By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
The liberal left's argument is about as old as they get. Because the right-wing conservative republicans are against entitlement programs including welfare, food stamps, and now Obama's health care law, the liberal left democrats claim the GOP is out to starve the poor, leave the homeless freezing in the cold, and force grandma to have no health care, social security, and for her to resort to eating cat food.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Recently, in the Washington Post, liberal commentator E.J. Dionne, Jr. goes so far as to headline one of his articles with, "Conservatives used to care about community. What happened?"
Like the rest of the liberal left community, liberal left progressives have decided to believe their own bullcrap.
Dionne proclaims in the first paragraph that, "Conservatives are no longer allowed to acknowledge that government can improve citizens' lives."
The opening premise allows him to stuff just about anything he wants into his accusation. However, it is no secret that Republicans, or at least the ones that are of the conservative stripe, believe in limited government, and that it is not government's job to improve citizens' lives, or at least in the manner that Mr. Dionne is implying. Freedom hinges on our ability to pursue our own happiness, through hard work, self-reliance, and individual decision making. That is not to say that conservatives don't believe in fostering community. Conservatives just believe that fostering community is done through individualism, and the voluntary decision to participate in civic activities. When government does it, instead of individuals based on their own voluntary decisions, it stops being about community and becomes about buying votes through what politicians can offer through entitlements, and authoritarian control by the central system of governance.
Mr. Dionne goes on to say, "Today's conservatism is about low taxes, fewer regulations, less government - and little else."
Hasn't that always been the primary emphasis of the GOP platform?
Dionne's accusations go further, listing a number of republicans whose seats are in danger because of not-so-conservative actions in office.
What does the democrats think of their own that dare to be pro-life? Or pro-marriage? How about those gun-toting democrats? Aren't they reprimanded for daring to challenge the liberal mindset? Besides, it is not that the voters are abandoning community, or are ready to chuck their representatives because those rats dared to collaborate with some democrats. Conservative GOP voters have realized that republicans that have bought into the establishment way of doing things, and shun the Constitution as evidenced by their actions and voting record, are a part of the problem. The failure of the federal government, and the rise of draconian policies, are not just because of the democrats that are in place, but because of the establishment republicans that refuse to adhere to their claimed conservative principles. Since they refuse to represent the people as the people wish, their seats are in danger. That is how a republic works.
Unlike Mr. Dionne's warped opinion that America's prosperity comes from the government as much as from the private sector, the fact is capitalism and freedom from governmental regulations and intrusion is what made this nation strong over the last two centuries. Individual accomplishments, successes, and the creation of wealth promotes the community. The successful person becomes more involved in his community, creates jobs as his business thrives, and provides goods for the community. By putting the individual first, the community ultimately benefits. When community is placed higher than the individual, and government tries to dictate to communities through measures of control, the community breaks down and fails, and ultimately the individuals become slaves to The State.
The importance of individual groups to the community, like family units, corporations, and in the long run the individual states, is not a sign of communitarianism, but also a salute to individualism. Those "communal units," as Mr. Dionne calls them, succeed when they act on a voluntary, individual basis.
The Washington Post's commentator is right in the fact that Americans do have a healthy tension between individualism and community, but through the individual decision to contribute to their community, not through governmental dictates. Government is not supposed to be charity, and it is not supposed to replace the churches as the hubs of community involvement. Liberty does in fact include a responsibility to community, but once again, as a voluntary and individual decision, without the direct influence of government.
When government compels an individual to give to their community through national community organizations, or by the redistribution of wealth, that is not liberty. That is tyranny through government dictate.
Further down the article Dionne begins to really show his ignorance for history, and the Constitution, bringing up the Marine Hospital Service system of 1798, and then calling John Adams a great conservative President.
The "socialized medicine" he is referring to was more like the Veterans Administration, and less like Obamacare, than Mr. Dionne realizes. The Ports were federally owned, and the people placed in that "AdamsCare" were federal employees. As for Adams being conservative, Dionne's wrong there, too. He was a federalist, though Adams was admittedly a moderate member of the Federalist Party, and the federalists overall desired bigger government. The people, however, did not agree with the Federalist Party's idea of an ever-expanding federal government, and that is why the party faded away during the 1820s.
President Taft, also called a conservative by Mr. Dionne, is heralded in the author's article as being the man behind a federal housing program. In reality, Taft was a fiscal conservative, but not so conservative on everything else. And regardless of if he was a Republican or a Democrat, a federally funded housing program is still unconstitutional. Just because some Republican in history decided to support such a program it doesn't mean that he represents the platform of conservatism as Mr. Dionne implies.
Mr. Dionne's examples then brings up Eisenhower's creation of the interstate highway system, and the federal student loan programs, in the 1950s. Again, just because Eisenhower was a republican, it does not mean that everything he did was conservative. In the case of the interstate highway system, which is a State responsibility, not a federal one, Eisenhower actually did exactly what James Madison refused to do in 1817. The Federal Public Works bill of 1817 was vetoed by Madison because it was unconstitutional, and the Congress made the same arguments in their bill in 1817 as did the Congress to Eisenhower in the 50s. The difference is that Eisenhower did not have the same understanding of the original intent of the Constitution as Madison did, and erroneously signed an unconstitutional bill into law.
In the article Mr. Dionne misrepresents Ronald Reagan's humor regarding taxes drastically, and also misrepresents Reagan's view of community, as well. Of course Reagan promoted community, with people working together, tidy neighborhoods, and the importance of the centrality of families and neighborhoods. All of those things are important, but they ought to be achieved without governmental interference. Refusing to allow government intrusion does not make Conservatives anti-community, but instead makes them people who understands the limiting principles of the Constitution, and the importance that community is something that is fostered by individuals on a voluntary basis, not by an overly intrusive government.
Mr. Dionne including George W. Bush in his article was the richest of all. I agree, Bush 43 was not a conservative when it came to his domestic policies, therefore by Dionne using Dubya's presidency as an example of conservatism shows us that the writer has no clue what conservatism is truly about. Bush's No Child Left Behind law, and the prescription drug benefit, were examples of Bush's progressive nature on domestic issues. I don't care how often the man called himself a "compassionate conservative." Actions speak louder than words, and those actions by Bush were anything but conservative.
Government, unlike what the liberal leftists like Mr. Dionne believes, is not supposed to possess the role of serving the common good. That is our responsibility. The federal government is there to promote the General Welfare by protecting the union from foreign enemies, ensuring the union remains united by acting as a mediator in disputes between the States, and making laws that promote and preserve the union pursuant of the Constitution - and nothing else.
Mr. Dionne goes on to blame today's difficult political environment on the conservatives being unwilling to play ball. The problem, my dear Mr. Dionne, is actually coming from the democrats. They have moved so far to the left that the conservative voters are sincerely afraid. We are watching this President use executive orders to bypass Congress, and pass draconian laws like Obamacare designed to enlarge the federal government's authoritarian control over the populace. The voters believe that if we don't stop this socialist madness, we will lose our country. Conservatives are not being partisan and anti-community. They are afraid that this nation as founded is slipping through their fingers, and believe the way to get it turned around is to resort to what worked originally to make us the great and prosperous nation we are. Those principles are present in the pages of the Constitution, and include limited government, low taxation (and in reality an absence of direct taxation), low government spending that only follows Constitutional guidelines and can be paid back by the present generation, and community through individual successes and voluntary choices. That is the America they remember, and the community we are trying to return to.
Mr. Dionne can throw around as many scare tactics, misrepresentations, and allude to people like McCarthy all he wants, but in the end, it comes down to the facts, and he has those all fouled up.
Community is an individual endeavor, not a governmental mandate, and the sooner people like E.J. Dionne realizes that, the sooner we can get back to the United States as it was founded, and not one built in the progressive image that the Founding Fathers would have never desired.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Conservatives used to care about community. What happened? - Washington Post
James Madison's Veto of Federal Public Works Bill, 1817 - Constitution.org
Defending Obamacare, Professor Einer Elhauge of Harvard Law School Reveals His Constitutional Ignorance - Political Pistachio
No comments:
Post a Comment