Future Farmers of America

24 01 2009

You reap what you sow… who’s farming our fields now?

Some people look at life as if it is an orchard for them to harvest from. These people view the world as it being strictly for their benefit and use. These people are takers, out for what they can get.
Some people look at their lives as if they were a fruit tree, and try to offer themselves as nutritious gift to the world. Thinking that the reward is in the giving, for we are often told it is better to give than receive.

Yet some people go through life as just a weed, growing on the side of the road. Any fruit bared taken by whoever whenever. Or trampled away by life itself. Too often they are content to sit with their hand out, only using what is given and never giving anything in return.

Some don’t even care. They are often bitter at the world and waste away, mad that their life wasn’t better, but unwilling to make any effort to make it so.

Are we givers, or takers, or just don’t care?

I think as conservatives we must plant good seeds and tend them wisely so they bare good fruit. Not take liberally of whatever’s available. If we are wise and work our reward will be in sharing the harvest in it’s own time.

One can take away until nothing is left to take. And without the planters of good seeds there is no future harvest. Stealing away the harvest from those that tilled and sewed only leads to a future of want. It frustrates the good heart and causes it to lose the desire to plant the required amount. Soon little seed is left for growth and harvest in the future.

I think congress is beginning to harvest what hasn’t been planted, and in doing so they are taking the good seed and leaving nothing to sow.

It would be wise to think about the future and protect the seed that assures a harvest yet to come.

-Al

 

 

 

 

Advertisements




Political Popularity

20 01 2009

Today we see the manifestation of popularity in politics. Almost like as child on Christmas morning the people, giddy with excitement, welcome a new President. Everyone full of Hope. Faith. Dreams of a better day. And mounted atop a high pedestal, a man.  What will the future bring?

With thoughts on this day being that a man starts with such promise one can’t help but be a little apprehencive about what the future holds. Will expectations be fullfill? One can only wonder…, and hope.

Today I think it apropos to bring this missive back:

 
 

 

The wacky world of political popularity.

17 04 2008

It’s something that has always fascinated me. Why we find some politicians popular, some not. My lifetime started during the Eisenhower administration, with my earliest memory of a president being Kennedy. I remember liking Kennedy, even though I don’t remember whether or not my parents did. I remember, also at that time, that the elementary school I went to had a mock election. I can’t remember our elementary school having a mock election since. Perhaps times were different then…or not? Does it seem that politics now is much more a popularity contest? Or maybe it’s not what you do, but how you do it?

If memory serves Kennedy was popular with the very rich, and the poor, splitting the rest pretty much down the middle. His administration was dominated by the Red Menace, and didn’t really accomplish a whole lot. Though his famous quote was “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!” he’s most fondly remembered by a segment of our society that didn’t want to do much of anything for the country but asked the country to do almost everything for it. Kennedy is still hugely popular today, pretty much due to his looks and lifestyle and untimely death by assassination and not any great accomplishment, other than his handling of the Cuban missile crises. Despite getting us into Vietnam, and the Bay of Pigs fiasco, his image is almost untarishable, “Happy birthday mister President…”. ‘Camelot’. What he did do is inspire us. We the people may have been greatly cheated by his death.

Lyndon Johnson. Ignored, overlooked, pitied, and even despised. Poured our troops into Vietnam. Tried to run the war from the White House, setting the whole thing up for failure, and had to bail out of the job. Johnson did more to elevate civil rights then Kennedy ever dreamed of but Kennedy somehow got the credit. At the same time his hand up was also a trap for many, addicting them to a life of living on the dole. It would have been so easy back then for his ‘Great Society’ to have really created a great society, but it ended up as being really just a political patronage program, binding a large segment of the country with welfare and food stamps and no jobs to go along with them. A bondage of a different sort. His administration ended with riots in the streets and Watts a smoldering ruin. It was a time of protest and political unrest. A nightmare time that somehow left Johnson fondly remembered by many.

Richard Nixon was hated by many. Not disliked, HATED. He is thought of by a large segment of our country as the worst single President ever. You even see it in the press, often listing him as the worst of the worst. His only accomplishment in office was ending the war in Vietnam and returning our troops and POW’s home like he said he would. And opening a dialogue with China. The SALT treaty, reducing nuclear missiles. Starting a dialogue of détente with Russia which was really the beginning of the end of the spread of communism. Formalizing civil rights and stabilizing our economy. And returning peace to our campuses and streets. But somebody that worked for somebody that somehow worked for somebody that worked in some periphery position for him did something very wrong, like getting caught breaking into his oppositions campaign headquarters trying to get information that would help him win an election that he won in a landslide anyway, and he supposedly tried to ‘cover up’ his involvement in something that he wasn’t involved with anyway and….so we hate him. For that, and 55MPH speed limits.

Gerald Ford is loved by some, hated by others, and “oh yes, I remember him…” by many. Best or worst remembered for pardoning Nixon, for better or worst getting us as a country beyond Watergate. That, or for falling down a lot. He was without a doubt honorable. He was well liked and respected by his peers, perhaps truly the right man at the right time, a good caretaker of the office until the next election. Really didn’t ‘do’ anything, which was most appreciated. Some girl named ‘Squeaky’ tried to shoot him. Another one did, too.

Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter was perhaps the nicest man ever elected to the office of President. He crashed our economy, bringing us some of the highest unemployment rates this side of the great depression. Interest rates climbed to unheard of heights, with prime rates into the twenty plus percent range. Inflation soared. He mishandled relations with the Middle East causing oil shortages, long lines, and high gas prices, and hatred and hostage taking in Iran. He is literally loved by the people that were hurt the worst by his administration. He wanted so much for us but delivered so little. He was as honest as the day is long. He prayed and no-one complained about it. He told us he lusted in his heart, and we knew, cause we did too.

Ronald Reagan entered office with enough force of authority that the country of Iran immediately caved and sent our people home. He restructured and rebuilt our economy with a “trickle down theory” and “Voodoo” economics (both just basic economics). He elevated minorities and women into real and authoritative positions within our government. He decreased taxes. He broadened the Civil Rights Act to cover the whole country instead of just the south as it originally was. He rebuilt a military that was virtually gutted by the Carter administration. The rich got richer. The poor got richer too. His ability and vision created economic growth which allowed the largest percentage of movement of the poor and minorities into the middle classes then ever, before or since. He won reelection by he largest landslide ever. He was the first to recognize and address the future problem with Social Security. He spent huge amounts of money to fix the problems of the past, spending us into huge deficits. Still, the economy soared. He is literally hated by those he helped the most. Criticized by a press he supported. Vilified by a Hollywood of which he was a part. Despised by unions, even though he was a member of, and even President of, a union. Hated by feminists, even though he did much to elevate them in rights and position. Despised by Blacks, even though they gained more socially and economically from his administration than perhaps any other. “Tear down this wall!” and they did. He, almost single-handedly took away the threat of nuclear obliteration and caused the downfall of the “Evil Empire” of communism. When he left office the United States of America held a prestige throughout the world unmatched since the end of World War Two. He’s disdainfully remembered by many people and the press as an elitist and bigot.

George H. W. Bush. When he ran against Reagan he accused him of practicing “Voodoo Economics”. When the republican party chose Reagan as its nominee Bush thought maybe his future in politics was over. He did what a lot of us do when we suffer rejection, consoled himself with a beer. But Ronald Reagan showed him what a real man is. When Reagan could have cast aside his opponent and gone to his political allies he didn’t. He reached out to him, asking Bush to join him as his running mate. Believe it or not that was a stunning move at that time. When Bush became President he tried to continue his predecessors legacy. The economy was flourishing. It was so good in fact that the democrats talked him into a “painless” increase in the Capitol Gains Tax. Investment in construction immediately halted. Thousands of projects and properties went unfinished and abandoned. Construction workers by the droves were laid off. The Savings and Loan industry was literally demolished. Having flourished under the previous administration, and with money flowing like wine and water, many of those in charge were caught living too high on the hog when the crash came. He was distracted from these problems by an arrogant Iraqi dictator that thought he could take advantage of the situation and invade his neighbor. Bush used great skill in forming a coalition of many countries to push back this belligerent tyrant and free the country of Kuwait. But he let the tyrant off the hook, after all, it was “the economy stupid”. Even thought he put back into place the disheveled economy that was strong and growing when he left office, it cost him re-election. He’s mostly remembered for being a nice guy with a nice wife (who, by the way, was a civil rights worker) who skillfully led us in the Gulf War. Disliked by that segment of society that dislikes republicans in general.

Bill Clinton. Smart. Smart enough not to change the way Bush was handling the economy, even though it was the economy that caused Bush to lose to him. His first few years in office he was accused of being more republican than the republicans on economic issues. He modeled himself after his hero, JFK. As a Governor he was a complete failure in his first term and drummed out of office. Unbelievably, he went on television and apologized to the people of the great state of Arkansas and… was reelected! Everyone should have understood then just how smooth a talker he was. His wife outclassed him socially, economically, and educationally. She was the rock he built his political career on. He cheated on her and she stood by him emphatically. When he became President he used wit, style, and a little bit of arrogance and created an almost unmatched power base. He neither helped nor hurt the country very much, but depending on which side you where on, you’d swore he did. Glorified by a rich elite, he attacked the wealthy. He dismantled the welfare state, yet still was a delight to those to who it catered. Hated by those that saw him as the Devil in disguise. He taught us all what doublespeak was. He bestowed the term “politically correct” upon us. He showed us that what you said didn’t have to mean what you really said but what you wanted it to mean to whichever group your focus was on at the time. That “it” didn’t have to actually mean “IT”. IT could be whatever you wanted IT to be, it could. He led by polling. He smiled and we bought it. One can only imagine what the feminist movement and NOW would have said if the Monica deal had happened with a republican. Any republican. Or just about any CEO of any corporation … Heads have rolled for a lot less.

He looked us in the eye and said it never happened. His wife said it was a vast right wing conspiracy. He shuffled his feet, bowed his head and admitted it was true. And that it wasn’t the first time. We said okay. All was forgiven. He felt our pain. His administration was the first to speak out and act against filth in the music industry and was the first to try to censor it. Yet, you probably couldn’t find a rapper anywhere that wouldn’t vote for him tomorrow. Sadly, his last few years in office he gave into a lot of the special interest groups, increasing taxes and diverting money into “causes”. The economy started to suffer, especially in the areas of employment and investment. Overall, he left the countries economy fairly stagnate, but in pretty good shape, having early on joined with the republicans and led in reducing , then abolishing, the deficits.

George W. Bush rode into office having just barely survived one of the closest elections in years. He arrived however, with one of the most ambitious social and economic plans ever. Plans to elevate the educational level of every child in America. Plans to reform a broken Social Security System. Plans to create jobs, both here in America, and overseas, where vast sums had been spent on foreign aid. A plan to fight the AIDS epidemic, not just here but world wide. Plans to end poverty, fight crime, fix a broken healthcare system and reform an out of control tort system. He had big plans, and big surpluses to spend! Good times!. What he didn’t have planned was 9-11. Plans changed. Priorities changed. Although he got a good head start with tax reform and his No Child Left Behind Act, other aspects of his goals for us changed, or at least got shoved aside. We stood behind him as he led us well during those dark days, and we thanked the Lord it was him and not the other guy that we elected.

The world can turn oh so quickly however. It wasn’t long before his distracters pointed out to us that it was 7 whole minutes after he found out about the World Trade Center before he left that classroom full of kids. No matter that it took that long for the Secret Service to determine that it was safe to move and where to go. 7 whole minutes that I guess they say were wasted, somehow. Somehow it pointed to indecisiveness, they said.

When the African embassies where bombed by al Qaida during the Clinton administration, Clinton responded by somewhat blindly sending a few cruise missiles into a closed terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. Bill Clinton knew full well the threat of Osama Bin Laden. Our intelligence agencies had developed a lot of info on him and al Qaida. One country even tried to turn him over to us, but Clinton passed. Also during the Clinton administration we fought a running verbal battle with Saddam Hussein. We didn’t just think he had weapons of mass destruction, we KNEW he did. Bill Clinton kept the heat on him and the U.N. kept its inspectors busy looking. Iraq kept up a cat and mouse game of blocking inspections, then allowing the inspectors in, only to find empty buildings. How do we know Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Because we monitored the destruction of a great many of them. Trouble was, not all that we knew they had was there record of there destruction. They claimed shoddy record keeping. This from a country however that kept meticulous records on any and everything, no matter how minute or trivial. Clinton didn’t buy it then, and Bush didn’t buy it either. Fact is, the whole world didn’t buy it. The question was, just how long should we allow the inspectors to keep looking. We never found those weapons of mass destruction, so, it became Bush’s “lie”. Even though almost all of the intelligence was gathered during the previous Clinton administration it became Bush’s fault. They like to say “lie”.

We accused Bush of not doing enough to uncover the 9-ll plot before it happened. Now that he’s put into place systems that would have perhaps uncovered the plot we cry foul. He’s treading on our “rights”. We accused his father of not completing the task by removing Saddam during the first Gulf War, then blame the son for removing him now. We cry to pull out now, before the job is done, though we know full well that only chaos would ensue. That, and the loss of any credibility we have as a leader and power in the world. There are those that say we only went there because of the oil, when we could have had the oil simply by ending the sanctions.

Politics does create strange bedfellows. There are those that would have us believe that a man who went to Yale and graduated from Harvard with a rather hefty degree is somehow a stupid oaf. Most of those that call him stupid couldn’t come close to getting into Yale, much less Harvard. The last election pitted one Yale alumnus against another. Both where ‘bonesmen’, both having been inducted into a secret society that only chooses the very cream of the crop for membership. Both served this country admirably during a highly unpopular war. Kerry chose his branch of service as a badge of honor, emulating Kennedy, but knowing full well at the time that the coastal patrol was seldom put in harms way. Bush chose the Air Guard because it was an easier way of getting to be a fighter pilot, his dad having been a pilot during WWII. At the time he joined they pulled Guardsmen to active duty regularly. Both, however, were unarguably legitimate services to our country. The only confusion came from those with a motive. Some folks profit from such confusion. (By the way, they don’t let stupid people become fighter pilots)

If you go by modern thought on such matters George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton should be mortal enemies. Somehow they’re able to work hand in hand for the good of the country. No, for the good of the world. Perhaps, they somehow know something we don’t. Or, at least something we’re not supposed to. Like how hot the air really is in Washington, maybe?

One of those things that is often overlooked by we the people about the Bush family is their philosophy regarding life and service to their country. Contrary to the standard of most politicians, they are taught to go out into the world and make a mark. Make some money. Then devote the rest of there lives to public service. George W. took his business degree and went out and made his own money. Nothing but advice came from his father, just as George senior took nothing but advice from his. Both were highly successful before going into politics. We tell ourselves that that’s the way it should supposed to be, but somehow we ignore or overlook it when we talk about them, thinking somehow they didn’t earn what they’ve become.

Bush’s administration suffered a huge blow on 9-11. The economy crashed, taking industries and stocks down with the twin towers. The war on terrorism has cost a fortune. It’s created huge deficits. It ended the plans Bush had to use those surpluses he inherited. The money was spent to protect us, yet we fault him for spending it, all the while still demanding protection. Katrina blew away what was left along with the Gulf Coast. Bush was blamed, as if manipulating the weather was a Presidential purgative. The levee’s failed in New Orleans. The haters even said that Bush had them dynamited. Blame was tossed everywhere. But it all really had to be Bush’s fault, they said. But, even with all of the above, our economy soars. Bush’s economic policies work! Stocks soar. Growth is at extremely high levels. Unemployment is less than ever, almost a whole percentage point below what is considered full employment. Inflation is almost negligible. Yet, Bush’s approval rating for handling the economy: only about 36 percent. That can only be described as baffling. Either that, or the public is being conned by those that oppose him. And don’t think that there aren’t those that oppose him in places that can do just that. Bush has never been a darling of the press.

They call him a liar, yet can’t point to a single example that can’t be immediately shot down. They say he is racist, even though he began his administration with dreams of elevating minorities threw educational opportunities and real fixes to societies problems; appointing minorities and women to more and loftier positions than any other President. He is supposedly extremely right wing but constantly does things that seem to disappoint the extreme right. They told us his tax cuts where supposedly only to help his rich friends, but somehow they created growth and jobs by the score, just like he said they would. He promised to keep us safe from attack here at home, but we attack him for it. He has enough guts to take the heat for an unpopular war, knowing just how necessary it is to stick it out. He stays true to his convictions, but we aren’t used to politicians who won’t change their mind with the wind, so we call him stubborn. He told us in the beginning that the fight against terrorism would be long and hard, taking years and years to win. He told us at the start that many people might die in the cause. We wonder why he hasn’t been able to finish it by now. He asks God for advice, and we criticize him as a zealot. And just when we think we know him, he goes and does what he said he was going to do, and we are left shocked. Politicians aren’t supposed to act that way. They’re supposed to care about their legacy and image and poll numbers and such, aren’t they?

-Al
 

 





January 20, 2009

20 01 2009

Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3YbrXAFnUQ





January 19th,

19 01 2009

Today we celebrate the birthday of Martin Luther King Jr. Yes, he was a great American. Yes America, and the world, is  a better place for him. To sum up his life and his dream one only has to look at the Golden Rule. To remember to do unto others as we’d have them do unto us. Do we?

This is from IMAO, and if you read it all it will make you think http://www.imao.us/index.php/2009/01/holiday/

With the election of Barack Obama has the King legacy been fulfilled…, or have we somehow missed the boat?

-Al





Snakebit

15 01 2009
Hey, did you know, the French don’t like us?! Never did. Oh sure, a long long time ago they supported us. Back during the Revolutionary War. But in reality they only did that to piss off the English. See, they hate the English too.
Many want to blame America’s standing in the world on George W. Bush. They think all this stems from the actions and policies of Bush, and they truly believe that when Bush is gone all will be right with the world. Not so. At least if history is any guide. History can be a really good guide…

Before World War 2 they despised Winston Churchill. Much like they despise President Bush now. Yep, back then , before WW2, they called Churchill a warmonger. Hitler, like Hussein, was just a man, nothing to really fear. It was Churchill that was the bad guy. A million people clasped hands across Europe to protest his un-civilized and ‘warmongering’ attitude with Germany.

Just a few short years later those same (mostly French) people were clasping their hands and praying for the English and Americans to rescue them from Hitler the madman. And Churchill was a hero when they did. For a little while anyway. A very little while.

They fed the snake, and it bit them. Saddam would have bit them too, had we given him the time.

Some have suggested that we (Bush) over-reacted to the terrorist attack on 9/11. Said we (Bush) went into Iraq halfcocked. They say we were fools over WMD’s, but then again, they thought he had them too. They think that’s the only reason we went to war. That we had no right to attack.

It’s funny, but how many times did the Iraqis fire a missile at one of our airplanes in the no-fly zone? Isn’t THAT an attack on us? And when you are attacked…, well shouldn’t that alone have been enough? Seriously, Iraq was a rouge state run by a despot that murdered thousands of his own people. Just like Hitler. He and his deserved to be brought down. Wouldn’t the world have been a better place had we knocked off Hitler, before he became the monster Churchill said he was? You know, by going into Iraq and taking out Hussein, we may have just saved millions. Reasons to attack Iraq? You could stack’em as high as bodies in an Iraqi mass grave.

And about those French. I read a while back that Al-Quada was targeting the Eiffel Tower. That, along with several other places over there. I wonder would they have a different attitude about our war on terror if they had a smoking ruin of there own. Well…, let’s hope we never find out.

We know that George Bush never played to polls. And its obvious that he really doesn’t care what the popular opinion of himself is. He just stayed focused on the issue at hand and did what he felt is right in his own heart and mind. He knows that history is on his side, and that is what matters.

He knows that the right thing for the country is more important than the right thing for the man. Many a President was unpopular in his own time, but the perspective of history brought their greatness to light. Lincoln comes to mind. Truman. And after all, shouldn’t we elect Presidents not to do the popular thing, but to do the right thing, even if its not popular with the masses. We wouldn’t even need a president otherwise would we, just a good polling organization.

As long as I’ve been alive (and I’m sure much further back than that) America has been scorned by somebody somewhere. Be it from jealousy, or politics, or maybe even that our troops tended to liberate their ladies from their gentlemen, somebody has had their nose in a twit over the U.S. of A. If you think that Clinton was beloved abroad your sadly misinformed. Carter stirred up a beehive in the middle-east that is still buzzing today.

Now I don’t seriously know if an American president has been scorned at home quite to the extent that Bush has been. And its hard to actually put the finger on why. Most of what people rail against him for is just so much nonsense and hot air. Mountains made out of molehills by people that have rings through their noses, put there by other people with political axes to grind.

Al Gore’s loss broke quite a few hearts, and sour grapes stirring up the crowd with ludicrous accusations of stolen elections just made it worse.

After 9 -11 everyone pulled together and supported Bush as he lead us through some pretty dark days. But the “other side” saw not much more than lost elections in their future if things remained the same, so the same they couldn’t let remain.

They started small, with some inferences that maybe Bush showed a bit of indecisiveness when he didn’t jump up and rush right out of a classroom full of kids when the news of the New York attack reached him. It escalated into accusations of Bush being in on the attack, or planning it or some other such garbage. Why some people grasped hold of that bull I’ll never be able to figure, unless it was the remains of hurt feeling from the election.

When WMD’s weren’t readily found in Iraq that became the be all end all of the mission there to many. Bush had placed an awful lot of emphasis on them being there, but so had Clinton before him. Clinton’s accusations about Iraq’s WMD’s were quickly forgot, but Bush’s became out and out lies… so we’re told by those that want them very much to be. (We DID find some. A little over 500.)

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

 “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”–Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

Words so easily forgotten. And people, it would seem, were beginning to forget that awful September day.
The second election campaign brought forth rhetoric such that has seldom if ever occurred in an election in the United States. Stupid talk on both sides about whose military service was better and who knew what when and how votes had went. All of it stirred up by a press that seemed to have taken sides.

Soon Mr. Bush could do no right. Katrina came, and even though it was the largest natural catastrophe ever experienced by this country, Bush caught the blame for its effects as if he had built it and set its course. And the Federal response, though delivered by the book (just like FEMA had said on their website beforehand) everybody expected more. More, however was actually the responsibility of the States. Mississippi preformed. Louisiana did not. Bush caught the heat for the lack of planning and action of a Mayor and a Governor. That’s politics…, point the finger and pass the blame. The finger ended up pointing at Bush.

For six years America soared. Even with 9-11 and the natural disasters of Katrina and Rita, Mr. Bush policies kept us afloat and brought us back from what surely should have been a deep dark depression. Real wages soared. Employment numbers were the best ever. Interest rates were low. Stocks were high. Things were pretty dang good in hindsight. Nobody would dare admit it at the time.

America cried out for change, so the mid-term elections went the way of the democrats. Change came. The last two years since we made that change haven’t been pretty. But because of the built in hatred of Mr. Bush the democrats were able to deflect any of the blame that should have rightfully rested on their shoulders and they completed their Washington takeover.

Now it will be up to them, the democrats, to get us out of the hole their policies have dug for us. Obama, for his part, has silently acknowledged the properness of many of Mr. Bush’s policies by keeping them in place. Seems that Bush was right all along on Iraq, and that one is most shocking to the left.

Now as the time comes for Mr. Obama to take his place as the President of the United States we have begun to see the inevitable. They are burning him in effigy before he has even begun. Yet there is hope by many that things will change for America around the world. Bush was, after all, easy for them to hate, when he was hated here at home. Maybe, someone somewhere, will show us a little love. We have, after all, probably done more for the world than anyone else. And we’ll keep right on doing so I’m sure. Bush…? He was snakebit.

 Anyway, the French, they never have really liked us. No matter how many times we’ve saved their ass. Why worry about them changing now?

France’s Useless Criticism Keeps Everybody Mad

-Al
“[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…– Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

 

 

 





Answering questions…

14 01 2009

http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2009/01/change-is-coming.html

I have a question and this is just a question, Sparkle, Eagle whomever can feel free to answer.

If we are anti-government intervention in terms of welfare, who will take care of the children of people who don’t have enough money to take care of themselves. Does the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) just prevent abortion from happening or does it take the money it has and support the families after protecting them from having abortions.

This always confuses me about the rightwings’ approach to welfare.
Titus Adronicus via RightWingSparkle blog comments http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2009/01/change-is-coming.html

***

Titus Adrondicus, you should note that it was the churches that were the first to establish charities and take care of children, families, the sick, and the poor. It was the church that first created hospitals. It was the church that developed schools along with a educational system. It’s churches that are typically the first to respond in a disaster. It usually the church that sends the first aid in the form of medicine and healthcare. It’s almost always the church that collects food for the hungry, or distributes clothes, or provides beds for the homeless. Remember what the C in YMCA stands for, or YWCA. The Salvation Army. But, it’s not just Christians, but ‘religions’ in general that are the first to step up to the plate whenever need arises.

The rightwings “approach” to welfare is that it is the responsibility of “the people” to take care of the people first. Governments hands are usually tied by procedures and policies, where a private organization usually is open to providing needs as they come, not as they fit into categories. Therefore it is better for those people in need to have private help. Certainly sometimes public support is needed, but most often those needs can be filled better, cheaper, and more quickly via charity. That’s why you see the right advocating government directing there support through private groups AND advocating inclusion of “faith based” groups receiving that support. After all, they are usually the experts.

Too often when government becomes involved we see needs become institutionalized, and by that we see needed help become handouts instead of handups. They don’t call it Welfare Addiction for nothing.

As far as abortion is concerned, and that is a great example, most churches that are involved with supporting and counseling women with unwanted pregnancies tend to try to council toward adoption if keeping the child isn’t viable. There are “homes” for unwed mothers run by many churches, and there are many children’s homes for kids without parents that are also church related or run. There are several church groups dedicated to supporting and helping women that choose life. And there is even counseling available for those that don’t. The government, via orgs like Planned Parenthood, tends to opt toward abortion, then if that isn’t the chosen option they with put up a bit of money for healthcare and such… but they tend to press for abortion as a less costly out, and sometimes as the “best” option. By doing so they have tended to make abortion just another form of birthcontrol. And that’s all the while attacking churches and other groups that advocate abstinence as some kind of abnormal affront to a females womanhood. To put all that in a left vs. right format one could say the left advocates (protected) sex as a humanistic right and advocates abortion when “mistakes“ occur, while the right tends to view sex as something a bit more special, seeing it as something a bit more personal between people and advocating life when a unwanted pregnancy happens.

This coming Saturday my church will be building a wheelchair ramp for a 16 year old boy that was shot in a drive-by shooting and is now a quad. We just got word of the need. If it were left to the government to provide for this need, how many applications would need to be filled out and reviewed, how long would it take to survey, plan, design, advertise for bids, and then contract this job out? Surely more than a week. And on top of that I’d bet it would cost several times more.

-Al





Entrepreneurship Rocks!

11 01 2009

As I’ve often mentioned before, politics is a mighty wacky world. And it now seems to be getting wackier ever day. There’s so much unknown and up in the air right now, and our president-elect is such a mystery as to his real views and stances on things (does he even have any established views), that it’s hard to read what is going on in Washington right now.

We know the views and goals of the establishment democrat crowd. Pelosi and Reid and bunch have long ago announced their intentions and directions they want to take our country in. But Obama even to this day remains somewhat hard to read.

That clearly shows in the response that he has gotten from many conservative writers, pleasing some and disappointing others with his choices and appointments.

I think the one thing that is clear is that the democrats want to use every opportunity they get to take this country in a more socialist direction, and the current economic crisis is a great opportunity for them to do so. The question then is just how much will Obama buy into that move? I hope I’m wrong, but I fear the worst.

These socialistic moves can be accomplished because they sell well. People love touchy feely stuff and will easily go along with things that seem as if they will relieve some burden or other, or push the cost of something off onto someone else. But, like the saying goes, there’s no such thing as a free lunch.

Everything has a price. Nationalizing healthcare might well come with less healthcare being available, longer waits for service, less innovation, research, fewer treatment options and loss of any personal control of where, how, and by who your cared for. An experiment that if it fails may not be easily retreated from.

Pumping public money into private enterprise via these bailouts may well come with some unintended and not so pleasant side effects. Placing more control of business into government hands has no long history of success, and judging by those enterprises that the government has run in the past doesn’t give one great faith in the future prospects of any such endeavor.

Knowledge that it was the government and its policies that caused most of the damage in that arena surely doesn’t quell many fears either.

The fact remains also that the democrats have a long deep history of desire for your money. How much control over pension plans and investments are we giving to these people in Washington as they pass out dollars that they don’t even have? That money will have to eventually come back from somewhere.

Windfall tax’s on retirement accounts? Higher tax’s on Capital Gains? More tax’s on “the Rich”? Tax’s on that healthcare received? Higher tax’s on energy, diving up the cost of everything from gasoline to the fuel used to heat your house this winter? This money will have to come from somewhere. They may sing a good song, but the fact is we are gonna be paying more in taxes somehow, somewhere. Even us little people.

I can almost understand the concept of government bailing out some of the businesses and industries here in America that find themselves in financial straits now. Also the banks and those Wall Street companies that found themselves up against the wall of failed government programs that pushed and prodded them into that very position. A big chunk of why we are where we are, or they are where they are, is because of government messing around where government didn’t belong in the first place.

But how much help is really help? How much more interference does government need to have in the workings of these businesses and industries? Might it not do more harm than good? The free enterprise system was supposed to be just that, free from government control. Can there be help without control? Minimal control anyway?

Our country was built with the sweat equity of the American people and the willingness to risk good money on good ideas backed with entrepreneurship and a faith in the good old American free enterprise system. Where good products succeeded and failed ideas failed. Where hard work and a willingness to risk was based on sound principles of supply and demand and reasonable expectation of a return on investment through actual growth. Not socially engineered concepts of obtaining something for nothing.

There is an old simple saying that well fits this problem and what has lead us to where we are instead of where we should be. “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

Somewhere along the line we started handing out fish when we should have just been supplying a little bit of bait to people that were truly in need. Instead of making loans available to those that couldn’t qualify for them we should have been giving the tools and ability to become qualified. If we were going to put up the money, (and believe me, we put up plenty of money) we should have been addressing the issues that caused the problems, not building artificial bridges over those problems, or giving handouts and validating excuses for needs instead of addressing those needs directly.

Now we are off on another bridge building mission, hoping to somehow get over the hole that we’ve dug for ourselves instead of trying to do what needs to be done to make the road smooth again. And we are borrowing the materials to bridge that gap by digging more holes in our future that one day, and probably only too soon, we’ll have to find a way over or through once again.

The free enterprise system worked wonderfully for years. America grew strong and proud and we lead the world for a good long while. But somewhere along the line we turned the keys to our economic engine over to the government and now we’ve run off into a deep ditch. We need to put Americas corporate structure and leadership back behind the wheel and let the American people steer for a while. We need to get government out of the way, instead of giving more control.

If some of these companies need a helping hand from the government so be it. But that hand should be only as necessary and for as short a time as possible. The government needs to be clearing the path head instead of trying to run the thing. This is the job of government after all, smoothing the way and optimizing and leveling the playing field for the people. It’s the people after all with the real expertise.

The thing I fear is however, the leadership we have in Washington has little or no faith in the American people. They think the answer to everything is bigger and more government. Taking more of your and my dollars to do for us what we should be doing for ourselves. They have forgotten the words of one of their favorite sons when it comes to the hand the government should have in all of this. “Ask not what your government can do for you, but what you can do for your government.”

We need to quit asking for the government to get us through these hard times. It’s the American people themselves that can get us through, and in doing so make this country, and in turn our government, better, stronger, and more capable to do the true job of government. That’s making us more equal, among fellow citizens of our own country, and around the world as the world truly is becoming smaller and its marketplace larger.

We can’t do that through socializing more and centralizing more and taking away more and more of the freedoms and liberties and the decision making and innovating abilities of the American people. The reverse is true. Entrepreneurship Rocks! We need to put more control back into the hands of the people. For in truth this country is supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, in the first place.

Less government is best government.

It’s been proven time and time again that when the American people and its industry is allowed to thrive, then even the coffers of the government will thrive. To do that the government must give back to the people its freedom, its flexibility, its ability, and its resources.

Problems have always be best solved in America when its allowed the chance to solve its own problems.

-Al