One of the major talking points of Senator Barack Obama's campaign has been "compassion". Obama has flown the country and world over, talking eloquently in support for the welfare of the impoverished. This is the main theme of the current Democratic Party, since the human emotion of compassion is a tool that can be abused while at the same time appearing noble. And while I would passionately agree that everything that can must be done for those less fortunate, it must be done by the private sector. The problem with this "compassion philosophy" of Barack Obama and many Americans is twofold. First, this philosophy is entirely void of responsibility; and second, it is rather self-centered. Barack Obama would gladly give away millions of Americans hard earned money to others who qualify for "compassion". And give some more, and some more, and then some more globally. Barack will gladly be the new Santa Claus, giving gifts to everyone. But not with his own money, or that of his affluent friends. Instead, Barack Obama should be called the new Robin Hood. However well intentioned Barack Obama, Democrats, Republicans, and many Americans may be concerning this "compassion philosophy", they are completely wrong. If the government would not take 30% of our money, there would be more than enough charitable organizations to take care of the needy. This "compassion philosophy" is really the only reason the Democratic Party is still in any kind of working order. If Conservatives ever figure out an intelligent and convincing way to debunk this ignorant credo, the Democrat Party will cease to be successful. Senator Barry Goldwater said it best in his intelligent book, The Conscience of a Conservative: "The long range political consequences of Welfarism are plain enough: as we have seen, the State that is able to deal with its citizens as wards and dependents has gathered unto itself unlimited political and economic power and is thus able to rule as absolutely as any oriental despot."
Think about this topic as I continue to formulate them. Thanks to Senator Barry Goldwater and my friend Carter for the ideas on this post.
1 comment:
I agree completely with the fact that Liberals, and the Democratic party itself use compassion as a selling point of their candiddate. I will take it a step further and suggest that the Liberals seem to have a monopoly on compassion. They think that if you do not believe in welfare and social handouts that you have no compassion and therefore Conservatives are cold and heartless. Yet as Kenneth has suggested, in order to sustain and hopefully improve the failing economy, the goverment MUST stay out out of the realm of charity. Churchs and charitable organiztions are more than capable of handling this crisis. Back to the subject of welfare, there seems to be a complete lack of understanding and common sense on the part of the government. If I believed in welfare(which I dont!) I would have say that all funds given to an individual should be so specific that they can only be used for that one need. For example, if you need groceries, instead of cutting you a check for $500, you would simply receive a grocery voucher where you can only use it for groceries. If you had kids and you had money coming in from the government for them,you can on use it(and here is the amazing part) for THEM. I realize some people think I'm crazy and will say "Austin, how will I be able to pay for that brand new BMW in my run down garage?" I don't know maybe you can try to find a job, as scarce as they are, and work. Or maybe you should live within the bounds of your finances. I think of it this way.... When a homeless man walks up to me when I'm pumping my gas I will not give him money. If he says he is hungry, if I have the money I will simply buy him a sandwhich( be sure to ask him specificly what he wants because he might somehow be allergic to the food you get him). If he needs gas, I'll fill up his car. If he needs medicine, I'll buy him some. What I am saying is, that if the government insists on giving free handouts it should make sure that those handouts are specific. Be compassionate but don't be as naive as this Liberals who may very well have the best intentions, but in the process of being compassionate alleviate personal responsibility from the individual.
Post a Comment