot.com

I hope you cane enjoy the GMUCR blog like you enjoy the Young Reaganite.
Thank you all and God Bless

Matthew DeLeon

The New George Mason College Republican Blog

2008-01-23T17:10:00.001-05:00

I wanted to let everyone here know that GMUCR'S have just started the blog. The link to it is in this post and will be on the blogroll from now on. Please lets support the GMUCR's!!!

Bill Clinton falls asleep during MLK speech

2008-01-22T20:20:00.000-05:00

Gotta Love Bill

Just wanted to share this with everyone. This is all he did during his 8 years as president.

Heres the link

Fred Thompson drops out of the Presidential race!

2008-01-22T14:45:00.001-05:00

The link to the story is posted here.

I liked Fred, but if you run a bad campaign, do not expect to win. Its the way the world works.

Any thoughts on how this will effect the rest of the race? Please leave opinions.

Honestly, who does not want people to have healthcare?

2008-01-22T14:07:00.000-05:00

The most common thing I seem to hear from College Democrats is that Republicans do not want people to have health care. Personally, I think this charge is absurd on the part of the liberals. Who honestly does not want people to have healthcare?

This little line is a tactic used to cover up the real reasons why Republicans believe universal health care is bad. Universal healthcare, as I am sure many of you know would have devastating effects on the way we get healthcare. Heres a list of why it is terrible.
1. The quality of our health care will be going down. Since the Hospitals will get paid money from the Government and not its patients, efficiency is not needed to get paid. We see this happen already in Canada and in England. Do you want your hospital run like a post office?
2. The supply of doctors would go down. Doctors would be paid less than they used to, and the government having a budget would only be able to hire as many as the budget allowed. Do you like waiting in line for hours? You will when we have less doctors.
3. The Democratic cry for universal healthcare is absolutely foolish. The idea everybody will get healthcare is false. The past has shown socialist plans always leave the people it intends to help in the dust, the poor and needy. Do the old USSR's five year plans ring a bell?A women in England did her own dental work because she could not get it privately. People all over Europe go to veterinary offices to seek urgent care they cannot get at there government hospitals.This is Universal? Give me a break
4. This universal healthcare will of course bring a end to a vast number of freedom we have as Americans. We cannot pick our doctors, we could decide which medicines we need, we will no longer be able to pick the hospitals we want. Can you imagine the attack on our personal liberties on both sides. People could say smoking and drinking should be illegal because everyone pays for everyone else's healthcare. Some on the conservative side of the spectrum could think of a myriad of things that effects the public health. Many say its crazy, but its not far from impossible.

Now, a Democrat wont ever say, these things are true but necessary for the good of the people, or wont even try to downplay the truth behind universal healthcare. Its easier to say the same things "Greedy, evil Republicans are trying to make people money."

I will say it again and again, I personally believe next to Jesus Christ, capitalism is the greatest thing God has ever allowed to pass. Let it work for America's healthcare as well.

Hillary and Romney win nevada caucuses: South Carloina Results

2008-01-19T18:51:00.000-05:00

As the title reads, Romney and Clinton both won their parties nomination in Nevada. Here is the link to a article giving better details into both races. Also according to the Drudge Report, Barack Obama managed to win more delegates from the Nevada Caucus. I will link the Real Clear Politics delegate count chart incase this is wrong.

The voting for South Carolina is supposed to end at 7 P.M. I will be back as soon as the first numbers drop. STAY WITH US!!!!!!!

7:29 PM.
The First pricincts have started coming it, here are the numbers right now
0.08% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...
MCCAIN... 33.39% HUCKABEE... 26.8%ROMNEY... 19.7%THOMPSON... 10.4%PAUL... 5.66%GIULIANI... 2.96%

8:01
6% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA..
.MCCAIN... 34% HUCKABEE... 29%ROMNEY... 15%THOMPSON... 13%PAUL... 4%GIULIANI... 3%

8:06
12% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...
MCCAIN... 35% HUCKABEE... 30%ROMNEY... 14%THOMPSON... 15%PAUL... 4%GIULIANI... 3%

8:21
22% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...
MCCAIN... 36% HUCKABEE... 28%ROMNEY... 15%THOMPSON... 15%PAUL... 4%GIULIANI... 2%

8:28
29% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...
MCCAIN... 35% HUCKABEE... 28%ROMNEY... 15%THOMPSON... 15%PAUL... 4%GIULIANI... 2%

8:32
36% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...
MCCAIN... 35% HUCKABEE... 30%ROMNEY... 14%THOMPSON... 15%PAUL... 4%GIULIANI... 2%

9:27
88% REPUBLICANS: SOUTH CAROLINA...*MCCAIN... 33%
John McCain took it!!!!!! Come back tommorow for more analysis of what this and the Nevada Caucus mean.
Thank you all for reading with us tonight.

Feel good economics and Poll results

2008-01-19T10:43:00.000-05:00

Hey everybody,
With my return to school approaching , it has been a hectic couple of days.

I will be back here tonight with a up to date coverage of the primaries.

Right now I am gonna link this site to a article called Feel good economics that was in the Wall Street Journal. I think it will give a great explanation what a economic stimulus will do.

Thank you for reading and I hope to be back here with you tonight.

The last poll is finished, and it seems the primaries are effecting the way people feel about this race. John McCain came in first place with Mike Huckabee coming into second. Hope the rest of the electorate stop thinking this way.

New Poll to come now! Do you think that a economic stimulus plan is necessary?
VOTE NOW!!!

It sucks to be a liberal sometimes

2008-01-17T10:34:00.000-05:00

When liberalism turns around and bites you in the ass. A great article on how truth hurts liberal feelings, and why Hillary Clinton is dealing with it now.

Heres the link to the article.

So what does michigan mean? A look at the electorate

2008-01-16T14:05:00.000-05:00

Last Nights results where not to shocking. Most People expected former Governor Mitt Romney to win Michigan with a decent margin, with the history he has in Michigan (he was born in there and his father was the Governor).

But, there is something very interesting to see when you look at how the electorate in each of these states votes. Each "group" if you will has a candidate that they like, and they are voting consistently in a similar matter.

Iowa- Former Governor Mike Huckabee took the Iowa caucus with a sizable margin. He was expected to win because of the support of little "c" Evangelicals (Evangelicals who care only about social conservatism). It seems that where ever these little c's are at, they will be propelling Mike Huckabee to the front.

New Hampshire- This is where John McCain took his first Victory. This was a open primary where a substantial amount of INDEPENDENTS who voted in the Republican Party. It seems when independent voters have a substantial amount of votes. John McCain is relying on there support in order to win.

Michigan - It was reported that over 60% of the voters in the Michigan Primary where "Mainstream Republicans." McCain took this state in 2000 because a far greater amount of independents voted. Mitt Romney took this state because a). The voters do not worry about a candidates religious views and b). Conservatives are voting, not independents and Democrats.

I think if a close look was taken to see how these states have voted in the past, we could make some pretty good predictions. However I do not think with the way polls and past voting trends have not mattered in this presidential race, it would be hard to predict. I do think if we look at these trends in a states electorate, we can make better state to state predictions.

If I had to take a guess based on these trends, I think South Carolina is going to vote for Huckabee, but we shall see.

Michigan Republican presidential coverage

2008-01-15T19:06:00.000-05:00

I will be keeping you posted up to date with poll numbers concerning the Michigan primary. The two favored candidates are John McCain and Mitt Romney.

As of 7:08 Pm
EXIT POLLS SHOW: Romney 34, McCain 29, Huckabee 16. The voting does not end until 8 pm. I will be back at 8 to update the results. 8:34 with only0.33 of the precincts reporting: ROMNEY 39% MCCAIN 34% HUCKABEE 12%
8:45 at1.44% Romeny 38% McCain 31% Huckabee 16% 9:07 MSNBC called it for Mitt Romney at 10 percent of the Precincts polling.here are the results as of nowROMNEY 37% MCCAIN 31% HUCKABEE 16%. I will report back here if something changes in the results. 10:20 Its super offical, Romeny took it with 39% of the vote. Heres a link to article concerning it. Thank you all for keeping up to date with us tonight. You made is a great success!!!!

How the Republican Primary Process works

2008-01-15T14:56:00.000-05:00

Here is a article I found on real clear politics. Many do not understand in great detail how we select our delegates for the RNC that pick the presidential nominee. The link to the article is here.

Hope you enjoy! More later.

Why making your entire campaign around demographics is bad

2008-01-14T10:40:00.000-05:00

*RASMUSSEN: Clinton leads Obama among white voters 41% to 27%... Obama leads Clinton among African-American voters 66% to 16%.. The Democratic Party is currently split in the Primary over the issues of race. *courtesy of the drudge report.

Apparantly honesty comes second to liberalism as well

2008-01-13T16:05:00.000-05:00

Heres the link to this story.
Apparently George Soros's is not a fan of honesty when it makes his cause look bad.

Be reminded that this man makes massive donations to moveon.org.
Scary huh?

The talk of recession is election year retoric

2008-01-13T00:09:00.000-05:00

In a recent post about the democrats beating the drum on a fake recession, i gave a bad explanation refuting the recession.

This article found on real clear market gives a excellent explanation.

Enjoy

Feminism comes second only to liberalism. Actually, everything is second to liberalism.

2008-01-12T22:56:00.000-05:00

The Feminist magazine, Ms. Maganize recently refuse to publish an ad in its magazine that was created by the American Jewish Congress. The ad showed three women that are high up in the Israeli Government. The story was found on GOP Bloggers.

While it would seem that this is fitting to the feminist cause, the magazine refused to publish it. But why would they do that?

The magazine is a highly liberal magazine, with constant references to how bad Bush is, and how necessary abortion rights are to the survival of civilization. They love high taxes and I am sure think the war in Iraq is terrible.

So, it only makes sense that anything that shows Israel in a positive light must be kept out of this magazine.

But is this just isolated to this magazine? Absolutely not. We have seen the same things with liberals and conservative African Americans. All hell breaks out when a conservative or a Republican makes a remotely racist comment, and rightly so. But we have the only former KKK senator around serving as a democrat. We have Micheal Steele having oreos being thrown at him at a speech, saying he is "black on the outside, white on the inside" for his conservative views. My personal favorite is the DSCC authorized ad that showed Micheal Steele as a minstrel, to show him as a Uncle Tom working for Republicans.

Liberals are the biggest hypocrites on this planet. They have no principles, only the desire to spread there message, without criticism. Every time liberalism is challenged, the liberals will do anythign to shut it down, including abandoning its "principles" such as equality and feminism.

Do we really want this ideology running our country?

Did you know text messaging while driving could kill you?

2008-01-12T17:14:00.000-05:00

Apparently the Virginia state legislature does not think you do.

The Virginia legislature is going to debate a bill very soon that would make sending text messages while driving punishable by up to 250$ fine. The link to story is here.

While I am glad this is at least a issue only the state government is attempting to look at, I still cannot believe this is what is being discussed in our general assembly. There are so many issues effecting Virginia. As a resident I must say my most pressing issue is not how to stop people from sending text messages while driving.

My biggest problem is once again legislatures need to pass laws in order to stop us from hurting ourselves. I am a adult and know text messaging while driving is bad, not to mention it can potentially kill me. I also do not think that text messaging is causing the same amount of deaths on the road as drunk drivers are, a really big issue that is being handled excellently in the state of Virgina. How they intend to enforce this law is something I look forward to reading later. I do not think there is such a crisis of texting-while-driving that other important issues should be pushed to the back of the line to debate such a nonsense bill.

This is just another chance for the legislature to point to how many bills they have passed when it comes time to run for re-election.

What messed up economy?

2008-01-11T18:56:00.000-05:00

Hillary Cliton recently proposed a 70 billion dollar "emergency spending bill" to help poor American's suffering from a "possible election year economic recession." 40 billion dollars is to help people who are dealing with the morgage crisis, with the other 30 billion to help the poor with recesion issues. The link to the article is here.

But is there really a crisis. Its a known fact in economics that the economy is cyclical, it will be really good and then go down and then go back up (this what not the best explanation, and I will ask a freind who studies economics to give a much better explanation.) The current mortgage crisis is another thing being blown out of proportion. 94% of American's are paying their mortages. We are not coming toward the great depression again.

But why is the media and why are democrats trying so hard to freak Americans out? Polls taken by The Economist show that when Americans think the economy is good, they want Republicans in office, while when there are economic "problems" they want Democrats who will help fix it.

Hillary Clinton knows that by playing on these fears she can help herself win. This is another example of Democratic fear mongering.

Gov. Schwarzenegger makes drastic budget cuts in California

2008-01-11T16:47:00.000-05:00

The link to the article is here.

Its amazing to see this coming out of the California government. Gov. Schwarzenegger decided to cut tons of money out of the state budget in order to bring soaring deficits down.

Republicans still manage to be the party of fiscal responsibility when they try. Former Governor Mitt Romney managed to do the same thing back in Massachusetts when he was governor while facing massive resistance from the Democratic state legislature of Massachusetts. It has already been said by members of the California state legislature that Governor Schwarzenegger will encounter the same problems.

I think the biggest lesson to learn is that if we keep the government small to begin with, we won’t have to deal with these huge deficits.

You may not my favorite Republican, but congratulations on your effort Governor Schwarzenegger. It is good to see Republicans trying there best to fix out of control deficit.

The reagan revolution does not have to end!

2008-01-11T12:33:00.000-05:00

There are many articles going around saying the Republican Revolution Ronald Reagan started is dead. They take a close look at the coalition Reagan created (Limited Government, Social Conservatism and Strong Defense) and say it is breaking apart. The link is here if you choose to read it.

Brilliant Argument because he says it the best. STAY C O N S E R V A T I V E.

We have such a hard time in the past 8 years because we have not been conservative. Pleaseeeee everybody

When you vote this year remember, conservatism does not have to end. Please vote accordingly.

More later today, I had to get that out.

JOHN KERRY ENDORSES BARACK OBAMA!!!!

2008-01-10T17:43:00.000-05:00

Well, to say to least, there are definetly some winners and some losers with this endoresment.

1. John Edwards-Loser. Your old running mate ignores you completly after a nice long presidential run. Its ok, getting 17% in New Hampshire means John Kerry would not have helped you anyway.

2. Barack Obama-Loser. Now you really wont get the nomiation. Winning a general election has now just gone down the tubes. The worst presidential candidate (who lost to the sopposedly worst president) in recent history has just endorsed you.

3. Hillary Clinton- Winner. This is just another reason for Mrs. Clinton to be nominated. 'The Crazy liberal John Kerry" does not like me because im not radical like him. It works for Mrs. Clinton, and to say the least it does not hurt her chances with winning with the general electorate.

4. Any Republican - Winner. The fact you could mention John Kerry certainly makes a difference when running this race. If its Barack Obama you may certainlly be able to use it.

This does not make a big deal right now, but this could come back to bite certainly people in the behind in the future. May help a few to.

John McCain and Joe Liberman on the Iraq Troop Surge

2008-01-10T09:52:00.000-05:00

Here is a link to the article written in the Wall Street Journal. I think this article will help many understand the troop surge and what courses we need to take to ensure victory.

New Hampshire 08: What does it all mean

2008-01-09T10:47:00.002-05:00

Well, the first thing i must say is that polls certainly are deceiving. The media is doing our democracy such a disservice by "predicting" with such "accuracy" the way our elections are going to turn out. Hillary Clinton's win yesterday really slapped the pollsters and Chris Matthews (who did not stop talking about Barack Obama since Iowa) in the face. How about a new rule, let Americans decide before the media does it for them.

Now, John McCain's win last night did not come as a surprise at all. The Senator took it before in 2000 against George W. Bush, and well we see how far that got him last time. New Hampshire works well for McCain because the state uses a open primary system, allowing for moderates to come in and vote. In a Closed Primary state, what does this victory mean?

Not much to say the least. John McCain is not well liked when its conservatives making the decisions. Being the architect of McCain–Feingold (Bipartisan campaign finance reform) and his vote against the Bush Tax cuts, and more recently the immigration bill he championed have put a sour taste in conservatives mouth.

Many Predicted the death of Mitt Romney's campaign, but I do not see it. He is still doing well in most of the states that Guiliani is not expected to just pick up. Guiliani is patiently waiting to try to win the states with the most delegates, and only time will tell how that plays out. Huckabee will be facing conservative electorate in the other states from now on, and i mean CONSERVATIVE, NOT JUST CHRISTIAN. Its certainly up in the air on the Republican side of the race

There is no front runner for the republican side, as we can see by the polls. There is a strong possibility it could become a brokered convention. The last time that happened was in 1976, and can you take a guess which party won that year?

New Hampshire 08

2008-01-08T19:37:00.001-05:00

Its certainly a interesting night indeed. I am gonna be staying with the rest of you all tonight to keep you up to date with the numbers. As of Right now, no doubt McCain will take it for the Republicans. The Democratic side is certainly interesting to say the least.
7: 38
Republicans
MCCAIN 38; ROMNEY 29; HUCKABEE 11; PAUL 6; GIULIANI 8; THOMPSON 1...Democrats
OBAMA 37; CLINTON 35; EDWARDS 17; RICHARDSON 4 7:45 Democrats OBAMA 36; CLINTON 37; EDWARDS 17; RICHARDSON 4; KUCINICH 2

Republicans
MCCAIN 38; ROMNEY 29; HUCKABEE 11; PAUL 8; GIULIANI 9; THOMPSON 1... 8:13 MCCAIN wins with 37% of the vote. Democrats11.29% IN: OBAMA 36; CLINTON 38; EDWARDS 17; RICHARDSON 4; KUCINICH Now that the Republican Candidate has been called. I will check back a little later to see who won on the democratic side. 10:35 HILLARY CLINTON WINS at 39% More commentary to be delivered in tomorrow's Post. One thing can be said, polls certainly are deceiving.

The Politics of Hope: Conservative Style

2008-01-08T16:44:00.000-05:00

Howdy every! Im glad to be back after a bit of a Break. 2008 is starting and boy is it going to be a interesting year for politics. I hope to be able to stay up to date and on top of current events and give you plenty of conservative commentary, here on the Young Reaganite, where principle matters more than anything else.

Since his recent victory in Iowa, Barack Obama has been talked about greatly in the media. His political style is different from something we have seen in a long time. It is a talk about hope and about excitement for the future.

But why is Barack Obama is the only candidate with the courage to talk about hope for the future? We all have seen first hand how Barack Obama's ideas of hope had worked in the past, and how more government social programs hurt the people he wants to help the most.

But Conservatives, why cant we talk about hope? Many of the candidates have stories that are not only compelling, but could uplift and give hope to millions of Americans who want to be successful. Former Governor Mitt Romeny worked hard to get to where he is, and was not privileged. He was a normal American with a desire to achieve his goals. Americans want to work hard, and Americans want obstacles out of there to help them be successful. The Conservative philosophy is all about being the best person you are capable of becoming. Republicans need to emphasis the fact that our policies and beliefs are not one of dependency, but of hard work and success. We need to remind Americans conservatism is about hope, hope that all Americans will be able to realize how successful they all can be.

I am sorry Senator Obama, I do not agree that your type of hope is going to make America better. I am sorry republicans, that you cannot realize that our type of hope is what Americans want.

From my family to all of yours

2007-12-25T13:10:00.001-05:00

I want to wish you all a very merry Christmas. Let's remember today those troops who will not be spending Christmas with there family's so we all can.
God Bless and Merry Christmas

Being a Liberal sucks sometimes...

2007-12-23T13:45:00.000-05:00

Especally when you have a re-election coming up. I am talking about Senator Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) recent change of heart when it comes to Iraq. On '4/19/2007 Senator Reid said that " ...this war is lost and that the surge is not accomplishing anything." Now 12/21/07 Reid now feels that "the surge certainly has'nt hurt. Its helped, I recognize that."

Wow, Mister Majority Leader, you certianly have come a long way. This is the type of hypocriscy that has become a trademark of the Modern Democratic Party.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-ca) and Reid have been basing the success of the Democratic Party in the 2006 mid term elections on "the Republican's blundering of the Iraq War" and the peoples desire for change. Now this "blundering" is suddently acceptable by the Democratic Leadership and success is a option again (go figure). These people never have any principle, they will say and do anything in order to win.

Liberals will be mad and stamp their feet, and hopfully the DNC will listen to them. We know in 2006 acting conservative is part of the reason Democrats won, and hopfully moveon.org will put pressure on them to act as liberal as possible. I want Americans to recognize the difference between the Conservatives who want to win this war, and the liberals who want to win this election.

Mike Huckabee: Were damned if we do and were damned if we dont

2007-12-22T10:45:00.001-05:00

Hey All!! I hope everybody has had good couple of shopping days before Christmas. Thank you all for voting in the last poll, with 50% of you saying moderates are bad for the party, and 41% saying they are good for the party. One vote could have made the difference, with only person saying they are not sure.

Now, for everybody who has been paying close attention, we have seen Mike Huckabee surge in the polls in the Iowa and South Carolina where he is taking the lead, and moving up to second in the national polls. What many conservatives are asking now is " he is the candidate that we want?"

Mike Huckabee is appealing greatly with the social conservative voters around the country. This and his desire to help implement the Fairtax are certainly part of why he soaring so high in the polls. Many social conservatives feel he is the most authentic in this sense, with Huckabee once being a minister and a past record on social issue that is not as shaky as the other candidates (Romney openly being pro-choice in 90's, Guiliani being pro-choice now, Thompson working for a lobbying firm that was pro-choice). Many social conservatives feel the party will be "damned if we dont" put Huckabee into office.

The problem with Huckabee is that he is not a typical conservative. He even puts himself on record saying he is not a typical Republican. But what does this mean? Huckabee has a fiscal record that even Bill Clinton would be ashamed of. The Club for Growth has labeled Huckabee as being a very big government Conservative. He speaks of Government programs to help people loose weight. E. J. Dionne of real clear politics says "Huckabee himself preaches a gospel of populism that rejects conservative orthodoxy on trade, the value of government and the beneficence of Wall Street." Huckabee does not seem to value the business aspect of the Republican Party, the aspect we all know is important to ensuring our economy runs smoothly and helps us all make money in the future. In a nutshell, all the economic libertarians are saying "were damned if we do" nominate Mike Huckabee.

My personal feelings on Mike? I must admit i like his attitude and his demeanor, and I have actually met his wife ( a very nice women btw). My problem is, can we say as conservatives we are dedicated to the causes of conservatism if we nominate a candidate who deviates from the ]platform? Remember that a presidential nominee is a symbolic representation of what the Republican Party is. We became the Party of conservatism when Barry Goldwater won the nomination. Please remember this when you vote soon.

Green Conservatism: Why conservatism can also be innovative

2007-12-19T09:27:00.001-05:00

I am going to link Newt Gingrich's article Green Conservatism: A New Way of Thinking About the Environment to this blog for all of you to read. Newt once again proves how intelligent he is by tackling an issue most do not associate with conservatism.

The idea conservatives can and should take the lead with innovation is one I wish would be talked about more. While it is assumed that being conservative means you want to keep things the same, I think Newt is able to explain why we can innovative and still follow our principles.

The link to the article is here.

Why we must not take Iran for granted

2007-12-18T00:46:00.000-05:00

Recently a report by a United States intellignece organization found that in 2003 Iran had halted its nuclear program. President Ahmadinejad took it upon himself to take this opportunity to say that this was a "declaration of surrender" on the part of the United States.

At this same time, the Russian government makes its first shipment of nuclear fuel to Iran today, after a much waited debate over sanctioning Iran over its nuclear program.

Many liberals are breathing easy, because now we cant just charge into Iran and once again try to free a country from a deranged government. The paranoia many liberals feel about engaging this enemy is the highest its ever been. Moveon.org has been swift to condemn a vote in the senate to label Iran's Revolutionary guard a terrorist organization as a act of aggression.

But are we out of the water with Iran now that this report tells us we are? Absolutely not. Iran is now in the process of creating a second nuclear power plant, and a senior Iranian official recently said that Iran had no "intention of halting its nuclear enrichment programs."

Ahmadinejad's attitude and crazy demeanor has lead many in the west to question the dangers of a nuclear Iran. I must say any and all things must be done to prevent Iran acquiring nucelar weapons, including force if diplomacy fails.

Why would it be so bad if Iran gets nuclear weapons? Part of the problem is the instability it would cause in the region. Iran would now be a super power in the region, able to influence any of the governments it sees fit. It is written into Iran's constitution that all countries must become Islamic States, with Iran paving the path . There is no doubt Iran would back up pro-fundamental Islamic regimes in different countries, causing much more turmoil in the region. We saw in the 1980's the Iranian desire to turn Iraq into a pro-shia, pro-Iranian government. We see these efforts on Tehran's part in Iraq currently, with Iranian troops supplying insurgents with supplies that are hurting our troops now as we speak. The idea a Iranian government with a nuclear bomb would not "be that bad" as a liberal told me once, is preposterous.

Not to mention the countries constant verbal attacks on Israel and its support of aggression against it. I need not remind you that Ahmadinejad has denied the holocaust and blames Israel for the all problems in the middle east. He even uses Israel as a scapegoat for its high unemployment rate. There is no doubt Israel would be in grave danger is Iran ever got its hand on the bomb.

Sure, this report says it stopped its nuclear program. But many also believe that Iran is playing the same games Iraq did with regard to weapons inspectors, and trying to cover it up before they start again. I wish i believed this report was accurate, but to much evidence is pointing to the contrary. If we do not elect a leader who is willing to stand up against Iran, we may have a much bigger problem than Iraq, a nuclear Iran.

Im sorry for the inconvenience

2007-12-15T00:10:00.001-05:00

It was recently brought to my attention that i made a great deal of errors in the last post. I want to apologize to my audience for this. You deserve the most professional, well written blog there is. While i am only human, i will try my best to limit these mistakes.

Once again, My deepest apologies and my gratitude to those who cared enough to alert me to this.

Are moderates good or bad for the Republican Party

2007-12-14T14:27:00.000-05:00

Hello Folks,
I wanna thank all of you all who took my poll recently. The results came back with more than half of all who voted believing that keeping a democrat out of the white house is far more important than insuring a Republican will be conservative.

This alarms me a little bit. It seems after 8 years of George Bush, a Republican who believes in expanding governments role and letting spending get out of control, that Republicans have moved away from the right.

So this leads me to ask, are moderate Republicans bad for the party? Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism" lead Bush to focus on the issues of poverty and addressing the global aids epidemic. While this is does not make bush a moderate, the way he went about it was.

Almost 8 years later and now Republicans have lost both the house and the senate. I believe part of this came from the Republicans in congress taking George Bush's lead and ignoring the free market conservatism that made them great during the 1990's.

Now, many in congress are alienating moderate Republicans. Tom Davis has received a backlash from the conservative base in his district because of many votes against tax cuts (such as the 1994 contract with American tax cut and voting against the troop surge). Many now contend that this infighting with moderates caused a great deal of problems that also lead to the republican defeat.

I personally believe that moderates are pulling us away from the right, and the right is the reason Republicans win. Republicans lost in 06 because we ran to the left while Democrats ran to right, and look how that turned out.

We Republicans need to stick to our Goldwater- Reagan roots, without those we have nothing.

Your opinions please!!!! Leave comments and take the poll

Punishing Gas companies only punishes Americans

2007-12-13T12:50:00.000-05:00

A new energy bill that is passing through the senate this morning recently had the nearly 13 billion dollars in taxes dropped from them this morning. This new bill was intended to increase the fuel economy of U.S. cars and trucks from 35% to 40% by 2020. These taxes were originally intended by Democrats to the federal government make up the estimated 3 billion it will use beucase of the increased fuel efficiency .

While I am not a Conservative who thinks trying to help the environment is not a bad thing, i most certainly am a conservative who thinks raising taxes is.

The thing many Americans do not realize is that no businesses or corporation pays taxes. WE the consumer, pay taxes. Every tax that the government levies on a business is then reflected in the final price, the price that you and me pay. Do any of you think having to pay and extra $1.00 to a $1.50 extra a gallon on fuel is going to helping the avergae persons pocketbook?

Democrats always claim to speak for the little guy who needs a helping hand. If this is the case, raising my gas prices are not going to help me, and they are not going to help the millions of Americans who have to fill up there gas tank in order to live their lives. Instead of raising my taxes, why not make some budget cuts. As much money as the federal government wastes, I am sure they can make the cut somewhere.

Good Job Senate Republicans!!

Republicans hold onto VA-01 and OH-05

2007-12-12T11:16:00.000-05:00

As those of you know yesterday, Robb Wittmann (R-VA1) became the new congressman of the first district of Virginia. This was one of two GOP victories in special elections, with a race being help in Ohio's5th district, with Republican Bob Latta winning that seat as well.
Good News:
Republicans are not disliked so much that we loose seats that have been republican for 30 years (at least thats the case with VA-1).
The Bad News: the NRCC had to dump money into both of these races, money that it is not going to have when it comes to the general elections in 2008.

So what does it all mean?

The fact that districts like these needed money pumped into them show that the next election cycle is going be extremely competitive, even in solid republican districts. The NRCC may not have money like this for incredibly competitive districts.

Next year is not going to be fun at all to say the least

And the Winner is...

2007-12-11T21:41:00.000-05:00

with no doubt in my mind, former delegate Rob Wittman.
The election results came out as I expected, with Wittman winning 61% to 36%.
While i typically would do some analysis on how the precincts voted, i must say this is a very boring district to analyze. The only city Wittman did not win was Williamsburg, where his opponent, Forgit is from.

I am happy to know that Republicans are not so disliked that they cannot even win in this district. Congratulation's Congressman Wittman, do us proud in the house.

VA First District Special Election day coverage

2007-12-11T11:37:00.001-05:00

Its going to be a bit of a hectic day folks, so i think for right now Im going to leave this as an open post. Got something on your mind, wanna talk about something? Go ahead and post it in the comments and have fun?

I'll be back later tonight to bring you up to date election results as the polls close tonight.
Anybody care to post predictions of who will win? Margin of victory ect.

Happy Voting

P.S,I have been meaning to do this for quite some time
Anybody see a resemblance?

¡Los Hispanos son muy importantes!

2007-12-10T17:28:00.000-05:00

To my great delight, Republican Presidential candidates took the stage the University of Miami for debate hosted by Univision, the most watched Spanish language television network in the country. The debate varied on the usually issues, from health care to illegal immigration to the war in Iraq.
The only candidate who refused to go, Tom Tancredo, felt that his fellow Republicans were "pandering" to illegal immigrants.

This train of thought that belongs to Tom Tancredo, sadly, is not isolated only to himself. Many in the party are demonstrating a desire to ignore the Hispanic population all altogether. My biggest fear is that the alienation many in the Republican Party have shown to America's Black community is going to happen again with the Hispanic population in America.

As a Puerto Rican American(i know thats a given since all Puerto Ricans are American), i must say nothing terrifies me more than the thought of the Hispanic community voting overwhelming in support of the Democratic Party (Puerto Ricans have already started to my personal dismay, supporting Democrats 70% of the time. I personally attribute this to most Puerto Ricans being located in the city of New York).

Why do i fear this so much? My parents and I are the only members of our extended family to leave the city of New York. However since i was a child I have been visiting the City two or three times a year. Many of my family is still troubled by the same problems my parents where raised with. Poverty, fear of crime and substandard schools. I have seen first hand the horrors caused by Democratic party's desires to get elected. I have seen how they turned members of my family into state dependents on welfare. I have seen how they deny my family members the right to a good education by pandering to teachers Unions and denying them any kind of school choice. I have seen how they block opportunities for personal advancement, and lie to my people about how Republicans will leave them out in the cold in order to get a vote. I became a Republican when i found out that New York was dominated by Democratic public officials.

I fear so much that Republicans will slip by and not fight for the Hispanic vote, and in turn just send all the Hispanics voters in this country in the hands of the Democratic Party. Republicans deserve better than what Democrats have to offer.

Hispanics understand the unfairness of granting illegal immigrants amnesty after waiting so long to become a member of this country legally. Hispanics need to know that the average Hispanic only receives an average two percent rate of return in their social security check, getting less than whites and blacks. Hispanics want conservatism, but they need it articulated to them first.

Republicans, we can articulate this message to Hispanics. Please, you can be tough on illegal immigration and not be as alienating as Tom Tancredo. Lets show the Hispanic community we care about them, we value them, and want a better future for them.

Why federalism may kill universal health care ( just can it do it in time?)

2007-12-09T14:04:00.001-05:00

For those of you who did not know, Massachusetts has recently taken its stab at a plan for universal health care( which by the way, was started by now Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney). The plan forces everyone to have health care or face a penalty, and many can purchase a subsidized health care plan if they so choose. This is intended to help the many poor members of the state who did not have health care already.

Sounds Peachy right?

The problem always goes back to one thing, cost.
The Article explains that the universal health care plan is supposed to bring down prices. The problem comes in with simple economics. The government health insurance companies are supposed to provide health insurance whether or not the person pays, even though were assuming they will pay. Rather than drop them like a private company would, the public sector( tax payers) will just have to pick up the slack, increasing the cost of premiums.

Also, the state creates a subsidized market place which will supposedly fight with insurers and health care providers to bring down the cost. The problem here is that this "bargaining" can only happen with the subsidized health care. The private health care company can do basically whatever it wants ( which by the way is follow the market as it should). So, since the government sponsored health care plans have to compete with the rest of the industry, it is expected that keeping prices down will not be as easy as all that.

While the plan needs health care prices to go up only 5%, it is estimated to go up around 10-12%, making the plan cost more, either to the citizen, or the the tax payer. Even Massachusetts's liberals do not like paying taxes that are to high.

If the effects of this health care plan happen sooner than later, it could prove that government mandated health care wont work as smoothly as democrats would like.

So what does this mean for the rest of the country? Hillary and Edward's plan are in sync with Governor Romney's own plan for health care ( the only difference is Romney does not want it for the country, or else his poll numbers shoot way down). If Republicans can tell Americans of the effects Massachusetts's plan is going to have on the state, and then explain the effect it would have on the country, universal health care may not happen.

The wonderful thing about federalism is it allows all fifty states to experiment with different things. We have the luxury of letting one state fail or succeed before we make our entire nation follow the same plan. Hopefully we can take advantage of federalism one more time, and save our health care system from disaster.

Now a word on Gun control

2007-12-08T14:51:00.001-05:00

Hey Guys, sorry I've been gone for so long, its been a crazy couple of weeks but i promise I am back and ready to keep you up to date with more conservative commentary here at The Young Reaganite.

I would like to comment on my most recent poll taken, which asked all of you which part of conservatism you thought was most important? A whooping 56% of you polled felt fiscal conservatism was most important, 25% feeling all three options were necessary, 12% feeling social conservatism is most important, and 6% believing a strong foreign policy is most important.

This personally makes me happy to know. As the next generation of conservatives, i believe it is most important that we cherish the Republcans Party's stances on lower taxes, less spending, responsibility and limited government ( even if the party right now feels its not important).

Sadly now, i must change the subject. Before i continue this post i want to grant my most sincere condolences for the family and friends of those who were gunned down brutally at a Omaha shopping mall.

Many now in the media and on the left are using this as another call for gun control. They claim this was the fault of the gun shop owner, and gun maker, and the state for allowing guns to be bought. In Micheal Moore's movie Bowling for Columbine, he cannot understand why our murder rate is so high, and focuses on what he feels are the root causes of gun violence (i.e. poverty, the NRA, republicans etc.) Many feel if that the crazy bastard in Omaha( i am not using his name because that is exactly what he wanted, to have name recognition), had someone to talk about his feelings and if he could not buy the gun (which i bet was not purchased anyway), such tragedies could be avoided.

But does gun control work? All signs (and statistics) point to no, but liberal hysteria and fear of guns makes them ignore these important facts, such as

`New Jersey adopted what sponsors described as "the most stringent gun law" in the nation in 1966; two years later, the murder rate was up 46% and the reported robbery rate had nearly doubled.
`Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws
'In England, since its ban on personal firearms, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled, despite a massive increase in the number of police personnel, as well as a rise in violent crime, both non-gun and gun related

The problem with gun control laws is that the people who would obey these anti gun laws, are not the ones who go around shooting up malls. Criminals, those people who commit crimes, will get there hands on a guns because they will not obey the law, as there name implies (sorry for reminding you what a criminal is, but I am hoping maybe, just maybe a liberal might stumble by and get the message) . I cant image the little sign on the door to the mall saying "no guns allowed" really made this kid think "gee, maybe I should turn around and not kill these people, the sign says no guns after all."

In Virginia, we have a policy where concealed carry is allowed, and we go the movies, to restaurants and many other places where the people walking around us have guns. I might seem scary, but there have been many instances where lives have been saved, because the evil conservative with his gun was able to stop a murder on the spot with out waiting for police. The founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they added the second amendment to the Constitution. Facts, not emotions, should govern our laws in regard to guns.

As Ronald Reagan put it, "I do not not believe in a government that protects us from ourselves." The best way to grant security for our family and ourselves, is for us as Americans to be the first line of defense against danger.

Sorry liberals, you just have no case this time.

From our family to all of yours

2007-11-22T10:04:00.000-05:00

We want to wish you all a safe and wonderful Thanksgiving day.

Now the Question Remains: Government or Private investing?

2007-11-21T00:56:00.001-05:00

This has been a huge hot button issues in very ( and i mean very) recent political history. I am over course referring to the debate to publicly fund embryonic stem cell research.
Today researchers in Japan and the U.S. have discovered a way make adult stem cells change back into embryonic stem cells. These embryonic stem cells are the cells that scientist can turn into another type of cell, which makes scientist think it is very possible to use these cells to repair damage cells.

This eliminates the root cause of debate in the first place. It is possible now to have embryonic
cells with out having to create and destroy a embryo ( who some including myself consider life). With this new break through, the debate should just go away should it not?

Not gonna happen. Many forget that the center of the debate is not over whether embryonic stem cell research is bad or not, but rather whether the Federal Government should help fund the research. Many on the left believe that without Government funding, this potential to save lives is going to disappear forever. Besides, we would not make a big deal of it if it wasn't so promising right?

But this is the problem. A lack of private investing into embryonic stem cell research proves that the research is not showing results that drug companies find enticing. When ever a drug company finds out about research that is promising, they invest to hopefully be able to market a cure for profit. Do you really think drug companies sit by and let a chance to capitalize on a idea pass by?

If a private company which has a incentive to invest in the research will not waste its money on it, why should are tax dollars be spent instead.

I am glad we have reached a point where stem cell research may no longer cross ethical boundaries, but now we need these researchers to turn out results. With the budget in the crisis it currently is in, we do not need to throw money at something that should be privately funded.

Besides, tossing dollars at something does not automatically make it better, as we can see in the countless government programs that fail to perform as they should.

The only problem will be convincing them he is conservative....

2007-11-19T00:11:00.000-05:00

...Because being a Republican certainly is not the issue.
I am referring to up coming special election between Delegate Rob Wittman (R-VA99) and Phil Forgit, a former Iraq War veteran and school teacher. The election is being held to replace Jo Ann Davis, who served Virginia's first congressional district until she passed away recently after a long struggle with cancer.

The only interesting part of this race will be how big of conservative turnout he manages to push away on December 11 (REMEMBER TO VOTE)
I know it seems brash to assume Wittman will win, but looking at the district it would be hard to argue against it. Davis won 19 out of the 23 localities in the district in 2006, 17 of these localities show her receiving over 60 percent of the vote. George W. Bush also won 60% of the popular vote in the 1st district, only 2 points down from the percentage Davis achieved. Forgit's home locality of Williamsburg, was one of the few where Davis did not win. At least Forgit has something to bank on.

The only foreseeable problem I think Wittman will face is the accusation of being too moderate ( I heard someone compare him to former State Senator JeanMarie Devolites Davis, which to many Northern Virginia Republicans is a criminal offense). He voted to pass the Driver Abuser fee's, a hot button issue in the 2007 Virginia state elections. He also supported the Regional Tax authority, a big no no to most conservatives.

Still, even if most of the electorate finds out about these things,( and I tell you besides abuser fee's, most of the electorate does not know a thing about state politics) I doubt Wittman will be big enough of bad candidate or a RINO to not garner a plurality.

Unless Delegate Wittman manages to win my soon to be created "Screw up of the week" award, we can expect this seat to stay red.
For now, the outlook for this race is Strong Republican Lean.

So we wanna fix, we know how to fix, but why cant we fix it?

2007-11-17T11:38:00.000-05:00

The Results are undeniable, competition makes schools perform better.

Micheal Bloomberg, with the help of private donations has established charter schools all over New York City. The Schools, in return for funding and better accountability, are granted greater (gasp!) flexibility in what programs they are required to teach. The result are outstanding, with the total number of third graders passing advanced or proficients in New York State reading exams being as high as 92%. This is compared with to 68% percent in the state and 62% in the NYC.

While this is a small step, charter schools are not enough. More competition is needed to improve a students chance for success. Many Americans understand this idea. In this poll done by the Economist, it is found Republicans support education vouchers by 60%. This should be a breeze to pass in a strongly Republican state right?

Wrong, an attempt in Arizona found a school voucher proposal failed when it got to the ballet. If so many support these vouchers, why can't we see them being used in many red states?

This one i am going to blame on the politicians. Republicans, we keep loosing elections because we do not challenge the other side on ideas. School vouchers are not being shown that they can work, but rather the issue is being ignored. The facts are their for anyone to see that competition and accountability work. If you articulate the message well, you can win. When done right, conservatism wins.

Or is this just me?

Welcome to The Young Reaganite!

2007-11-17T01:22:00.000-05:00

I thank all of you for reading my first blog. As an introduction I would like to say that as the name implies, this is a conservative blog. I will do my best to address current domestic and foreign affairs, federal and Virginia politics, and of course campaigns. As a lead into my first post, I am going to write something that has been on my mind for a long time.

Is Limited Government Conservatism dead?

In 1964 conservatism became the dominant ideology in the Republican Party with Barry Goldwater getting the nomination. It was not until Ronald Reagan won the nomination in 1980 that conservative leaders in government rallied behind Reagan to promote the conservatism many Republicans claim to be. Reagan’s vision for small government conservatism overwhelmed the Republican Party. This vision carried over in 1994 when Republicans in the House lead by Newt Gingrich started the Contract with America, causeing the Republicans to win the majority for the first time in 40 years.

Now fast forward to 2006, and Democrats have taken both chambers of Congress. What was left behind in the 12 years of Republican control? We now have the biggest government America has ever seen, and spending so out of control many believe Democrats have become the party of fiscal responsibility. We saw in 2006 many Republicans running to the center, some running as moderates, others bringing their brand of “big government conservatism” as a campaign platform. Many Republicans feel that does not matter any more, with the mentality of “anything but Democrats” running through voters mind, most do not care whether or not a conservative values limited government or not.

2008 has brought no sign of the Republican front runners really promoting a message of limited government among other things. But the question remains, will big government conservatism win elections, or will principle ever come back to the Republican Party with more heavy losses to Democrats? I can only hope the Republican Party can find its Ronald Reagan of the 21^st century.

Thanks for reading, and all comments are welcome