(Editorial note: A few days ago I started writing an article about Freedom. I have long been fascinated with the concept. In fact, I can trace my interest back to an argument I had with a nun in 1st grade. “Freedom” finds a way into most of my classes too – I love nothing more than to shock students with my crazy ideas on the topic. But, Freedom is a complicated topic – and the short post I started a few days ago is rapidly expanding to book-length. I want to get something posted – so here is a snippet. It comes as a subpoint to a sub-subheading of the original; argument, but fortunately it stands on its own…..)
———————————————————-
Let’s listen in on a short conversation between Lefty and Righty.
Both are Lefty and Right are elderly and both are handicapped veterans – Righty lost his left leg in the war and Lefty lost his right leg. They are sitting in their wheelchairs in the activity room of the local VA senior center. Righty is clearly agitated and could use some Valium. Lefty is a bit too mellow and probably needs to have his Valium prescription reduced a bit….. or else he should share with Righty…..
Righty: I am tired of the government stealing my hard earned money and giving it away to others! That is socialism! This is a free country and it is my money and I should have the freedom to spend it as I wish!
Lefty: Sometimes those of us who have more need to give some of what we have to those of us who have less. It is the right and moral thing to do….
Righty: Don’t talk to me about “right and moral” things! I give away plenty of my money to charity – but on a volunteer basis, and I donate my time too! It should be my choice to do that – it is not up to the government to do it for me!
Lefty: You may give to charity – but charity alone is never enough. The need always exceeds what people are willing to give voluntarily. Do you think that people would give enough to cover the need?
Righty: The need only exceeds the charity because you lefty commie bastards have created a welfare state and you have taught people to depend on it! If the welfare state didn’t exist then charity would go to the small number of people who really need it! The rest of the lazy buggers would just have to get to work!
Lefty: So you think that volunteerism would be sufficient to support the social needs of this nation if the lazy people would just get to work?
Rightly: Yes! If the damned liberals would stop teaching them to rely on handouts they would have to get to work!
Lefty: Hmmm…. So – we have voluntary food pantries, and various churches and organizations like the Salvation Army feed people at the mission – and that should be enough to take care of the need – that is as long as the lazy folks start working?
Righty: Exactly! Remember, with the lazy folks all working there wouldn’t be as much need for all those “social services” and the government could get out of the food stamp and welfare business! Besides, it’s unconstitutional anyway!
Lefty: Unconstitutional?
Righty: Yes, unconstitutional! The Constitution says the government can raise taxes to have a Post Office and to raise an army for defense and a bunch of other stuff but the Constitution says nothing about providing people with food!
Lefty: But the Constitution says that the government can provide for the “General Welfare.”
Righty: Leftist garbage! “General Welfare” is just shorthand to mean “all the stuff the Constitution already provides for specifically….” – you libs just don’t understand the Constitution – in fact I bet none of you have even read it!
Lefty: But if “General Welfare” was just supposed to be shorthand, why did they write it in there at all… Oh, never mind. How did you get there today?
Righty: I drove myself like I always do! I may be in this chair and I may not get around as fast as I used to but am still free to drive – at least until you libs take that freedom from me too!
Lefty: Where did you park?
Righty: In the handicapped spot – like I always do – right next to that hippie-mobile junker you drive!
Lefty: I think we should make handicapped parking spots voluntary.
Righty: Huh?
Lefty: Yes – or more accurately, we should make enforcement voluntary. We should keep the parking spaces there – but instead of saying “$250.00 fine” the sign should read “Please reserve these spaces for those who truly need them.” We might add “out of goodness and charity” but that would probably take up too much space.
Righty: But then there wouldn’t be any spaces for guys like us who really need them!
Lefty: Why not? You said yourself that volunteerism and charity would be sufficient. Do you mean to tell me that people who didn’t need the spaces – people who had no disability – would simply park there anyway?
Righty: Damned right they would – you know that!
Lefty: But this is a free country. Shouldn’t people have the right – the FREEDOM – to park anywhere they want?
Righty: But if people exercise the freedom to park anywhere they want then guys like me – guys like us – we lose our freedom because we can’t be assured of ever having a useable parking space….
Lefty: Besides, it’s unconstitutional…. The Constitution says nothing about providing parki….
Righty: Oh shut up! Where’s the food? Isn’t there supposed to be food here?
Lefty: Dunno…. after the budget cutbacks to the VA one of the local churches was supposed to start bringing the food… but that apparently hasn’t happened….
Tags: ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, conservative, democrat, left-wing, liberal, political, republican, right-wing, socialist, taxes, wordpress-political-blogs
March 5, 2010 at 4:45 pm |
** GUFFAW **
What is this? You know Hippie, I love you man but you’re living on Vulcan. Lefties are incredibly generous – with other people’s money.
Every survey has shown that Christian Conservatives are the most generous people on earth. Doubt me?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1
It’s a myth, and a well proven one in study after study about the charitable nature of liberals, especially rich liberals.
You need to start over on your thesis.
March 5, 2010 at 4:53 pm |
I never claimed that one side or the other gives more, Tex. I am claiming that charity isn’t enough. That isa very different thing….
– hp
March 5, 2010 at 5:00 pm |
Hippie,
Speaking only for my wife and me, if every $2.00 we made, we didn’t have to refund $1.00 back on taxes, fees or services, most which we in no way benefit from, we could be a lot more generous. If you have a land line, check your phone bill and you will be amazed at how heavily we are taxed. It’s outrageous.
Taxes are simply out of control, and a large part of the frustration many of us have with any government. That alone drives the Tea Party. Really.
March 5, 2010 at 4:48 pm |
Hippie, check your filter. My first comment is awaiting approval unless you’ve changed your mind about moderated comments.
March 5, 2010 at 4:50 pm |
Comment approved Tex….. my spam filter has been acting strangely lately….
– hp
March 5, 2010 at 4:57 pm |
Hippie, though I am not a blogger, I think if I remember right from memory, WordPress automatically moves any post with two links to the spam filter.
Rutherford would be the one to ask.
Hope you’re doing well. I was afraid you’d been so repulsed by my vindictive nature and “wicked nature”, you had abandoned all of us.
March 5, 2010 at 5:08 pm |
First Tex, Hippie probably has his “number of hyperlinks allowed” setting at 1 so you went into moderation for putting two links in your comment. Hippie can reset that as he pleases.
Now to the post. Phew!!! Hippie when I saw the title I thought you had turned to the dark side. ROTFL
What Tex does not understand and what he doesn’t even seem to have gleaned from your hypothetical conversation is that it doesn’t matter how charitable conservatives are. Let’s take Tex’s premise lock stock and barrel. Liberals are stingy bastards who spend other people’s money and conservatives are charitable good souls who volunteer at every opportunity. The point of your post, correct me if I’m wrong, is that
it’s not enough!
There aren’t enough charitable conservatives out there to fill the need.
Your other point which I got a huge chuckle from, is that everyone likes their “entitlement”. They get all hyperventilating about other people’s entitlements but when it comes to their own, ehhhh not so much.
Funny that you touch on the “folks are lazy” theme. Great minds think alike. I hit that same topic in my latest article. (Jeesh, someone on another blog called me an “attention whore” today.)
========================
Quick personal aside:
One morning about 15 years ago I was circling the corporate parking lot looking for a spot because the handicapped spots were full. As I circled I noticed an apparently able bodied man get out of a car that was in a handicapped spot. I was having a bad morning, I was late, and I was livid. I rolled down my window and challenged him. He told me he had a heart condition. I felt like dirt. As soon as I got to my office, I called him and apologized. Since then I’ve never challenged someone in a handicapped spot again even though a good many folks have probably been cheating.
March 5, 2010 at 8:52 pm |
No Rutherford. You and Hippie don’t get it. The problem isn’t lack of charity. It’s lack of responsibility and accountability. I heard the same horseshit about a lack of charity when welfare reform was signed. And what happened? It built a sense of self-worth and helped to lower poverty. It’s human nature!
What you guys refuse to understand is the record of history. To build a dependency upon anything reduces someone’s self worth and self respect. You don’t believe me, you look at what the Great Society has done to multi-generations of folks. We have spent trillions of dollars to be charitable with good intent and destroyed hundreds of thousands of families in the process.
And Rutherford, you better than any of us should recognize this fact. Look at the status of the black family.
If you want to increase something, it shouldn’t be charity. It should be teaching responsibility.
March 6, 2010 at 12:22 am |
Tex, I’d go so far as to say some balance is needed. If you provide a helping hand in a society totally absent of any expectation of responsibility than you might indeed build this nanny state that you fear so much.
But I think American society does encourage responsibility. I still think conservatives have a paradoxical problem here as I stated on my own blog. On the one hand you talk (even brag) about the industrious “real” Americans and in the same breath you don’t trust Americans to take just so much of a helping hand when needed and then do for themselves. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
March 5, 2010 at 6:23 pm |
General welfare doesn’t mean for the government to control every part of our lives. The typical liberal is so far off about what real conservatives are all about. We don’t advocate NO government. Just a LIMITED government. Right now our government has gotten so far out of control … yes, THE PEOPLE are supposed to control the government, not the other way around. I wonder how liberals miss that all the time. Anyway, here is something you might find interesting; it pretty much clears up the difference between the left and the right…
http://bigjournalism.com/jhudnall/2010/02/11/the-new-fascists-part-1-a-political-primer/
I hope you have a great weekend hp!
March 5, 2010 at 7:32 pm |
Good job getting at the idiocy of the “socialist” rant. School lunch programs to the VA itself should be seen as socialist- commie conspiracies by the typical right-wing nuts. To some in the Tea Party movement these are indeed indications of too much control by the government. Yet, the republican obstructionists are not interested in working together to solve economic, health, or social problems. Most of us were and are centrist as regards social policy or government programs, but the extremist, fear-mongering, right-wing ideologues have succeeded in closing down real discussion.
March 5, 2010 at 7:36 pm |
“School lunch programs and the VA” is seen as socialist-commie conspiracies by the typical right-wing nuts.
And you base this blather on what?
It is written to ‘go from the presence of a foolish man when thou percievest not in him the lips of knowledge’ … and brother, you fit that bill!
March 5, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
OH Baloney. Your own language gives you away. You’re a damn left wing hack without the balls like Rutherford and Hippie to admit as much. You sanctimonious clowns always frame it as somehow you’re a “centrist” – and more often than not, that means you’re a self-absorbed lout.
March 5, 2010 at 11:14 pm |
Good point Taylor!
March 6, 2010 at 12:59 am |
[...] meet. If you like smarmy condescension in your unrepentant political propaganda, then by all means, check it out. Otherwise, you can thank me later for sparing you the not so thinly veiled pro-Obamareidpelosicare [...]
March 6, 2010 at 7:11 pm |
And then there are all the good conservative farmers who scream at any threat to cut their crop support or insurance, or the services from the state extension service, etc……
March 6, 2010 at 10:55 pm |
Not being a farmer, I have no intention to answer for them, since I find the whole idea of subsidies absurd. But then, I don’t have much use for the Department of Agriculture, either.
March 6, 2010 at 7:13 pm |
The underlying question is whether one views the government as ‘we the people’, or as some foreign entity that takes our money and gives it away, rather than as an extension of our community providing for ‘the general welfare’.
March 6, 2010 at 10:54 pm |
No, the question is what was meant by the inclusion of “general welfare” in the Constitution. That question is answered in the Federalist #41 in no uncertain terms, and it doesn’t mean what big government advocates keep trying to tell us it means. This really isn’t much of a mystery, but since very few people actually read the Federalist Papers, and fewer people study them, so it becomes easy for people to be lead astray.
March 7, 2010 at 12:19 pm |
Hippie, sorry to go off topic, but you ask me last time why I appeared hostile toward universities – more specifically public universities. And you were correct that I have made it a priority to be loud and vocal about their shortcomings.
Rutherford would attest that one of my favorite journalists also happens to be a professor whom I refer to often. I read this article this morning and it summarized many of my own complaints. If not interested, skip it.
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/on-receiving-another-request-to-protest/
March 7, 2010 at 2:31 pm |
Interesting article Tex … and one that falls into your liberals creating heaven on Earth theme you introduced over at BiW’s place.
Mmmm, I wonder if Victor has volunteered to have his salary slashed? I kinda doubt it.
Oh and just in case you think this is a partisan comment on my part, I have “Tweeted” repeatedly about the hypocrisy of Arianna Huffington telling people to move their money from big banks to small ones when I can bet dollars to donuts that she hasn’t moved a cent of her millions anywhere.
P.S. Friday night on Bill Maher, Arianna complained about the indifference of CEO’s to the little guy, this coming from a woman who does not pay many of her bloggers.
March 8, 2010 at 3:58 pm |
Ack!
For the second time in recent memory I made a post late in the week only to have my home internet account go flaky on me…. all these comments to comment upon… I will be getting to it shortly. Don’y worry – I am not ignoring everyone.
– hp
March 12, 2010 at 10:43 pm |
So I’m guessing by the tenor here that I don’t the free spot in front of the booze house if I’m willing to sacrafice a few basic morals?