The Democrats and Republicans have survived over the years pandering to many different interest segments in our society, but none has been quite as successful as that which has put the wealthier at odds with the needy. Democrats have successfully painted Republicans as aligned with being “haves,” while asserting the Democrats are the party of the “have nots.” Though there are as many wealthy folks on the Democrat side (probably more) who are wealthy, the “people” have supported them and kept them in power.
Part of the reason is entitlement programs, another is the Democrats carefully develop the culture of victimization. Without victims, who needs heroes? Another part is the ability of the Democrats to find those who have had tragedy and are in economic trouble, and live without. Without poverty who needs social welfare? The Republican philosophy has been more of a hands off approach with emphasis on opportunity to earn before handouts. A “limited government” approach.
It seems to have changed a little however..
In recent years Republicans have been voting more consistently in favor of bigger government, tougher regulatory standards as it relates to energy, and additional intrusion into health care. Overall, it seems the “right” has joined the “left” in pursuing populism, and has blurred the lines with its disregard for its stated core principles. The question is begged, what is the underlying reason? Maybe the following could put a little light on it..
Liberal Democrat: “The earth will be on fire if we don’t do something about CO2 emissions.”
Conservative Republican: “Aren’t you being a little alarmist?”
Liberal Democrat: “The Republicans don’t care if our Kids will live in a world without polar bears”
Conservative Republican: “Um well I don’t..”
News Outlet: “Democrats issue stern warning of impending global crisis, Republicans in denial.”
Liberal Democrat: “We propose a bill to reduce the greenhouse emissions (CO2) by 50% in 10 years, and if you care about the planet, you’ll sign on”
Republican: “OK, well I think we have pollution as an issue, I think certainly we can agree to work on..”
Liberal Democrat: “What about CO2? Are you denying CO2 is causing our climate crisis?”
Republican: “well.. umm we BREATHE out CO2, its natura….”
Liberal Democrat: “Supreme court says it is a polutant”
Republican: “Maybe if the Supreme court says.. I guess..”
News Outlets: “Republicans on board with Democrats with climate change legislation”
Republican: “But.. But.. ..um”
Liberal Democrat: “Venus.”
Republican: “Oh my, we couldn’t have that”
News Outlets: “Democrats convince Republicans to Join them in saving the planet”
Liberal Democrat: “Once again, we have shown Republicans the light”
Carrying the message has been a weakness for the Republican party. The message is still the same, limited government, individual responsibility, (which is somewhat nullified by SOME republicans who support drug enforcement efforts which fly in the face of the constitution) and free market beliefs which support a hands off approach to business. The message is and always will be a good one, but the delivery is often distorted by the CONTROL of it’s delivery as shown above.
The news outlets need victims. Without victims, here is your headline: “Another day goes by..” The Democrats need victims. Without victims, who would they have to vote for them? To give them power? Without a “cause” to rally behind, Democrat politicos are then relegated to clerkdom, perhaps a reduced visibility which would be unacceptable. The glow of POWER and visibility, much like that which is wielded in Hollywood, a reason they so relate to their patrons in Tinseltown.
Republicans for all their correctness, accuracy on the issues initially, seemingly cannot maintain integrity to their beliefs however. In Michigan, it is allowing further monopolies in energy, supporting film credits (welfare to the film industry) and actually seriously considering smoking bans in businesses further eroding the fine line of free speech, free markets and freedom. In the nation’s capitol, we have Republicans voting YES to a bill (the bailout) which in its 451 pages is the size of a Stephen King Novel. Deciding on the “fate of the world” in a few hours time, probably without the benefit of an Evelyn Wood’s Speed reading course.
I have written my Dear John letter. Further, I can only carry so much water and deliver only so much of the message for conservatives. I am not Walter Williams, who in one of his most recent (brilliant) essays wonders if we have not yet crossed the line to inescapable tyranny. And I am not an elected official who with the bully pulpit and a little more agressive nature could fight back the horde of liberty usurping power mongers. I am doing all I can, and unless our flag bearers hold the line and stand tall on conviction, Williams’ ponderings may well become reality.