Milquetoast Conservative Wimps
Recently I was channel-surfing and landed on Fox Business. Larry Kudlow was doing his monologue, so I listened for awhile. Here's a link.
He was ranting about the Democrats, tearing apart their zeal for big government, big spending, big taxes, bureaucracy, regulation, wealth redistribution, and all the other evils that befall a nation when we allow government to accumulate too much power. As I listened, I thought: Ok, maybe this guy IS the Real Deal, and Fox Business might just be a TV channel where I should spend more time. Please, Kudlow, I thought, stay on message and don't stray into Liberal territory!
And then, at the end, he cratered. He said: "I agree that we need a safety net."
No No No! A thousand times NO!! "We" do not need a "safety net". We do not need government to take from people according to their ability and give according to their need. That is Left-wing Liberal Progressive Socialist talk.
Kudlow, it seems, is no different from the legions of gutless, spineless Conservative sissies and milquetoast-eating wimps. They cannot stand up like a real man (or woman) and defend the principles that made this country great. When they get right down to it, they have all been persuaded by the Leftist Liberal agenda and the government schools where they were taught.
What needs to be said is this: the only way to kill the parasite of excess government is to stop giving government power over our lives and paychecks. And that means abolishing, yes abolishing all these socialistic welfare schemes, lock stock and barrel. Like any parasitic bacteria or virus, you must get rid of it, else it will just start multiplying again, and then we're back where we started.
Leftist/Progressives reading this are probably thinking: this blogger is one cold, cruel, uncaring meanie! Um, no. There is nothing "compassionate" about spending someone else’s money. What is cruel is forcing taxpayers to support these government-run "safety net" programs where the only real beneficiaries are the politicians and bureaucrats and administrators who run them, while a tiny fraction of it trickles down to the truly needy.
So you say you care about the poor who need help? Then help them! You do not need government playing middle-man, extracting their rather hefty transaction charges. One easy way to help is to donate to any of the thousands of established churches and charities all over the world. They handle all the details, so all you have to do is write a check (or use credit card). Here's a site where you can start: Lutheran World Relief
The thing about private, voluntary organizations is: the donor is in charge. If you don't like their performance, or think they wasteful, then vote with your dollars and go someplace else. That is light-years better than government-run agencies that pilfer your paycheck without your consent. If you think government wastes your money and doesn't really help anybody, well, that's too bad.
So you don't like dealing with any of these organizations? Then start up your own charity. Or, just skip the whole organizational apparatus thingy, go out and find someone who needs help, and just help them.
We all must realize that government is not some combination of Superman, Santa Claus, and God. And Republican voters need to wake up and realize that this party they love so dearly is a sham and a hoax.
At least the Democrats are honest about their intentions. They say they want big government, and by golly, they deliver!
Spot on David. I have made this same rant with many, and even some Christians will say, "but we need the government to....", or, "we must have compassion." Sorry, charity through government is not compassionate to anyone. Good article!
I have found that when I am arguing with a “liberal” and manage to rhetorically box him into a corner, he will confide that the welfare state is not so much about social justice as it is about buying off society’s lower achievers. Those who finish last in the Game of Life will not necessarily be good sports about it.
Speaking as a libertarian who feels guilty about participating in a city rec department softball league (Socialist Softball!), I am willing to entertain the idea of a guaranteed minimum income as a replacement for welfare and unemployment benefit bureaucracies.
Continuing the “game” analogy, think of it as a consolation prize (“Johnny, what do we have for our departing contestants?”).