A CALL TO ACTION!

Next Opponent

            While I am glad to see Joe Dullin quite writing his diatribes in the HJ we now have a new opponent who is just ripe for debate. He starts out by condemning the few letters to the editor which have been warning of creeping socialism within our country and then goes on to make the point that socialism is good. The lack of sophistication in his arguments has become common during the last few years but yet deserve an answer whenever possible. He starts out by stating the “tactics of fear seem to work for our conservative friends but the rest of us aren’t so easily derailed or amused I might add.” Where to begin? First of all do we not fact threats from violent Jihadists, a mass invasion of illegal immigrants, destruction of the nuclear family, etc.? If you want to talk about cheap tricks and pulling rabbits out of the hat, using ridicule and slinging epitaphs is par for the course from our leftist brethren. You see our concerns are that “… we don’t like Arabs, Mexicans, abortionists and homos.”  I thought it was proof of homophobia to refer to homosexuals as homos. And the fact that millions of Arabs want to cut off our heads might be a legitimate concern. We are told that only about 10-15% of Muslims support Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Well that amounts to at least 130 to 200 million Muslims.

            Then he goes on to complaining about our “…phone lines being tapped, our constitutional rights weakened and our privacy dissolved.” The left is quick to exaggerate the threats to our liberties (of which I am also very concerned) while at the same time minimizing the threats that we face from abroad and even here at home. Is monitoring international calls from known terrorists to people within the US really that great a threat to our liberties? I would bet that he is unaware of the Clinton program called Esalen which monitored millions of Americans calls, faxes etc. all within the borders of America and with no clear ties to criminal or terrorist enterprises. The Clintons administrations collection of FBI files on his opponents also seems to have escaped his awareness. What about their attempts to make encryption of communications easily breakable by the government. I could go on and on but the hypocrisy is rather trying. We are at war with an implacable enemy who will not give up, has a very long memory (they are still fighting the crusades) and to not have any moral compunction whatsoever. They kill innocent children, women, fellow Muslims or anyone that might serve their twisted purpose without regret.

            According to Al Qaeda we have killed 4,000 of their compatriots in Iraq since 2003. If you actually read the NIE you will find a much more nuanced analysis than that portrayed by the New York Times, etc. I also noticed that they pick and choose their evidence while accusing the Bush Administration of cherry picking intelligence date on Iraq.

            He then enters fairy land by claiming “Much of Western Europe, Scandinavia, and to an extent Canada, nations with fewer resources who are virtually kicking our fanny economically and our traditional allies in the developed world.” He is highly mistaken. The United States economy continues to lead the world. Our closest competitor would have to be Sweden. I came across a very thoughtful and informative article which I highly recommend. It can be found here:  http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=082806E

Then he goes on to condemn the Republican’s of out of control spending. I couldn’t agree with him more on this issue. But would he spend less? He implies not. He seems to be for more income redistribution not less and more power to government. So which is it? The Republicans are evil for spending so much and the growth of government or simply that they are not spending our money for programs which they support. While trumpeting numerous government programs and stating that they haven’t wrecked the train, he fails to understand the increasing growth of these programs and the incessant call for more of the same. At what point will our system collapse? The pending doom of Social Security is evidently a taboo subject or at least one to be ignored. At what point does the growth of the Dept. of Commerce, Agriculture and Education become unsustainable and how do these departments actually contribute to the overall good of society. To me they seem to exist solely for themselves, to generate more regulations and paperwork which add further drain to our economy. 

            Then the old class canard comes into play. He states “…that if you do not make $500,000 a year, the Republican Party is not for you.” I am sure that he arrives at that number by estimating the cutoff point where tax cuts have provided the most benefit. Perhaps he has failed to realize that because the rich in this country pay the most taxes (by far) they will benefit the most from a tax cut. He also fails to understand that by cutting these taxes there is more to reinvest in our economy which stimulates job growth. This kind of thinking uses one of the oldest tricks in the books. Hate the rich and those who make the most money. They are the enemy. I say those who want government to control more and more of our lives are the true enemy. Does he really think that some bureaucrat will spend my money and protect my interests better than myself? Doest not more government, by definition mean less freedom? Then comes a real whopper. “The progressive minded individual has come to terms with the fact that a society that only benefits the richest 20 or 30 percent population is not a healthy system.” This statement implies that the rest of us because we aren’t rich do not benefit from our economy or system. Now that is a bold statement. This concept is so absurd it is hard to know where to begin to counter it. He then goes on to spout statistics about how the richest are becoming richer at the expense of the rest of us. Never mind that the Democrats where in control of government during much of this timeframe, he clearly fails to realize that all of us are doing much better financially. Our standard of living is much higher than during the 1960’s. The noted economist Thomas Sowell has written extensively on this subject and is worthy or our study.  http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17347

            Finally he then tries to paint himself as some kind of reasonable person who only wants a “fair balance of raw capitalism and raw socialism is exactly what our society needs.” I submit that is what we already have and it is thwarting economic growth, already has made promises which we cannot hope to meet and severally prevents further opportunities for all. Supporting endless bureaucrats who are constantly devising new ways to waste our money while adding numerous regulations which accomplish little and make it harder and harder to make ends meet or run a successful business. His arguments are old hat and ignore the grave economic crisis that most of old Europe is facing a grave crisis with its socialist programs and stagnating economy. Unemployment is very high and pending benefits which have been promised to its citizens are not only under funded but will require drastic cuts in benefits and higher taxes with resulting tremendous social unrest. The problems facing them make our Social Security problem and other entitlements seem like small potatoes.

            His ignorance can be somewhat forgiven by his youth, but none the less when you enter the public forum and make sweeping recommendations like his you should have some grasp of the facts.

Peace