When dad gets home

Some conservatives are whining because a real Constitutionalist is in the race for GOP nominee: these naughty Republicans are acting like misbehaving children who feel the fear of when dad gets home

I acknowledge that there is a reluctance among many post-modern conservatives in America to quickly align themselves with a Ron Paul revolution to restore our Constitutional republic.
What I want to do is take a stab at explaining that reluctance.
These conservatives have been calling for restoring the Constitution's rule of law, wanting judges to interpret the Constitution according to original intent, and not to legislate from the bench.
These conservatives say they want lower spending and fiscal restraint. They say they want a strong military and that social causes like pro-life and true marriage are important to them.
Then an authoritative, Jeffersonian Constitutionalist runs for the Republican Party presidential nomination, and these conservatives are very slow, and somewhat reluctant to join his side.
I compare their difficulty with Ron Paul to children who, after crying for dad to come home, don't like to hear dad tell them that they really will have to clean their room, then they need a session with the family's board of education for their disobedience.
Yes, these conservatives need a spanking for their very liberal interpretations of the constitutional rule of law, their social engineering and manipulations that amount to unconstitutional excess.
There are among these conservatives those who screamed for a fight when the 9-11 attacks happened, and they supported the nation's responses regardless of the fact that they circumvented the rule of law that requires the president to seek a declaration of war through congress.
That rule of law requirement has been forgotten, and complaints about presidents abusing the concept of their war powers have been scoffed at, often by these very same hawkish conservatives.
And they argued for the Patriot Act heedless of the marshal law style despotism coded into it.
On the pro life front, these conservatives want the federal government to end abortions through the jack-booted thuggery of centralized, national enforcement.
Some get angry over the frustrating way that the pro-abortion cause has been manipulated through activist judges, and, as voiced by one of the other presidential nomination candidates, would like for a president to violate his limitations of authority and directly punish judges for their violations of judicial restraint.
You can almost hear the rancorous debate: THEY STARTED IT!!! DID NOT!!! I WANT MY POWER BACK!!! NO, GIVE IT TO ME!!!
Children, and they don't like to be corrected, now do they.
There is a problem in America because of liberal welfare programs. There is also a problem in America because of liberal warfare programs.
There are problems because of spending on social manipulation agendas, and also because of spending on corporate manipulation agendas. TARP to HUD, GATT to NAFTA, and a constellation of other Constitutionally lawless acts, need to be on the table for judgement.
But there are Republican Party conservatives who are ready to join the whiners when its their unconstitutional toys that are up for consequences.
These are the conservatives who need to grow up, and their emotional immaturity shows with their feeling of when dad gets home.

TEA Party Patriot organizers bungle straw poll survey

A straw poll of 23,000 conservative activists on Sunday went awry when organizers messed up the instructions for phone-in participants to follow for choosing who they want for GOP presidential nominee.
The polling of TEA Party Patriots listening to four of the seven lead contenders who participated with the phone-in forum were told that they would first vote for who they thought did the best in providing answers during the questioning period.
Instructions explained that then they would be given a chance to choose who of all the seven remaining top contenders they would support for Republican nominee, regardless of participation in the forum.
It was after the forum that the straw poll began, first with a choice of who listeners liked among the forum participants. Only the question was: who do you support from among these four to be the Republican nominee.
Then the instructions changed further, compounding the problem even more. When the second question came, asking whom of the other three candidates do you support, the rules also changed again: only the three, Ron Paul, John Huntsman and Richard Perry, were included for the choices of the second question.
To make matters worse, respondents were only just then informed that if they chose a candidate from among the first four, during the first question, then their response to the second question would not be counted.
This confusion led many to chose from the four forum participants first, then have no recourse to chose a favorite candidate if their favorite was among the second group.
The fact that the straw poll did not place all candidate choices together in a clear selection process with clear instructions that did not change negates the straw poll's credibility.
It is sad that the whole event was completely bungled. It was advertised as a means of gauging conservative TEA Party support for Republican presidential contenders without media manipulation.
Then with the confusion about the instructions, and how the instructions changed, the result was a bungled survey that can't be trusted.
The TEA Party Patriots website indicated the results of the bungled straw poll would be posted at 8 a.m., Monday - December 19.