Post by Matter on Oct 16, 2004 16:59:35 GMT -5
www.rejectliberalism.com/articles/understandingliberalismgraydog8-2-04.htm
OK, gang, here's the routine:
Cut, paste, and email. Repeat vigorously. Thanks!!! ;D
John Edwards’ theme “Two Americas” is a cynical attempt to fractionalize the homogeny of America’s citizenry. His message clearly intends to establish barriers between rich and poor, drive wedges between black and white, create fear among old and young, foster mistrust between labor and management. He appeals to people who look to government to provide the solutions to all of their problems. People, that not only see government as a solution, but expect these solutions as their right.
I specifically mention Senator Edwards because he more eloquently espouses the shared beliefs and platform of the Democratic Party than does the senator from Massachusetts. But, make no mistake: This is the basis and central theme of the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
This tactic of divide and conquer is strategically sound. Who among us, has not opined at one time or another, that the government should not step up to solve a problem that is of immediate or personal concern? Who among us has not been delighted to be the recipient of some form of government largesse? Who among us has not been susceptible to the allure of ‘something for nothing’? It is this aspect of our human nature that has passively, if not actively, allowed liberalism to flourish and bloom into socialism.
We are no longer a nation of rugged individualists. We have bartered our liberties for convenience and ceded our freedoms for false security and promises. We don’t take the time, nor do we have the common sense to see the imminent threat that liberal/socialism presents to our economy and our nation. We all know that ‘something for nothing’ doesn’t exist; yet we continue to accept this as a viable theme from the Democratic ticket.
John Kerry and John Edwards understand that their liberal proposals have a price. The rest of us need to understand that if they are elected, that price will spiral upward out of sight. The electorate they appeal to doesn’t know or doesn’t care! It’s so much easier in life to be the beneficiary and not the provider. It has become part of our national ethic to believe that coercive confiscation of one man’s wealth to provide comfort and benefit to others is not only justifiable and legal, but moral as well.
Liberals offer solutions for all of our societal maladies. They want to provide vast social safety nets, endow the arts, fund abortion clinics, raise the minimum wage, redistribute local and state taxes through an out of touch Department of Education, pay farmers to not grow certain crops and subsidize the growth of others, all while increasing the size of federal bureaucracies and patronage employment opportunities for their supporters. To support this they will raise taxes on corporations and middle/upper income individuals, while slashing defense spending once again.
All of this spells disaster for our economy and the general welfare and defense of our nation!
Are there truly needy people in America? Is there a moral imperative that should be placed upon our society to provide a social safety net for the infirm, the disabled, or those too young or old to provide for themselves? The obvious answer to these questions is yes! Should this be the primary concern of the federal government? The answer is just as obviously The federal government has proven itself to be disastrously inefficient in the administration of federal entitlement programs, which are often ridden with fraud and abuse. Often very little of budgeted tax dollars actually are spent providing intended services to legitimate recipients.
Churches and community centers provide a much more efficient model for delivery of goods and services for those in need. It has also been shown that charitable funding for these organizations dramatically increases as the tax burden on the middle and upper brackets decreases. If the federal government should play any role, it should do so by expanding tax breaks for charitable giving.
Is there a need for the rest of the afore mentioned bureaucracies and federal programs? The answers range from probably to definitely not! Are there problems that require solutions and needs that should be met? Yes! But again, not at the federal government level!
The level of taxation, funding and control throughout all levels of government looks like an upside down pyramid. All of the funding starts at the top (federal) and runs down to the bottom (cities and local schools). A dollar that starts at the top of this system results is a few pennies by the time it reaches the bottom. This is the hallmark of liberal thinking. Strong centralized control at the top. The very few making all of the important decisions for the many of us at the bottom. This method of government did not work for the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries; it has shown itself to be an abysmal failure in Cuba and will ultimately come to an end in China and North Korea. Why is this now an economic model Western Europeans, Canadians and the liberals of this country wish to pursue in the face of such historic failures?
It’s time to turn this pyramid right side up. We need to wrest control of our money, our freedom and our lives from the liberals in Washington. We need to keep the important decisions back at the state, county and local governments. This is where one person’s vote can always make a difference. This is where activism can show direct and immediate results. This is where a dollar taxed can come closest to being a whole dollar available for it’s intended purpose!
That we should pay taxes to the federal government is also necessary. To, “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence (defense), promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ”is not only right, it is ‘constitutional’! But It also should be incumbent upon us as states, cities, towns, villages, churches, communities, neighborhoods and individuals, yes ‘we the people’, to seek and effect the solutions to our own problems.
This is a ‘Tale of Two Americas’. It is a country that is being assaulted by ideology intent on taking us down a flawed and perilous path versus one that seeks a return to the country our fathers founded and fought to preserve. This November we will be casting votes not only for a president, but for an affirmation that we choose remain the ‘United States’ or to continue on the path toward becoming another ‘People’s State’
I specifically mention Senator Edwards because he more eloquently espouses the shared beliefs and platform of the Democratic Party than does the senator from Massachusetts. But, make no mistake: This is the basis and central theme of the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
This tactic of divide and conquer is strategically sound. Who among us, has not opined at one time or another, that the government should not step up to solve a problem that is of immediate or personal concern? Who among us has not been delighted to be the recipient of some form of government largesse? Who among us has not been susceptible to the allure of ‘something for nothing’? It is this aspect of our human nature that has passively, if not actively, allowed liberalism to flourish and bloom into socialism.
We are no longer a nation of rugged individualists. We have bartered our liberties for convenience and ceded our freedoms for false security and promises. We don’t take the time, nor do we have the common sense to see the imminent threat that liberal/socialism presents to our economy and our nation. We all know that ‘something for nothing’ doesn’t exist; yet we continue to accept this as a viable theme from the Democratic ticket.
John Kerry and John Edwards understand that their liberal proposals have a price. The rest of us need to understand that if they are elected, that price will spiral upward out of sight. The electorate they appeal to doesn’t know or doesn’t care! It’s so much easier in life to be the beneficiary and not the provider. It has become part of our national ethic to believe that coercive confiscation of one man’s wealth to provide comfort and benefit to others is not only justifiable and legal, but moral as well.
Liberals offer solutions for all of our societal maladies. They want to provide vast social safety nets, endow the arts, fund abortion clinics, raise the minimum wage, redistribute local and state taxes through an out of touch Department of Education, pay farmers to not grow certain crops and subsidize the growth of others, all while increasing the size of federal bureaucracies and patronage employment opportunities for their supporters. To support this they will raise taxes on corporations and middle/upper income individuals, while slashing defense spending once again.
All of this spells disaster for our economy and the general welfare and defense of our nation!
Are there truly needy people in America? Is there a moral imperative that should be placed upon our society to provide a social safety net for the infirm, the disabled, or those too young or old to provide for themselves? The obvious answer to these questions is yes! Should this be the primary concern of the federal government? The answer is just as obviously The federal government has proven itself to be disastrously inefficient in the administration of federal entitlement programs, which are often ridden with fraud and abuse. Often very little of budgeted tax dollars actually are spent providing intended services to legitimate recipients.
Churches and community centers provide a much more efficient model for delivery of goods and services for those in need. It has also been shown that charitable funding for these organizations dramatically increases as the tax burden on the middle and upper brackets decreases. If the federal government should play any role, it should do so by expanding tax breaks for charitable giving.
Is there a need for the rest of the afore mentioned bureaucracies and federal programs? The answers range from probably to definitely not! Are there problems that require solutions and needs that should be met? Yes! But again, not at the federal government level!
The level of taxation, funding and control throughout all levels of government looks like an upside down pyramid. All of the funding starts at the top (federal) and runs down to the bottom (cities and local schools). A dollar that starts at the top of this system results is a few pennies by the time it reaches the bottom. This is the hallmark of liberal thinking. Strong centralized control at the top. The very few making all of the important decisions for the many of us at the bottom. This method of government did not work for the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries; it has shown itself to be an abysmal failure in Cuba and will ultimately come to an end in China and North Korea. Why is this now an economic model Western Europeans, Canadians and the liberals of this country wish to pursue in the face of such historic failures?
It’s time to turn this pyramid right side up. We need to wrest control of our money, our freedom and our lives from the liberals in Washington. We need to keep the important decisions back at the state, county and local governments. This is where one person’s vote can always make a difference. This is where activism can show direct and immediate results. This is where a dollar taxed can come closest to being a whole dollar available for it’s intended purpose!
That we should pay taxes to the federal government is also necessary. To, “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence (defense), promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ”is not only right, it is ‘constitutional’! But It also should be incumbent upon us as states, cities, towns, villages, churches, communities, neighborhoods and individuals, yes ‘we the people’, to seek and effect the solutions to our own problems.
This is a ‘Tale of Two Americas’. It is a country that is being assaulted by ideology intent on taking us down a flawed and perilous path versus one that seeks a return to the country our fathers founded and fought to preserve. This November we will be casting votes not only for a president, but for an affirmation that we choose remain the ‘United States’ or to continue on the path toward becoming another ‘People’s State’
OK, gang, here's the routine:
Cut, paste, and email. Repeat vigorously. Thanks!!! ;D
