Alive and Kicking
According to John Leo of US News “Liberals might one day conclude that while most Americans value autonomy, they do not want a procedural republic in which patriotism, religion, socialization, and traditional values are politically declared out of bounds. Many Americans notice that liberalism nowadays lacks a vocabulary of right and wrong, declines to discuss virtue except in snickering terms, and seems increasingly hostile to prevailing moral sentiments.” He concludes by announcing, “In their bafflement over rejection of their product, liberals have been lacing speeches with religious phrases and asking mainstream Americans to vote their economic interests by rejecting Republican fat cats. It will take a bit more than that.”
By patriotism, religion, socialization and traditional values I assume he means nationalism, Christianity, racism and discrimination against gays and woman with unwanted pregnancies. Saying that liberals have no definition of right and wrong isn’t insulting, it’s an affirmation that we understand the circumstances play a role in life. Conservatives, like John Leo, would wish liberalism dead. The liberal ideal is ingrained in American culture and it is reflected in government programs like Medicaid, Medicare, social security, public education and food stamps. If liberalism is dead then compassion has also died. That hasn’t happened yet, has it?
By patriotism, religion, socialization and traditional values I assume he means nationalism, Christianity, racism and discrimination against gays and woman with unwanted pregnancies. Saying that liberals have no definition of right and wrong isn’t insulting, it’s an affirmation that we understand the circumstances play a role in life. Conservatives, like John Leo, would wish liberalism dead. The liberal ideal is ingrained in American culture and it is reflected in government programs like Medicaid, Medicare, social security, public education and food stamps. If liberalism is dead then compassion has also died. That hasn’t happened yet, has it?
posted by mochi at 9:12 AM
7 Comments:
Mochi, to insinuate that liberals are the only ones who have compassion is just not right. Conservatives just see the fact that social programs have failed. The intentions behind the programs were admirable, but they have not worked. We believe that the government has made generations of people dependant on it for their general well being. Also, we don't understand the self-rightousness of someone who sees the virtue in taking from a third party and redistributing that money to someone else. Its like you all feel good about yourself for giving to the needy, but your giving someone elses money. As for compassion, the Salvation Army and Catholic Charities are just two examples of caring conservative orgainzations. Who funds those groups, conservative Christians. You have no idea how much conservatives help others and give to charities. My church gave over a million dollars to the tsunami victims. A church once gave my wife and I a car because we couldn't afford to buy one ourselves. I could go on and on but my point is that liberals are not the only ones with compassion.
Iraq is no different than the Marshall Plan or the aid we gave to Russia after the Cold War. It is part of foreign policy. The point is that the messes in the United States can not be fixed by government because they were caused by govt. What you are referring to as cleaning up, has not worked. Empowering people so that they can be self-sufficient is what we should be doing. What we have done is make millions of people slaves to big government.
Sorry Glen but you aren't making much sense.
"The point is that the messes in the United States can not be fixed by government because they were caused by govt."
If the US government is able to mandate change in a foreign country on the brink of civil war, one would hope they could do something to solve the social issues here.
"We believe that the government has made generations of people dependant on it for their general well being."
You might believe that but give me a single example of a person living the high life paid for by the government, other than the President.
"Also, we don't understand the self-rightousness of someone who sees the virtue in taking from a third party and redistributing that money to someone else. Its like you all feel good about yourself for giving to the needy, but your giving someone elses money."
OK, so explain this to me in the context of the DoD. They get 400 billion a year, would I feel better taking some of this money from them and pumping it in to social progams? Yes. You can't tell me the DoD are more efficient at using tax payers money than the food stamp program. They spend billions firing missiles at each other and missing. That's not a really efficient use of tax payer money, is it?
Mochi, glad to see you reading some good stuff!
-jack
Mochi, the point I was trying to make is no, they are not living the high life off of the govt. They are living in the projects waiting on their food stamps and SSI checks and they are poor as hell. Govt. is what created the cycle of poverty that they remain in generation after generation. You can't keep throwing money at poverty and think it is going to go away. You need to teach those people to be self sufficient and empower them. I realize that the reality of what the War on Poverty and Great Society failed to accomplish will not make any sense to a liberal, because liberals base their ideas on emotion rather than fact.If you want to cut defense spending, then fine. But the very idea that giving people govt. handouts is going to do away with poverty has been proven false over time.
Of the industrialized nations which country has the highest rate of poverty? Of the industrialized nations which nations spend the least per capita on social welfare?Do the research and come back to me with an educated response. Preferably not source from Anne Coulter's web site.
"You can't keep throwing money at poverty and think it is going to go away. You need to teach those people to be self sufficient and empower them."
Hmmm, not quite sure how to respond here. Money would appear to be the driving factor behind poverty, but sure go ahead and teach them to be self sufficient and empowered on $10 an hour feeding, clothing and housing a family.
"Liberals base their ideas on emotion rather than fact."
This is flat out insulting. What are you basing your "self sufficient" and empowered without more money" theory on.
You just argued that liberals don't have the monopoly on compassion. At the same time you are arguing that liberals "base there ideas on emotion" (implying that conservatives don't). If conservatives don't use emotion to form policy how can they be compassionate?
I am assuming that the US has the highest rate of poverty. Well here are some statistics from the United States Census Bureau about poverty in the USA.
46% of all "poor" own their own homes in America. The average poor person in America has a house with 3 bedrooms, 1 1/2 baths, garage, and a porch or patio.
76% of the "poor" have an Air Conditioner.
The average "poor" American has more living space than the average person of any class in Paris, London, Vienna, and Athens.
75% of the "poor" own their own car.
97% have a color TV and over half have two or more TV's.
78% have a VCR or a DVD player.
62% have cable or satellite TV.
73% own microwaves.
Over half own a stereo and 1/3 own a dishwasher.
Most of those people in the other industrialized nations you compare America to would love to be "poor" in the United States. In America, even the poor are fat.
Post a Comment
<< Home