I agree UC.  We are Americans first, and are obligated to support our President.  This is not easy for a lot of us conservatives, but I think it highlights the differences between conservatuves and liberals.  If McCain would have won I can almost guarantee you that we wouldn't be getting this same response from liberals.  Hopefully, the real conservatives in Congress will have learned their lesson this time and get back to fighting for the family values on which their party is based.  Then, and only then will they be able to gain seats back in Congress and get our country back on track.

while I'm not American, I'm a Canuck, I understand what you said and I commend you for that.  its one of the fundamental differences ebtween left and right my friends.  I supported our Canadian Conservative Stephen Harper for re-election, and when he was re-elected the knives came out for him and the "ignorant" masses who elected him.  Not everyone on the left is so simple and puerile but we all know more than a few ourselves no doubt.  Your president does deserve your respect and reasoned co-operation.  If his movements seem wrong to you, then you will voice your opinion, but at least before the man gets actual power, support him, and give him the benefit of the doubt until his actions prove otherwise. 
for the record I never liked McCain, too middle of the road for me. 

Would you consider linking to my blog? We have similar interests.

The New Republican at http://newrepublican.wordpress.com/

Thanks.

UC.......
i'm sure you'll do a good job as loyal opposition!
i can tell you from experience it can be fun!

Good for you, UC.  In the end, we all want this country to be at its best.  Be vigilant with your scrutiny.  Government must return to being accountable to the people.  I want Barack Obama to lead this country out of these tough times.  We, as Americans, have to do our part as well.  I will be curious to see how your list of priorities will evolve over the next few years. Republicans and conservatives need to go back to the drawing board and figure out how you will address the middle class. 

You are to be applauded for your blog.  Good luck.  See you next election season.

Wow, it seems like we're having a love fest now!  I have to say that this feels a lot better than it did last week.  Conservative principles will never need to evolve simonesdad2008.  And I don't agree with your premise that our principles don't address the middle class.  If it means that we have to promise handouts to everyone as BHO did, I wouldn't support that candidate whether they were Dem., Rep., Ind., or otherwise.  And only time will tell whether BHO actually provides what he promised.  This election was all about "change", anti-Bush, anti-Republican, anti-christian, and any other "anti" that you can think of.  Unfortunately, that is how degraded our society has become.  Conservatives just need to stand up and be conservatives again.  Let's see what happens in two years.

With you all the way on this one. New Republican, you are added to my links too.

http://conversativexpress.blogspot.com/

please link my blog if you feel it appropriate. 

UC - I love your opinion! You tell 'em If more of us stick together, then we will make it through. We should smartly support the President-elect, which is why I co-wrote an Obama survival book. You can check it out at http://www.HowtoSurviveObama.com
 

Well, it has happened.  And I am not surprised.  I am a conservative and believe in fundamental Republican principles...always have.  I believe in true capitalism, the right to bear arms, decreased government involvement, and the fundamental morals that keep our country strong.  I have always thought of liberals as spineless, blind, and willing to believe anything that is said to them, as long as there was a Democrat saying it. But in the last few weeks of the campaign I started asking myself, "Am I a blind conservative?"  I think McCain is an honorable man and I feel comfortable with him as president, but as much as Palin is a true American, she is simply not ready to lead this country.  I think all of us know that deep down, even if we choose not to admit it.  And if Obama was running with someone that I really felt was NOT prepared for this job, I would have been questioning his judgement from the get go.  So I asked myself, "am I a blind Republican that can't hold my own party to the standards that I judge others?"  I am someone who loves the freedoms so many have fought for, and it pains me to say this, but I did not vote.  While I could not vote for Obama, I would be a hypocrite if I voted for someone who was simply not ready to run this country.

I didn't like Clinton but respected the Presidency.  If obama wasn't going to ruin this country with his policies, i would do the same as i did for Clinton.  President Bush has been so gracious and has shown his class by welcoming obama.  Clinton didn't have that class. 

KevinP,

WHile I understand your reasoning, it is VERY unfortunate that you chose not to vote.  There is no such thing as a perfect politician.  Sometimes we have to vote for the best candidate, even though they may not be who we would like to have.  I wasn't a big McCain backer myself.  I voted for Romney.  BUT one thing I did realize was that the McCain-Palin ticket believed in "most" of our conservative principles, whereas Obama-Biden believe the total opposite.  You really need to use your head as much as you do your heart when it comes to politics kevin.  I hope that there weren't enough conservatives like yourself who decided not to vote to actually tip the election to Obama.  That would be an abolute shame.  And as far as Palin goes, she has had more executive experience than ANY of the other three candidates!  She may not be as "politically polished" as the other three, but that was exactly what drew her to us.  She (and folks like her) are the future of the conservative movement Kevin.  She will be more mature and knowledegable in four years.  I hope we can count on your vote then.

While I do consider myself a Republican, I simply cannot vote strictly down party lines, without a thought to who I am voting for.  Yes, the conservative principles do ring a bell with me.  But that alone is not enough to get me to vote for someone who I think could be a possible detriment to this country (Palin).  I voted strictly down party lines in the last two elections (despite what my gut told me about Bush's inability to lead, especially in the second election), and I feel that I am now paying for that mistake.  While I do not always agree with Obama's policies, I do not think he is a great danger to our country.  It is unfortunate, but had McCain demonstrated better forethought in choosing a running mate, he would have had my vote.

I am a conservative republican who completely opposes Obama's liberal and socialist views, but I will support him as the elected President of the United States.
At the same time, I do believe Obama's policies are going to worsen the recession. This will lead to Republican control of the Senate in 2010. Of course, these Republicans need to be new, conservative faces with a new plan for America; like a "Contract for America" that the GOP brought in the 90's. After some success, the American people will vote a Republican in as president (Bobby Jindal/Mitt Romney 2012!!). Finally, the story will end with conservative republican control of the House, Senate, and White House. Then, 76 year old John McCain will be named Secretary of Defence.  

Kevin,

Your logic and response makes me wonder if you're just pulling my leg, and that you're really an Obama supporter in disguise.  I never said you should vote strictly down party lines, but if you couldn't see a BIG difference between what was being offered by each candidate, I wonder what would have changed your mind.  Simply because you didn't like Palin is a really lame excuse.  And if you really believe that Obama (and his beliefs) aren't a real threat to our country, I'm not sure what you were doing while he was being vetted day after day leading up to the election.  He has so many whackjob relationships and socialist ideas that, if implemented, will change the course of our nation for generations to come.  Please tell me you're really an Obama supporter.  That would be easier to understand.

I like your idea but I don't think I completely agree with it. If I support him then I am supporting the socialist ideas that America has run away from. This is a president who is pro everything that I am not and I cannot support someone like that as a concervative republican

Thanks.

If this country turns into what Obama wants it to become, I WILL be tempted to move to another country.  What's the point of being an American if all our hard-earned liberties are trashed and we just end up becoming the (relatively) wealthy host nation for all impoverished socialist parasite nations.

Hint: there is no point.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/

Kevin, listen to your instinct, you voted for not once but twice, your an idiot .

stupid fucking republicans

KevinP: That's funny. I voted for McCain. Had he not chosen Sarah Palin, I almost certainly would have voted for Obama. I was excited about voting for Bush in 2004. Ultimately disappointed but . . . yeah, I think KevinP might be trolling. But, you know, it takes all kinds.

That being said, Obama is our president and deserves some respect. If conservatives make an effort, they will find a lot to love in an Obama presidency. He may not quite "govern from the center", but the Messianic regard with which he is held on the left is sure to be a big disappointment. Some of his initiatives aren't going to happen. He certainly isn't going to wave a magic wand and make the world a safe and perfect place--which is going to be a disappointment to some voters. Frankly, 

That being said, it's interesting that so many liberals are as ungracious and hateful in victory as they are in defeat. I've actually found some things to like in the Obama agenda, before they Obama Ministry of Truth purged the Change.gov site. 

He is the president. I'm gonna support the guy. Will liberals support the next Republican or conservative that wins? Of course not. But that's not the point. 

BTW, Kudos UrbCon. I don't know too many conservatives who would hold your support for our President against you. Conservatives love America--all the time. Even when it elects liberals! And we respect the office of the President and the Will of the People. Of course you're going to support Obama? What else would you do?

And we better get used to supporting Obama. I'm pretty sure he's guaranteed to win in 2012, so we're going to get eight long years of him. But, hey, fair is fair. The liberals had to endure eight years of Bush after we did our eight years of Clinton. So . . . we're just taking turns.

I'm not a marine, and I've never served in the military, but I've got the greatest respect for those who have. So, will all due humility and respect, semper fi, UrbanCon. God bless you for your service to our country. 

And, as always, God bless the president of the United States.

"It is unfortunate, but had McCain demonstrated better forethought in choosing a running mate, he would have had my vote."
-KevinP (13)
.......the christian wing of the republican party has got to be pandered to, as evidenced by the selection of Sarah P.
The voters of America rejected your party because a woman of such narrow intellect was chosen to step in for an aging politician.

Amber – your inability to post coherent and well-thought-out comments has gotten you banned from participating here. I am sorry you didn’t finish high school but it’s never too late to go back.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

When you are a guest,  in someone else's home,  show R-E-S-P-E-C-T

UC

I will always stand by to defend and support our country.

I will be praying for our President elect that "God"  gives him wisdom, knowledge and understanding, so that "God" will be glorified.

obama was elected a week ago and is already upholding his promises to cut spending?  yesterday, it was announced he would squash the restriction on funding abortions overseas.  wow!  i didn't know we had the money for that?  so much for keeping our money in America.  of course, Biden said all he needed to say even for idiots when he said obama's plan called for doubling foreign aid but they would consider holding back for now due to the economy.  so much for that, huh.  i guess obama's true colors are showing once again!  the way it is looking we will see our country bankrupt before it is over with.  but hey, i guess if people get checks and don't have to pay taxes, nothing else matters!  so tell me again why businesses and people's taxes should be raised?  liberals enjoy your wonderful choice!

Titus:
"it was announced he would squash the restriction on funding abortions overseas.  wow!  i didn't know we had the money for that? "
I s'pose he could use the funds that Bush used for Abstinence only sex ed., huh? 

Happy Vets Day to UC, David Walters, and ALL other veterans.  I am a veteran, and I know how much it means for us to be appreciated. 

My deepest gratitude to all of you!

Thank you for your service and sacrifice.

David--if everyone were responsible we would not have to worry about abortion would we?  President Bush did the right thing in trying to prevent that problem in the first place whether it worked or not.  a lot of the problem is with irresponsible parenting and that is the root cause of most of society's issues now.  (notice i said a lot and not all.)  however, you are missing the point here.  if obama is the person you guys elected, he would follow through with cutting back on spending as he promised.  well, it is obvious that is not his intention.  why should taxes be raised because of this kind of spending?  so from now on, liberals really don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to backing the tax increases unless you guys are doing it for some kind of revenge against people who have money or....... some other dumb reason.  obama cannot justify any tax increases when he has promised to lower spending when irresponsible decisions like these are made. 

UC- well said.  I wish that I had been so magnanimous in 2004.  In stead, I went into a 12 step mourning process.  

Let me say again that we are seriously more alike than not- and it's the similarities that will lead us out of this mess.  I honestly do not agree with much of the Republican platform and I think I've made that clear, but there are definitely points of agreement.  For example- I, too, believe that anyone can make it in this country.  However, I see this concept as a trope because, as a sociologist, I focus on the structural mechanisms that afford people of differing social locations (race, class, gender, etc...) a different set of obstacles and head starts.  I think that a balanced, two party government, advances a set of checks and balances on that structure.  We go back and forth- like a pendulum.  And now it's time to swing the other way for a time.  
I'm glad you will be a conservative watch dog- I may just be there along with you.  Something tells me that Obama will be far more centered than I will be able to appreciate.  :)

Its interesting that someone who is a conservative such as myself, but who could not vote for John McCain due to his poor choice for a vice president is accused of being an Obama supporter.  Its as simple as this:  I voted for Bush twice.  He is the biggest mistake this country has made in the past century, and as a result, has made the Republican party falter tremendously.  Bush and his cabinet has made us a laughing stock among the world, and now we are trying to get ourselves out of the biggest recession since the great depression.  So this year I decided to not vote blindly.  While I like McCain and think he is a good leader, I could not get myself to vote for Sarah Palin.  She is simply not ready to be vice president, and we all know that.  She was not ready to speak to foreign leaders and represent this country in such a high office.  She was not ready to lead our troops in the event that she would have had to.  If McCain would have won, I would have been on eggshells for 4 years that something would happen to McCain and she would take over.  Now, I don't agree with Obama on everything, but the man is intelligent and charismatic...two assets that remind me of Ronald Reagan.  He is our president now, and I am not surprised.  I believe many other conservatives did not vote for the simple fact that we were nervous of a Palin presidency.  Let us hope that the Republican party gets it together for 2012.

If giving good speeches, making false promises and wasting our taxpayer dollars more than Bush did qualifies obama to be president, this country has a big problem.  however, if reaching across party lines is what obama intends to do, his chief of staff choice is the wrong pick.  he is a thug from chicago who wasted the taxpayers money.  also, obama is getting off on a good start with wasting our money by lifting the ban on taxpayers footing the bill for people overseas to have abortions.  yep, that is what i call a good use of our money already.  i didn't realize we had enough money to spread around the world right now!  hmmm!  now why should taxes be raised while money goes overseas for..........................?  so i don't think "true" republicans have a lot in common with democrats.   

....and he hasn't even gotten into office yet!  what a long four years this is going to be.  but hey, President Bush is showing class by welcoming obama in for a smooth transition.  Obviously, Bush believes in the do unto others rule, which is the opposite treatment he received from your boy clinton. 

KevinP,

Sorry, but I don't buy your excuses for not voting.  You say that you liked McCain, but wouldn't vote for him because you were afraid of what "might" happen to him.  With that kind of hope and optimism, I find it very hard to believe that you're a true conservative.  We weren't voting for VP my friend.  You bought right into the liberal lies regarding Gov. Palin.  The fact that she was a breath of fresh air, and would have turned Washington upside down doesn't seem to mean as much to you as it does to the rest of us conservatives.  As far as Bush goes, I voted for him twice, and worked on his re-election campaign team in '04.  He has disappointed me on spending and immigration, but he and his poilicies have kept us safe since 911.  That is BIG deal to us!!  I hope and pray that BHO lied to all of us about what he plans on doing regarding the war on terror and the economy.  The hard left is going to push him as far as they can, he owes them.  And if he does what they want, we're looking for a lot of trouble the next fours years.  Hopefully, he will come to his senses and not pursue the things that he lied about to get elected.  I would be happy if he just went on Hawaii vacations every other month for the next four years.  So Kevin, stop the excuses about Palin and admit you're not a true conservative.  Otherwise, your conscience would not have allowed you to sit out the election and usher in the messiah. 

DS-- you are correct!  i would never vote against a party that has has my belief systems.  even if they do not live up to everyone of my expections, it is better than going to the liberal view.  so obama has gotten himself into a pickle.  if he fulfills his promises to the idiots who voted for him, he will destroy our country.  if he doesn't fulfill his promises, he is a liar and can't be trusted.  hmmmm!  sending money overseas for abortions and hiring a thug who doesn't want to work across the isle is a really bad start no matter how it is sliced.  

Titus (33)
<<if everyone were responsible we would not have to worry about abortion would we? >>
-Are you speaking of abstinence only as a method of birth control method as being responsible?  It may be "responsible", but not practical...
<<why should taxes be raised because of this kind of
spending? >> .................................No one (other than you)is making this claim.  If we really want to cut spending, cut some big ticket items such as military assistance programs to corrupt governments(giving expensive weapons away) ,though weapons manufacturers wouldn't like to see that gravy train stopped.
harrysmom.....looking for tickets to the inauguration! 

KevinP
Well written piece. I felt the same way in 1980.  I couldn't agree with Reagan on many issues, he did provide  leadership......

2006 Statistics for only, Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and Syphilis
This does not include the other prevelant STDs!
 
Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain STDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psychological consequences of STDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs associated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars.2
This document summarizes 2006 national data on trends in three notifiable STDs — chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis — that are published in CDC’s report, Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2006. These data, which are useful for examining overall trends and trends among populations at risk, represent only a small proportion of the true national burden of STDs. Many cases of notifiable STDs go undiagnosed, and some highly prevalent viral infections, such as human papillomavirus and genital herpes, are not reported at all.

Then there is HIV/Aids 2003

Prevalence is the number of people living with HIV/AIDS in a given year.
At the end of 2003, an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 persons in the United States were living with HIV/AIDS, with 24%-27% undiagnosed and unaware of their HIV infection.1
Incidence is the number of new HIV infections that occur during a given year. In 2008, CDC estimated that approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 2006 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men. African American men and women were also strongly affected and were estimated to have an incidence rate than was 7 times greater than the incidence rate among whites. Visit the HIV incidence page for more details.
The cumulative estimated number of cases of AIDS through 2006 in the United States and dependent areas was 1,014,797. Of these, 982,498 were in the 50 states and the District of Columbia and 31,217 were in the dependent areas.  In the 50 states and the District of Columbia, adult and adolescent AIDS cases totaled 973,352 with 783,786 cases in males and 189,566 cases in females, and 9,144 cases estimated in children under age 13 years.
These numbers do not represent reported case counts. Rather, these numbers are point estimates, which result from adjustments of reported case counts. The reported case counts have been adjusted for reporting delays and for redistribution of cases in persons initially reported without an identified risk factor, but not for incomplete reporting.
 

The estimated total number of people living in the US with a viral STD/STI is over 65 million. [2] Every year, there are at least 19 million new cases of STDs/STIs, some of which are curable. [2,3]

More than $8 billion is spent each year to diagnose and treat STDs/STIs and their complications. This figure does not include HIV. [4]

In a national survey of US physicians, fewer than one-third routinely screened patients for STDs/STIs. [5]

Less than half of adults ages 18 to 44 have ever been tested for an STD/STI other than HIV/AIDS.

Each year, one in four teens contracts an STD/STI. [6]

One in two sexually active persons will contact an STD/STI by age 25. [7]

Then there is also
HPV infection.

Genital human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI)
Approximately 20 million Americans are currently infected with HPV, and another 6.2 million people become newly infected each year. At least 50% of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives.
Genital warts. About 1% of sexually active adults in the U.S. have genital warts at any one time.
Cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2008, 11,070 women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the U.S.
Other HPV-related cancers are much less common than cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2008, there will be:

3,460 women diagnosed with vulvar cancer;
2,210 women diagnosed with vaginal and other female genital cancers;
1,250 men diagnosed with penile and other male genital cancers; and
3,050 women and 2,020 men diagnosed with anal cancer.

Certain populations may be at higher risk for HPV-related cancers, such as gay and bisexual men, and individuals with weak immune systems (including those who have HIV/AIDS).

Abortion as Birth Control
Using abortion as birth control means that abortion is being used as a back-up method to ineffective or improperly used contraception, or no contraception is being used at all. Of women having abortions,

46% did not use contraception during the month they became pregnant
8% never used a method of birth control
47% have had at least one previous abortion

Although there are situations in which abortion is in response to health concerns of the mother or fetus, or in response to pregnancy arising from abuse, the majority of abortions are obtained for social and financial reasons. The primary reasons given for choosing abortion are given below.

75% say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities
about 75% say they cannot afford a child
50% do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner

Using abortion as birth control is not healthy physically or psychologically, and is not a mature or responsible approach to sex. Women obtaining abortions are at higher risk for reproductive tract infections, including HIV and PID. If you are using abortion as birth control, you are encouraged to rethink your sexual decisions. You might wait on sex until you find a relationship where you could continue a pregnancy should one occur.

There are medical risks associated with surgical abortion which increase with subsequent terminations and gestational age of the fetus. As the physician cannot see what he is doing during the abortion procedure complications may include cervical laceration, perforation of the uterus, and hemorrhaging which can be life-threatening. Medical abortion, performed using mifepristone (formerly RU486) or similar drugs can also result in prolonged hemorrhaging and other long term effects which are not yet known.
Common abortion-related problems include pain, infection, emotional distress, and problems in future pregnancies are possible — including miscarriage and prematurity leading to infant disability. Because of scarring to the uterus which can result from surgical abortion, a woman who has had an abortion is up to five times more likely to have an ectopic pregnancy if she conceives again. Ectopic pregnancy requires surgery to correct and can be fatal if not caught in time. There is also evidence that a first trimester abortion may increase the risk of breast cancer (box below), especially among women who have not had children.
 

So what you are saying 2BlueStarMom......we need more information about safe sex, and contraception huh?

Evidently!

They all go hand in hand.  Safe sex, STD and abortions.

Again, (you always seem to do that!)
missing the point my friend......STD's go with ignorance.  That's is why comprehensive sex ed is essential(something our government is eschewing in favor of "abstinence only education")!
We have had Bush's policy of "abstinence only", and yet we have an increase in STD's......if his policy you support was truly effective, it stands to reason the rates would diminish.
This idea (abstinance only) isn't really "responsible", is it?

Abstinence is possible.  I have seen it practiced successfully by my daughter and many of her friends, both boys and girls.  Of course it does take a set of moral values that believe it is better towait until you're married to have sex.  And that is where the problem is......liberals don't believe in that.  We could discuss all of the benefits of waiting until marriage, but it wouldn't matter to liberals.  They want to do what they want, when they want, and nobody is going to tell them any differently.  Then they just clean up the mess later.  That's what I call "smart".  You are right on 2BlueStar.  Of course, all of us who love God already knew that.  Keep it up sister!  The truth will set them free...

Ok. 

Where do you draw the line on where you want the Govt. to get involved?

You see, therein lies the problem.

We don't want them involved in private citizens lives, right?

It seems to me (and I am no rocket scientist, that is obvious to everyone who reads my post), that everyone wants Govt to play God and dictate laws that the different groups find acceptable and meets with their life styles.

There is such a great diversity in this country, you can't please everyone.

So, who makes the determination, who plays God then? 

I don't want them involved nor to play God.

I want them to stay out of our lives.

However, we have to have laws and guidelines.

Which is why the basic 10 commandments covers every aspect of our lives.

Law.

But, here we go again.  It doesn't stop.

You don't want politician's with Judea Christian principals running the Govt.

We don't want politician's without Judea Christian principals running the Govt.

So, what do you do?

None will ever be happy with either party or their elected politician's.

So how do we all live in harmony?

Do you realize that if we got rid of all laws, we would destroy each other?

We are practically doing that now.

So, without going into all the things everyone is debating on this site.

Someone, tell us, simply put, how do we do it?

I believe that if it were to ever happen, it could only be on a super natural level.

No one person, government, entity, can fix this.

The only thing many of us have to hold onto is, hope.

That sustains most of us. That give us strength in a crazy, mixed up world, to go on.  To make it through, life, death and everything in between.

Here is how I see it, in my little feeble mind;

Liberals probably hope that we, conservatives and Christian's,  will go away, forever.  We will, don't worry! LOL

But do you realize that if it weren't for us and our prayers, God would have destroyed the world a long time ago?

Go read about Sodom and Gomorrah. 

God will not strive with man forever. 

I don't know how he can stand this. 

I can barely stand it and I've only been here for.....well, that's not important, but less than 55 years!

2BlueStarMom writes:
<<You don't want politician's with Judea Christian principals running the Govt.
We don't want politician's without Judea Christian principals running the Govt.>>

-You're getting close, but not quite right....
Judeo-Christian principals are fine.....in fact they are a part of our collective society as a nation.  This i cannot deny.
What i see as the main difference is the exclusivity of your views.....in other words, there is a narrow definition of those Judeo-Christian principals which leads me to believe the "common-sense" values you desire in a politician are actually idealistic and not at all common sense or based on realism.
We have spoke on the issue of abortion as murder......and i retorted rationally that foreign policy that kills Pakistani kids can also be seen as murder.
I wouldn't think that we can agree on EVERYTHING.....it wouldn't be realistic or pragmatic.  To think that ONLY your views or principals are correct is in fact idealistic, and therein the problem lies.  To resolve this dilemma will take a reexamination of your values to the extent of those values being purely exclusive...

Dave 50

"I wouldn't think that we can agree on EVERYTHING.....it wouldn't be realistic or pragmatic.  To think that ONLY your views or principals are correct is in fact idealistic, and therein the problem lies.  To resolve this dilemma will take a reexamination of your values to the extent of those values being purely exclusive..."

My exact point.  Right back at you! LOL

I am on standby.  My son is taking her to the hospital.... I think we are going to have a baby today!

Whoopeee!!  I am so excited!

The gist of this thread seems sound.  I agree with the notion that we should respect the office of the Presidency.  We can certainly disagree with the President at the same time.  I've said this in other blogs recently; one of the big differences (there are several, but ...) between liberals and conservatives is in how we greet defeat.  After an election loss, liberals whine and toss accusations of fraud and voter suppression, etc.  Then they refuse to acknowledge the winner in his or her official capacity (how many liberals refused to recognize George Bush as the President after 2000 or 2004?).  Conservatives, on the other hand, will lick their wounds for a day or two, then set about figuring out what went right vs. what went wrong.  They'll figure out how to do better next time.  Conservatives tend to be positive about the future, while most of the liberals tend to be doom-and-gloomers.  I for one say, let Obama have a chance.  I think (hope) he knows he won this 52-48% so he's starting out with a 48% disapproval rate from day one.  If he does ok, fine.  If he screws up, he gets hammered.  Simple.  That's true of any president.  Until then, he's actually done nothing good or bad.
This is a fun blog.  Glad I found it.

Welcome Beaker!

2Blue,
How exciting!  I know how you feel.  Enjoy this blessed event.

Beaker,
Welcome to the blog.  You are right on with your comments.  One more I might add tho.  Liberals spent ALL eight years trying to crucify and undermine EVERYTHING that Pre. Bush tried to accomplish for our country.  He tried to fix social security, medicare, education, and various other problems only to have to liberals fight him every step of the way.  Republicans didn't say no to everything that Clinton proposed.  As a matter of fact, I believe that it was actually the Republican controlled Congress which helped him accomplish most of what was done.  Balancing the budget would not have happened if the Republican Congress hadn't pushed for it.  Their "contract with America" was a huge success, and Bill Clinton reaped a lot of the reward from it.  Republicans are willing to work together for the good of the country.  Democrats have done NOTHING to support Pres. Bush.  That is a BIG difference in how we see our country.  COUNTRY FIRST was actually a slogan for soemone wasn't it?   ;-}

51
2BlueStarMom:
The part of 50 that you missed.....
<<What i see as the main difference is the exclusivity of your views.....in other words, there is a narrow definition of those Judeo-Christian principals which leads me to believe the "common-sense" values you desire in a politician are actually idealistic and not at all common sense or based on realism.>>
The Exclusivity of YOUR views is what leads to a lack of realism on you part.  A stance on abortion that differs from yours brands that person a murderer. 
I don't like the idea of abortion for birth control.....few people do.  Yet we need to teach safe and effective methods of contraception which would stop this practice, and allow the choice of an abortion to remain a decision of a woman and her doctor for a mother's safety, and not the governments. The numbers you quoted on the rise of STD's and unwanted pregnancies seems to verify that the policy that promotes "abstinence only" methods of birth control and sex ed. do NOT work.  To insist on a policy that is proven not to work, shows the idealism and lack of common sense of your views.

David,
I never heard 2BlueStarMom brand anyone a murderer per se, but isn't that really where we differ?  They are taking a human life.  Is that not murder?  Of course it is.  The "only" debate in regards to abortion is the argument about the time at which an embryo becomes a living human being.  If liberals were honest, they would concede that point since there is overwhelming evidence that life begins at conception.  If that is not thrue, then when does it begin?  And what triggers it to begin?  If scientists "really" believed that, they would be able to tell us.  The fatc is, it DOES begin at conception, and christians have always known that because the God who created us told us!  As far as sex ed., our schools, among other organizations have been teaching sex ed. for many years now.  And our governement has been funding it with big dollars as well.  You make it sound like it is something we haven't tried.  And yet, the numbers quoted by 2BlueStarMom prove that it doesn't work.  We know why don't we?  It's not that kids don't know what causes pregnance or STDs.  They don't need education!  They just don't want to be hassled with using any of the methods available to them.  They're a hassle.  Haven't you ever been in the position of making love with a beautiful woman, knowing it was time to put that condom on, only to say "heck with it, this feels too good...and I'm not going to stop what we're doing to slap that thing on."  "We'll be ok just this once."  Be honest David.  I know I have done that in the past.  Well, that's why sex ed. isn't working, and n