Skip to comments.What is compassionate conservatism?
Posted on 04/27/2006 6:06:38 AM PDT by ElPatriota
What is compassionate conservatism? Apr 27, 2006 by Marvin Olasky ( bio | archive | contact )
Email to a friend Print this page Text size: A A Columnist Peggy Noonan recently quoted a journalist saying that the expansion of federal entitlement spending during the past five years should come as no surprise, since George W. Bush "ran as a compassionate conservative." Noonan's frustrated reaction: "This left me rubbing my brow in confusion. Is that what Mr. Bush meant by compassionate conservatism?"
I don't think so, judging by several conversations then-Gov. Bush and I had in Texas during the 1990s. At that time, compassionate conservatism was about neither government growth nor budget-cutting. Instead, it was a different way of looking at what government should do, what "civil society" -- religious and civic groups -- should do and what individuals should do.
Democrats had equated compassion for the poor with government poverty-fighting expenditures: Vote against my spending bill and you're hard-hearted. They maintained that position even though entitlement programs did more harm than good when they enabled and even encouraged people to cease efforts.
Republican critics of those programs had repeatedly made the mistake of implying that welfare programs were fine except for their expense: I'm for your bill, but let's cut the outlay by 10 percent. Welfare programs were expensive, but this affluent country could afford them. The real cost was multigenerational welfare dependency.
Oops, this is just a portion of the article!
I just don't see the "compassion" in the king taking the hard earned money of citizens and simply giving it away to others.
Where is the compassion in this?
It is neither compassionate nor conservative to take property (money) belonging to someone who earned it and give it to someone who didn't. It might be compassionate to give one's own property to someone else but when the IRS is the highwayman and donor it is criminal.
Bending over and grabbing your ankles.
Or ... having the "Can't we all just get along" attitude, while the enemy does everything in their power to destroy you.
A compassionate conservative is one that believes in hard work and the American dream, while still having enough sense to give some people a leg up to make the world go round without giving them the shirt off your back.
Where is the compassion in this?
We all know that Bush is an "idea"/big picture sort of guy who does not think or express himself well in verbal concepts ...
He does not comprehend the difference between compassion and confiscation. What the heck!? They both start with a "c".
1. Holding back your Tomahawk missiles on the trailer that Saddam, his sons, and his entire cabinet WAS positively identified as meeting in and could have possibly saved more solider lives "because you gave them 48 hours" and only 10 had passed (see last night's Discovery Channel).
2. Saying "Brownie, you're doin' a heckuva job!" a week before he's removed.
3. Proposing that 12 million illegal aliens be treated as "guest workers"
4. Spending borrowed money like a drunken sailor on liberty in a Yokohama whorehouse that our great-great grandchildren will eventually have to pay back.
5. Passing a No Child Left Behind Act that demands all children, regardless of their misbehavior and violent rule breaking, get access to classrooms until the age of 18
6. Giving senior citizens, who alread draw social security and medicare supplements, nearly free medication for anything ailing them.
7. Backing a Defense Secretary that put too few troops with too little armor in harm's way and who practically no one in senior military leadership wants.
8. Apologizing to the leader of the most repressive Communist regime in history because a demonstrator yelled a him.
8. Trying to push through a ports deal with the very enemy you're engaged in war with as its management.
9. Failing to cast one single veto on odious legislation because it might offend the opposition party.
10. Finally, compassionate conservatism is failure to issue an executive order that guts the average of $.50 of federal tax on ever gallon of gas to help alleviate the current crisis until alternative fuels can surface.
LOL - Sort of like "Diet Coke" not the real thing.. (music).... but close enough...! :)
This is very good... sometimes I WANT to make the point why I am POff with the prez, and my memory fails me then, but I do know all this things you listed. I will keep the list for the next time I needed.
Another thing, when you look at the list... then you realize what we already know: That is not ONE thing alone... but all of them added up, show a pattern that is worrisome.
There is no compassion in filling a man's stomach or his pocketbook by relieving him of his responsibilities in life. Illegal aliens have abandoned their own house in order to be comfortable in ours. By so doing neither can be the master of his own house and both will be enemies in the street. This is our house, the U.S. of A., and it is our responsibility to set the rules in it.
The issue of a guest worker program is separate from the issue of illegal aliens. If illegal aliens take jobs from Americans (and they do) they take even more jobs from foreign nationals who apply by the legal route to work here and wait years for the chance. Illegal aliens steal that chance from them.
They are different groups of people, regardless of their country of origin, and the political issues that concern them are different in their effects and needs. Confusing the two may be lethal to our society, economy and sovereignty.
We already have a guest worker program, which may indeed need to be reformed. But illegal aliens are those who have not applied to be guest workers. There are 11 million of them by some estimates, 20 million by others. The only thing needing reform concerning illegal aliens is to enforce the existing laws respecting their presence and their employment here. Our sovereignty and rule-of-law demand it.
Border security is the number one problem in this debate. The flood of illegal aliens is a major factor in relation to our lack of border security but it is only one factor. There is also a matter of national security in a time of war and in an age when terrorists have set their sights on inflicting mass destruction on our society.
After the issues of border security and millions of illegal foreign nationals on our soil the matter of guest workers is very small in comparison. Until the first two problems are thoroughly and firmly addressed the guest worker issue should not even be discussed.
The President and the Senate need to get that message with unambiguous resolve.
The best methods to control the border have been studied and debated for a long time now. There are many good ideas and proven solutions. What is lacking is only the will to do it. The cost of controlling our borders will be insignificant compared to the price we will pay, both in security and economy, if we do not.
It would be nice to help everyone in the world lift themselves up out of poverty. But we cannot take that responsibility upon ourselves especially if we ignore our own welfare to the point that we are no longer prosperous.
Other nations of the world have an obligation to help their citizens every bit as much as we have to help ours. It is one thing to help other nations prosper it is quite another to relieve them of their own responsibilities. Beyond that it is simply not realistic to think that poverty can be ended around the world. We still have some in this great nation.
We must stop pandering to American employers who criminally employ illegal foreign nationals. Dry up the jobs and illegal foreign nationals will go home. Home where they can do what they must to put their house in order just as we must put ours in order.
Rinoism.. Feelings feelings.. Actually its a democrat with fake horn on his nose trying to be a RINO that hangs with Elephants..
Too much common sense! ... you must a freak :)
Great stuff, thanks :)
:) RINOISM... new word? :)
It'll never fly in Washington will it? ; )
Well, They may pay attention
I keep saying - part of my mantra :) - That the "rules of the game," have changed. The "country club" (congress), it will never go back to the "good old days," when politicians could "operate" with a certain amount of "privacy." Ain't gonna hapeen, no more :) I am afraid. Too many people, too many bloggers INTRUDING :), in the business of governing the country "damn shame, yeaaah." :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.