Admittedly, I have high standards for those I vote for. I see no other way to live my life. But as the election comes closer to the end I felt it important to demonstrate that we are humans, and that no person is perfectly conservative or liberal as they are known today. I tend to believe that my way is conservative, but people will disagree with me on a few different issues that I ardently believe in. First, its important to note that there are three, maybe four, lines of thought in conservatism.

First, you have the Warhawk conservative. Examples of this are John McCain and Lindsey Graham. They are known for their very proactive and aggressive foreign policy. Believing that miltary and defense spending more or less, is good regardless of how efficiently it is done because if you spend enough, inefficiency does not matter.

Second, you have the social conservative. There are very few true examples of this in politics as they are often chased out of town with pitchforks, in spite of the fact that on many of their opinions the majority actually rests closer to them then with “mainstream thought.” Rick Santorum is said to be a pure social conservative, but I view him to be more personally socially conservative that views social issues largely as state issues outside of marriage and abortion.

Third, you have the fiscal conservative. Believe it or not, many fiscal conservatives are actually registered democrats. These are the types of democrats that voted for Ronald Reagan twice and did not regret it later. They believe intrinsically in a free market capitalistic system and would rather err on the side of freedom on all fiscal issues. They also do not like rampant spending and running up deficits.

The others I do not classify as conservative at all in thought process. You have so called “compassionate conservative” which is a code word for, hey on education and immigration I’m a flaming liberal. Then you have libertarians. Where there are nearly 100% fiscal conservatives, they are socially very liberal, and their foreign policy is far more liberal then most of the diehard democratic liberals.

For those things that I feel I hear the most backtalk about from conservatives that I see are these things.
First, I believe that Marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that it should not be “granted” by the state. We should eliminate the current marital system and change regulations on who can be considered family by some sort of variant on power of attorney/agency/living will. I do not like the fact that I must pay money to a governmental agency and be registered in a database in order to be “allowed” to marry. Its a completely farcical paradigm we have allowed for too long. This would have a side effect of “allowing anyone to marry” without my having to sanction it by my government saying that its ok and acceptable to do so in spite of my moral and health objections to the practice.
Secondly, I believe that Marijuana as a drug is not as dangerous as alcohol, and the only reason it is considered a gateway drug is because it introduces the user to the dealer that sells much more then weed, and of course makes more money on the harder stuff. Would I ever smoke it? Not on your life. Would I let my son experiment with it if I could help it? Absolutely not. But for something to be outright prohibited there is most definitely a cost benefit that is lacking with marijuana in particular. Other drugs I’m definitely not so libertarian on, as I’ve discussed before.
Third, I believe that if a state passes legislation to set up some sort of health care system a la obamacare I believe they have every right to do so under the constitution. It is not specifically prohibited, and health care is not under the purview of the federal government therefore it should be handled by the states. Would I live in a state that chose to do so if I could help it? Nope. Would I try to remove the politicians through whatever means available if they did? Yep. But I have more control over something done by my state then something done by the federal government both in being able to move, and easier to remove the politicians and repeal the laws.
Fourth, I am not in favor of one size fits all free trade. If they do not charge a tariff on us, then its fine to have free trade. Once you charge us, we’d charge you if I were in charge.
Fifth, I am not for the status quo harped on by those like John McCain on foreign policy. I am not for reducing the budget for defense, but I am for cutting for the purposes of freeing up spending on technology for our troops in making us more efficient with less lives lost.
Sixth, I believe that civilian military contractors are not just wrong constitutionally, I believe that they set up a perception that does hurt us in all of our affairs both inside and outside the country. While I have no problem with manufacturers making a profit on making the materials for war, I do have a problem with profiting off of war itself that these civilian contractors have been doing.
And last, at least that I can think of right now, is gerrymandering. It is defended by both sides, but largely by the most outspoken conservatives and most outspoken liberals in office. Why? Because they see it as a weapon to win elections which they see as the ends justifying the means. One of the reasons that this is such a problem is because our constitution meant for us to have representation of a certain amount of people per house member, and when that was halted in the early 20th century it led to enlarging areas and populations controlled by one person. This creates a scenario where Bobby Scott can somehow be a representative of richmond, newport news, hampton, portsmouth and norfolk all at the same time. Sometimes his district is two houses wide! Why is this a bad thing? Because it eliminates all hope for accountability. There are only so many people who even pay attention to politics at all. So say that number is 35% (which I view as an exaggeration) that means that the lowest percentage of votes possible for him is approx 56% based on his district. So he can do pretty much whatever he feels like doing and survive, because rare is it that anyone even runs against him. There are examples of conservatives that have these types of districts as well.

So when you go to cast your vote, know that I understand that if its not your guy you’ll be frustrated or even holding your nose to vote, but you must look at the totality of what they will do or try to do in office, and keep in mind that for fiscal and social issues congress is much more consequential then president given we get the lawless European socialist out of office. The only trump card I show in voting against Obama would be someone with worse foreign policy, as the commander in chief has direct control over the deployment of troops, and only veto and bully pulpit for the other things that we look at.