John Ransom, over at Townhall, has a column up answering his Email, Hate Mail, and Comments from Readers. And reading the first two entries, I was struck by how utterly predictable they are.
Leftie “solution” 1: When you don’t have a solution, blame someone, anyone and keep blaming them until your opponent gives up in disgust.
Bud wrote: Ransom must have memory loss. George Bush made a real mess of the economy and cannot be let off the hook by revisionist history.- in response to my [Ransom’s] column The Democrat Debt Mess. [Read Ransom’s response to both this and the next question at Townhall]
Fuzzy says: Bud, Bud, Bud, why oh why do you lefties always have to do this? It’s the same thing with every issue, every problem this country faces. Iraq? Bush lied, we should never have gone there. And on, right up to and including the economy. So I’ll play along, let’s ignore reality and pretend that the fact that we are (all numbers from 2009) now running deficits of $4.9 trillion (compared to $2.5 trillion when Bush left office), that BO has added at least $1 trillion to the federal budget (compared to the $700 billion that Bush added), and that the entitlement deficit is now 20% of the GDP (compared to 3% when Bush left office) . . . but, hey, let’s pretend Bush is responsible. Okay, good, you win. Bush did it. He’s solely and completely, totally and utterly, one hundred and fifty-eleven percent to blame.
Now what? Think we can do something like . . . oh, I don’t know . . . address the actual problem now?
Leftie “solution” 2 and 3: demonize anyone who doesn’t want to indiscriminately throw money at said problem.
Lon wrote: When Ransom describes entitlements and road building as a boondoggle, he is making clear that he considers providing a safety net for the poor, the elderly, and the disabled, the groups protected by those entitlements, to be things to be dismissed. -in response to my column Tax Congress!
Fuzzy says: Lon, most conservatives, though by no means all, do want to provide a safety net for the poor, elderly, and disabled. But a safety net is not the same thing as generational welfare. What has happened with the safety net is that it has become a lifestyle (and certainly BO is not entirely to blame for this, the foundation goes back decades during which time it’s been fed and fueled by Democrat and big-government Republicans alike, including President Bush).
But here’s the actual problem, more and more people are going onto welfare and food stamps (truly staggering numbers under BO alone), the middle classes are shrinking as they are being taxed and via other policies forced down and out of it. Right onto public assistance. This is not a safety net; this is an anchor, dragging and holding down both the poor and the working and middle classes. This is the mindful destruction of our society in the name of “helping” the poor, elderly, and disabled. It is, in other words, unAmerican and unconscionable.
These questions are illustrative of the illogical and ridiculous nature of the leftist thought process (if it can be called that). They have three, and only three, responses to every issue and every problem: blame, demonize, throw money at it.
Got a problem that needs a solution? Don’t ask a leftist, all you’ll get is finger-pointing and blame-laying. Do they honestly believe that it matters who caused the problem? Who can say, but what is abundantly clear is that their thought process (you know, if you want to call it that) grinds to a screeching halt at finding and blaming the person they believe (usually single-handedly, as in the case of President Bush) caused everything from economic collapse to human conditions such as greed or envy. Bizarre? Of course it is. But that’s what we’re dealing with. Best to just say, okay, yep, you win. Bush did it. Now what?
When the blame game doesn’t get dragged out (and it’s rare indeed when it’s not), they resort to the senseless and illogical demonizing of their “enemy.” Do they honestly believe that conservative Americans want the poor, elderly, and disabled to die? Yep. That’s exactly what they believe. And they believe that for two very clear reasons: one, they are told that by “authorities” (the so-called media, leftist politicians, union leadership, etc.); and two, they think that everything is about money. To leftists, insufficient financial resources cause every problem from crime to poor education to poverty to terrorism. You name it, lack of money is to blame, so more money must be the solution. It’s really sad that they base so much on money, so little on things of real import and value, but it’s really what they believe.
What’s mind-boggling, is that to leftists it doesn’t matter if the money is being ill-spent, if the money doesn’t even get to the intended recipient, or even if the money demonstrably fails to “solve” the problem. Heck, if numbers show that the problem isn’t going away (or, as is more often the case, the problem is getting worse because of the undisciplined and ill-managed use of financial resources), the leftist response is to throw more money at it. And if you don’t agree with this approach, if you offer an alternate means of providing quality education (one that involves spending less money) or if you have another way of approaching the problem of the exploding underclasses (one that doesn’t involve handouts), if you suggest making any cuts at all, no matter how these cuts would actually improve the situation/s, it can only mean one thing to them: you’re a greedy, selfish person who doesn’t want to help the poor, elderly, and disabled.
Around and around it goes.
“More money” is not the answer. Spending money wisely to leftists means splashing it around wildly, blindly and unthinkingly slopping money here, there, and everywhere. In the wild hope that someone, somewhere will actually benefit. The rationale is that even if one person is helped, it’s worth it. To conservatives, this is wasteful, ignorant, and destructive because it breeds a culture of neediness, dependency, mediocrity, and failure. We want to spend money wisely with actual, concrete goals in mind: getting people off welfare, for instance; whereas the leftist goal is to get–and keep–as many people on it as possible because this “helps” them (somehow).
2012 is make or break for this nation because there is no way, no way at all, to compromise with this sort of thinking. Frankly, we’ve spent decades compromising on it, being bullied and harassed into agreeing to truly moronic programs and spending (even as we knew that it would be destructive to our nation and our people). We simply can’t afford to keep compromising with them. So 2012 is the election of our lifetime. Does America remain American, with American values of equality opportunity for all, or do we become a communist nation with communist values of opportunity for none?
It’s going to be a nail-biter because BO will never come out and take a stand for his true ideology, for his true plans for “fundamental transformation” and “social/economic justice.” He won’t make an honest, transparent case for it; instead, he’ll continue to respond to the myriad crises facing this country by laying blame at anyone’s feet but his own and painting anyone who diverges from his failed socialist policies as unpatriotic, even evil, Americans who want the poor, elderly, and disabled to die.
Sound absurd? Underhanded? Shallow? Puerile? Manipulative? Dishonest? Cowardly?
That’s because it is.