That’s a nice cut and paste Korrupt Kornholer…
Unfortunately (for you) it only proves you are even more intellectually bereft than the original author – just mindlessly parroting left speak without really understanding the concepts behind the lies. But I’ll spend a little time dispelling this propaganda.
1. Tax cuts and the resulting budget deficits.
Over 40 years ago an American president suggested that cutting taxes would stimulate the economy and thereby actually increase tax revenues.
"The most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand -- to cut the fetters which hold back private spending (tax cuts)…
It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low... An economy constrained by high tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget, just as it will never create enough jobs or enough profits."
-John F. Kennedy
Of course Kennedy was right… and so was Reagan. Tax cuts always spur economic growth. I guess it just sounds better when a Democrat says it.
Some interesting tax statistics…
Federal tax revenues this year are projected to consume 20.5 percent of the economy's output. This is the highest peacetime level of taxation the United States ever has experienced, exceeded only in 1944 at the height of World War II.
The federal government is expected to collect $1.722 trillion from taxes this year, more than $13,500 for every worker in the country. This is nearly 50 percent more than the government took in as recently as 1993 and more than twice the level collected in 1987.
According to the Tax Foundation, taxes at all levels now consume nearly 38 percent of the average dual-income family's income. Medieval serfs, by contrast, had to give the lord of the manor only one-third of their output.
Indeed, this typical family will pay more than $22,500 in taxes to all levels of government. This is more than the family will spend on food, clothing, shelter, and transportation combined.
Conservatives hate “social spending".
That’s right. But let’s lose the euphemisms – the phrase should more accurately state that conservatives hate socialism.
Conservatives lose elections when they talk about undoing it.
Right again… Liberals have been buying votes for years with their social(ism) welfare programs funded through huge transfer payments.
2. Opposition to improvements in wages and working conditions.
Wow Mr. Peabody… let’s fire up the way back machine. Are you trying to infer that modern day conservatives are in favor of slavery, child labor, unlivable wages, etc…?
3. National Health Care System –
The problem with socialized medicine is that it does nothing to address the real problems of the American health care system – waste and high costs.
“America spends more than twice as much per capita on health care as the average for other industrialized nations, but has lower life expectancy than the other industrial nations and much higher infant mortality than the average for the other industrialized nations. We clearly have reached a point where spending more on health care is not as important as other factors.
Studies that look at individual procedures to see which are unnecessary have estimated that 25 percent of our health care spending is wasted, but international comparisons imply that half of this spending is wasted. Yet this waste is happening at a time when many Americans have no insurance coverage at all: those who do have insurance waste an even higher proportion of what they spend, despite attempts to control costs.
The amount we spend on health care soared from 5.1 percent of the GDP in 1960 to 8 percent of the GDP in 1975 to about 14 percent of the GNP today. Yet, by the 1970s, it became clear that spending more on medical care was no longer improving health. Improvements in the usual indicators of public health, such as average life expectancy, slowed and then virtually stopped.”
The liberal concept that somehow a government run program is going to eliminate waste and reduce costs is laughable.
Socialized medicine will only increase costs, reduce the standard of care and eliminate freedom of choice.
4. Education –
“During the 1950s, when spending was modest by today's standards, achievement was gradually improving. It is hard to believe that in 1950, American schools spent only $1,701 per student (in 1995 dollars), compared to $6,993 today. During the 1950s, increased spending was still needed and helped to improve achievement.
During the 1960s and 1970s, spending on education soared. Class size went down dramatically, as the pupil-teacher ratio fell from about 30 in 1960 to about 20 in 1980. Yet scores on the SAT and other standardized tests plummeted during the 1960s and 1970s. In part, this was because the pool of test-takers increased, but it is generally recognized that it was also because of lower school standards and weaker family influence.
Overall, per pupil spending on education today is more than 2.5 times what it was in 1963 (after correcting for inflation). But the students learn less.”
Conservatives understand that throwing money at schools doesn’t engender a thirst for knowledge in a child. The desire to learn must be instilled at home. It is a rare student who, without direction and inspiration from a parent, develops his full potential. But the liberal mindset is such that Uncle Sam should supplant the lackadaisical administration of uncaring parents. Would a reasonable person expect (or want) a government to be a surrogate? A school is not a daycare.
A school and its staff are merely a tool, a resource for learning, and its effective utilization is dependent on the user. Parents are responsible for the end product. You’ve heard the expression: ‘garbage in – garbage out.’ Well if you put a disinterested, disengaged and unruly student in a desk what you get out is a McDonald’s fry boy. It doesn’t matter how new the book he doesn’t read is – he’s not going to learn. But at least in the brave new world envisioned by the left, when he carves penises and pot leafs on his desk he’ll have a shiny new canvas.
It seems clear to me that the disintegration of the nuclear family is responsible for a whole list of ills. Or maybe bad teachers and old school buildings are responsible for teenage pregnancy and drug abuse too?
When the problem is one of personal accountability no amount of money can correct for a dereliction of responsibility.
5. Law and order –
Conservatives, unlike liberals, believe in accountability (see above). People should be held responsible for their actions. Society is not the root cause of crime - criminals are.
6. Family values and the culture war.
Traditionally families have served as the primary agent of enculturation and socialization. In the past, a child’s economic livelihood, training, religious upbringing and moral convictions were centered on the bedrock of home and family. The disintegration of the nuclear family in contemporary America has resulted in a generation of children that have been socialized by the electronic media and public education. And while the popular media has become increasingly violent and distorted; our schools have become, under the liberal banner of nondiscrimination, essentially value-neutral. Public expressions of faith, and the values that they represent, have been removed so as to not offend the hypersensitive segments of our country. There can be little question that the moral blight that plagues this country is seeded in the rejection of traditional Judeo-Christian principles. Liberalism places its faith in Government – not God.
“Humanism is the denial of God and the total affirmation of man. Humanism is really nothing else but Marxism.”
“The chief enemy of Communism is the Christian clergyman.”
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
The creation of a secular-amoral vacuum is the center plank of the liberal agenda. By destroying the moral fabric of this country, and thereby ultimately destroying traditional American society, liberals seek to create a climate that is ripe for the proliferation of the socialist state. “As men grow farther away from God they become more evil. Government, then, must step in to protect society. In doing so, government becomes at once our protector, our provider and our master.”
“The cycle is then complete. Lost is freedom and independence. Found is slavery and servitude. An all-pervasive, all-powerful, all intrusive government has replaced God. What God was to us government has become. The difference is: where God gives life and liberty - government gives death and bondage.”
Aside from gay marriage and abortion on demand just what are the values that liberals are supporting?
7. Racism and other forms of bigotry –
Liberals created the most insidious form of racism yet devised - welfare. Thus it is in the pathology of Black America that we see the true impact of leftist ideology.
"We'll have 'em eating out of our hands forever."
- President Johnson
The legacy of the Great Society programs is the creation of a permanent underclass and, more importantly, a perpetual voting block lorded over by black race-baiters and their fawning Democrat lackeys. Using the cry of racism as a whip, these masters of the ‘New Plantation’ strive to create and control successive generations of black voters. Blacks who erringly think for themselves and challenge this status-quo are labeled as “Uncle Tom’s”, “sell-outs” or (perhaps most tellingly) “acting white”. Individuality in the black collective is unacceptable.
Liberals that argue for the proliferation of the welfare state and race based preferences point to years of systemic racism and discrimination as a moral justification. The necessity for these programs is proven, they say, by the present day state of Black America. Surely the ‘vestiges of slavery’ are responsible for the family instability, high crime, welfare dependency and poor academic achievement that are epidemic.
But consider these historical facts… From 1890 to 1940, blacks had a marriage rate slightly higher than whites and a comparable rate of two-parent families. In 1940 illegitimacy among blacks was 19 percent. In 1960 illegitimacy was 22 percent. In a study conducted by Herbert G. Gutman ("The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom, 1750-1925") it was determined that , in Harlem between 1905 and 1925, only 3 percent of all families were headed by a woman under 30, and 85 percent of black children lived in two-parent families.
Why are these numbers important? A one-parent family is six times more likely to be poor than the two-parent family. 60% of children with unmarried mothers are likely to score in the lower half of their class and 25% are likely to have behavioral or learning problems. 70% of the young offenders in our criminal justice system today come from single-parent households.
What are the results of President Johnson’s ‘War on Poverty’? Today black illegitimacy is 70 percent. Only 36 percent of black children live in two-parent families. One of every three black males (20-29) is involved in the penal system (this is projected to be two of every three black males by 2020). 40 percent of black males are marginally illiterate. One of every 12 black males in Washington, D.C. is a victim of homicide.
Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if slavery and institutionalized racism are the roots of black disenfranchisement - that the negative societal reaction of blacks to those evils would have been more prominent in the generations immediately following slavery and during the era of Jim Crow? How can Liberals explain the past strength of black families in a time of lynching and segregation in juxtaposition to the current failures? Yet Liberals would have us continue to believe that 40 years after the enacting of Civil Rights reforms and after $7 trillion dollars spent on the ‘Great Society’ programs that the foundation of Black America is in worse shape NOW because of the ‘vestiges of slavery’.
Welfare has sponsored and encouraged illegitimacy, immorality and the destruction of the black family.
"Destroy the family, and the society will collapse."
Liberals are incapable of admitting the painful truth: the inability of the welfare state to effectively change society for the better. The failure of present day Black America has nothing to do with race or (in large) racism… and everything to do with the nature of government – and how the increasingly liberal face of government has undermined the family and the individual.
“Since the social victim has been oppressed by society, he comes to feel that his individual life will be improved more by changes in society than by his own initiative. Without realizing it, he makes society rather than himself the agent of change. The power he finds in his victimization may lead him to collective action against society, but it also encourages passivity within the sphere of his personal life…
To have more college-educated minorities, we don't need to work at instilling the principle of intellectual excellence, or at raising the standards in inner-city schools, or at making minority neighborhoods safe for children. (In fact, we allow license and lowered standards to prevail in these areas.) And we don't need to engage our ``client population'' personally. A group preference in college admissions is a simple and impersonal intervention by which we can manufacture a wonderfully 'diverse campus' even when black students average three hundred SAT points below whites and Asians, as has been the case at the University of California at Berkeley.”
“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
Benjamin Franklin, in "The Encouragement of Idleness," 1766
“The remedy for poverty is not in the material resources of the rich, but in the moral resources of the poor. These, which are lulled and deadened by money-gifts, can be raised and strengthened only by personal influence, sympathy, charity. Money gifts save the poor man who gets them, but give longer life to pauperism in the country.”
8. Right to bear arms.
Liberals have few qualms about trampling the constitution and there is no greater evidence of that sin than their fanatical desire to unarm the American people. But for what purpose….?
"Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with the view of confiscating them and leaving the population defenseless."
- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
"The most foolish mistake we could possible make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms ..."
- Adolph Hitler, Fuehrer of Nazi Germany
"The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. [...] They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results."
- Prime Minister Benito Mussolini before the Italian Senate, June 8, 1923
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington, First President of the United States in a speech to Congress, January 7, 1790
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of Independence, 3rd President of the United States
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1928, Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were unable to defend themselves and were rounded up and exterminated. In 1964, Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1970, Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1956, Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
9. War on drugs.
I, like most conservatives, don’t care what you liberals are smoking (and not inhaling).
10. Pro-oil energy policies-
Like it our not oil is the life blood of our economy and as yet there is no viable technology that is ready to replace it. Fuel cells? A letter to the editors of CAR & DRIVER makes an interesting point that must have escaped you:
“We burn fossil fuel in a power plant somewhere and convert at some relatively inefficient rate into electricity. We then transmit that electricity through a series of step-up transformers, power lines, and step down transformers with a power loss at each stage. We then convert the AC current to DC (with more power loss) to hydrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen (more power loss). We then compress the hydrogen (more power necessary) into containers and transport it (in diesel powered trucks) to the fuel cell automobile… I’ll bet that a serious study would reveal that this fuel cell car runs along at an efficiency rate of, at best, a few percent.”
Of course the fact that you are looking to JIMMY CARTER for advice speaks to the depth of thought that you have applied to this topic.
And candidate Kerry’s draconian proposals of a 35 MPG CAFÉ standard and a $.50 hike in the gas tax are delusional non starters - unless you’re a granola crunching, treehugging leftist that rides a bike from the commune to the free clinic for your AZT treatments.
11. The invasion of Iraq and the “Bush Doctrine”-
I’ve addressed this before and don’t feel a need to repeat myself ad-nauseam every time some dumbfuck who’s flunking his way through a political science course taught by an America hating, Chomsky quoting, leftist troglodyte cuts and pastes some liberal dribble from his favorite hate site.
But when you can come up with something original feel free to try again.
And for the rest of you liberals:
There is no part of conservatism that says you should be a dispassionate observer of your fellow man. If Americans as a people are truly concerned about an issue – then they have a right, indeed a duty, to affect a remedy. Conservatives merely recognize that the mechanizations of the federal government are ill suited to a role best served by family, friends, the church, charitable organizations and the concerned individuals of the local community.
So if in fact you are concerned about the homeless, the plight of the inner city youths, our under performing school system, etc…. PLEASE feel free to volunteer, to give to charity, to get off your lazy asses and do something other than bitch on the internet about ways to spend my tax dollars on your ideal of a socialist Utopia.
“In fact, charity is an axiom of conservatism. Charity is one of the great responsibilities of freedom. But, in order for us to be responsible-and therefore free - that responsibility must be personal. There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as 'caring' and 'sensitive' because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't?”