Contributors

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Origin of The Species

The other night I closed my eyes and started to think about all of the challenges we face as a nation. The turmoil in the Middle East, changing climate, and health care. Education. Poverty. Inequality. Abortion. All of these things floated through my mind as I was heading off to dreamland. With the exception of the Middle East, very simple solutions entered my mind and I began to wonder why they can't be implemented. It's a simple question with simple answer.

Conservatives.

That's right, folks. This may come as a shock to you that I would feel this way but conservatives are the major road block to most of the solutions to the problems our country faces. In fact, in some cases they are the cause of the problem. How is this possible? Liberals stand up to make a difference on these issues and conservatives, much a like a jealous younger sibling, rip them down -creating a cynicism about a particular issue where there should be none. Conservatives do a good job of creating conflict when there should be consensus.

Let's take a look at abortion and gay marriage; the two center pieces of the conservative agenda. Abortion is a problem in this country. I think we can all agree that it would be great if there were none. Conservatives would be ecstatic if there were no more abortions. So would liberals as it would take away a very large bit of ammo that conservatives have against the left. Let's end abortions now!

Oh, but wait. Can't do it. Because conservatives want people to abstain from sex. Liberals want people to be educated about sex and use birth control. Of these two choices, which do you think has the greater likelihood of succeeding? Conservatives will not give an inch on this issue and the base of their party is living in a fantasy land that refuses to provide simple education to people to prevent this horrible thing from happening. I have talked about this before but it needs repeating. It is a simple fact that if more people used birth control, there would be less abortions.

Liberals would like GLBTs (Gay Lesbian Bi-Sexual Trans genders) to have the same rights that everyone has. They would also like non-whites and women to be treated better. Conservatives absolutely do not want GLBTs having the same rights as the rest of the population and, in some cases, would like to see gay people locked up or shot. Conservatives are also under the horribly mistaken impression that racism and sexism are all but vanquished in this country and, oddly, take credit for it.

So, here again, we see liberals trying to solve what is very obviously a problem and conservatives blocking that solution and, in the case of GLBTs, fomenting hate. The same paradigm applies to the rest of the issues mentioned above.

Environment: Conservatives in this country, for the most part, think that global warming is a fantasy. They think, and this just makes me want to hit my head against a brick wall, that liberals created global warming to make money. The lap dogs of right wing radio spew lies so vile about this that it is hard for me to fathom the unreality that is unspooled. Ultra conservative industry leaders will never give an inch on the horror that they are creating and the people they have bought off (the Michele Bachmanns of the world) brainwash us into believing that global warming is a myth and everything will work out just fine.

Health Care: Conservatives health care plan is....don't get sick. Oh, and keep your paws off of my money.

Education: The conservative plan for education is: Let's create an army of robots who take tests well but don't actually learn anything. Oh, and let's ignore the fact that people of other races/nationalities learn differently than white people because who cares about them anyway?

Poverty: Conservative plan to attack poverty: poor people are lazy and should work harder. They shouldn't even be making the 5 dollars an hour that I am paying them. 7 dollars an hour? Are kidding me?

So, now who is open minded again and how is intolerant? Why should I accept them for who they are when they are part of the continuance of the problem? And, finally, look at all of the issues listed above and the atypical conservative response: doesn't it all revolve around money and keeping people stupid?

As if all of this stuff wasn't enough to get you in a mouth watering rage, conservatives then have the audacity to accuse liberals of being the cause of and/or hindrance to all of these problems. They shift the blame to liberals accusing them of being irresponsible or too idealistic and, oddly, don't even claim 50 percent of the responsibility themselves.

Make no mistake about it. Most of these problems have simple solutions and if it were left up to liberals, most of them would be either by solved or on a path to solution. For the last seven years, we have left things up to conservatives and, in all of these areas, have moved backwards. Look at these issues and decide for yourself, logically, which side thinks more about people and which side thinks more about money?

The greatest lie that I have ever heard in this country is that liberals are destroying everything. You hear that mantra constantly on the radio, the TV, the blogsphere, and among the people in your life. It is the ultimate re-direction because if you sit back and truly look at the issues, the real culprit is revealed.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nicely written. Thank you for not swearing.

When I hear politicians talk about solving our nation's problems, the "answers" that invariably come out of the mouths of conservatives are generally abusive towards someone or neglect a large portion of our populus. Liberals tend to think about the big picture and the long term consequences that the potentially complex answers may hold.

I disagree with markadelphia that there are simple answers to these problems but will at least say that at least liberals are trying to go in a positive direction.

Anonymous said...

I'm proud to say that I'm one the conservatives actively working to block the "solutions" that your party endorses. So I basically agree that conservatives are a major road block.

If this is the message that our kids are being taught then I think you are right about something else...this country is in big trouble.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree with you more, mc.
I like your blog alot, keep it coming!

Mark Ward said...

PL,

So am I to believe that you are against birth control and are preaching abstinence?

Anonymous said...

Listening to WCCO on the way home from work today, I heard this from our President in regards to the US policy in Iraq.

“I am the decision maker; I had to come up with a way forward that precluded disaster …”

Did you hear that comment? I am a very tolerant and level headed individual (that’s how I can officiate), but I could not believe he said that. Yes, I agree that George is very good at stating the obvious and 'he is the decision maker.' However, the part that disturbed me was the "I" part. You can debate or even make snickering comments all day on the disaster end of his quote, but the fact he felt like "I," he alone should come up with a plan was disturbing. Even assuming for a moment that he is intelligent, lucky, or whatever the reason, and his plan is great and will solve all problems, but that is not what good leaders or managers do. They take the people and resources around them and make them work together to provide a common goal. I have no idea where he thought it was a great idea to come up an implement a way to move forward all by himself. (Cliché) There is no "I" in team. What is trying to do, flex his muscle to empress his new girlfriend?

Ok, now I am getting cynical, what are your thoughts everyone?

Anonymous said...

M,
I am not against birth control or abortion but would, in fact, preach abstinence were I to feel compelled to preach anything. I'm not in alignment with many conservatives on these particular issues, but in the giant scheme of things these things are so unimportant to me that they won't even begin to influence my choice of candidates. Besides, I don't see the concept of abstinence as anything but a positive. Just because supporters of your party are too stupid to understand the benefits doesn't invalidate the concept.

Ref -
My interpretation (and this is strictly my interpretation) is that the second "I" in his statement is nothing more than a continuation of the first "I", which I interpret to be a "buck stops here" sentiment. I know Markadelphia and others on this blog are going to rip that to shreds, saying that GWB never takes responsibility for things. I'll refrain from once again arguing that point and I'll simply point out that if GWB truly views himself as the sole decision-maker, and if he is as stupid as some people claim he is, it's hard to believe he could be orchestrating as much evil as he's accused of doing.

Anonymous said...

I agree with this post but only to a point. Many conservatives are starting to hear the sound of the people and are changing their tune. Our own governnor here in MN is talking about spending more money on education, universal health care, and energy efficiency to curb global warming.

So, the only conservatives that are still part of the problem are the Michelle Bachmanns and George Bushes of the world currently going the way of the dinosaur. Hey, markadelphia, did you hear anything about that House commitee meeting on global warming in which Rep Henry Waxman said that the Bush administration intentionally changed various govermental reports to say that global warming is not as bad?

Wow.

Anonymous said...

The words that jumped out to me were..."For the last seven years".

You kind of make it sound like these problems are something new. Did any of these problems exist before the year 2000?

Mark Ward said...

Of course they did but at least we were on a road to fixing them as opposed to a road leading away from solutions.

Vheights, yep. I have been reading about that and there was an article on the Chritian Science Monitor today about how there have been over 120 scientists spread out over several federal agencies that have been pressured to not mention the worsening climate in their report.

Might be my next post....

Anonymous said...

Well it’s Friday and like Sir William Wallace said when asked why he was about to do something "...to pick a fight".

Didn’t you write a column a while back about liberal solutions being too complicated for people to understand? I sure didn’t see any complicated solutions in this post...you just simplified things (the same thing you accuse conservatives of doing) and assigned blame...all I read is you reducing things to stereotypes like you accuse me of doing, like right and left, or ownership of issues (which is nothing more than a fundraising tool that politicians use). Ever wonder why these pressing issues don't get resolved year after year, decade after decade (not even in the 90’s when we had a "liberal" president)? Nobody in DC wants them resovled because that would be wringing the neck of the goose that lays golden eggs, both in campaign bank accounts as well as ballot boxes. Look no further than the abortion issue to prove that one. Up until recently we had a republican house and senate and a republican president, yet abortion is still legal. Explain that one to me (other than my explaination). The issues that confront this nation are complex and interwoven, and can't be explained away nor solved by simply electing liberals.

You know, when I was in a public high school in the early 90’s, we got sex education in health class and I don’t recall any conservatives preventing my health class from receiving the knowledge. Are you telling us that conservatives are in control of our public schools and are not allowing kids to receive sex education? Is sex education still being taught? If it is still being taught, I don’t see what the problem is.

I’ll still never know why an educated person has to continually mis-represent the views of others to get their point across. I do not want gay people locked up and shot and nobody on here has ever said racism and sexism have gone away. That’s stupid.

Since the only hint of a liberal "solution" I gathered from your post was you telling us your INTENTIONS, I’m going to again point out the RESULTS of the $6 trillion wasted on LBJ’s Great Society programs and the massive expansion of welfare that happened and the destructive effects it had on inner city families. There is quite a bit of evidence that subsidizing out-of-wedlock births encourages more out-of-wedlock births, that penalizing marriage discouraged welfare recipients from getting married, and that enalizing work discouraged welfare recipients from receiving work.

Many liberals simply don’t want to look at the results because they are a natural consequence of a piece of the liberal/left agenda that was enacted in this country. The policies exacerbated the problems – made them worse, with all kinds of negative cultural side effects. After a bill of $6 trillion, I think we can safely assume that throwing money at poverty doesn’t solve it, and in fact only makes it worse. I don’t care what the goal is – it’s RESULTS that matter, and the results of welfare as implemented in the War on Poverty was disastrous. Increasing rates of illegitimacy, increasing numbers of fatherless children, and crime ridden inner cities. Those things skyrocketed after welfare as we knew it was implemented in the 1960’s. Don’t try to distance yourself from the policy either – we’re breaking things down into liberal/conservative here.

Thankfully Clinton signed welfare reform but only after vetoing it 3 times with the harshest critics of him signing it into law being liberals – the same bunch who said crime would skyrocket in the year 2001 (when the 5 year lifetime limit on benefits would run out for many welfare receipients). Crime didn’t skyrocket in 2001 did it?

Your future guest column that will say that that the rich should pay proportionately more is an idea that has its intellectual roots in Marxism. If you implement a flat tax, the rich will still pay more – but they won’t be penalized for making more, because the percentage is the same no matter what. Yet liberals reject this system out of hand – and while they won’t admit it, they probably reject it because of the control it strips away from government. In contrast, the only place the idea of a flat tax has any clout is in economically conservative circles.

Bush did increase CAFE standards for SUV's (gas mileage) against the will of Detroit, who gave him a pile of cash. He made GE dig up PCB's out of the Hudson River at a cost of billions to the company, and they gave him a ton of dough too...but never mind all that, there are stereotypes to enforce. Why not post about how your guy Kerry is good for the environment by getting all that environmental legislation he wrote passed? Oops, can't do that, because he got no major legislation passed. The bigger polluters in the 21st century will be the developing nations, imagine 2.5 billion new consumers (the combined populations of China and India).

What you left out is that there is a consequence of liberal agendas as well. If companies don't have to comply to stricter environmental regulations by moving operations out of this country they will. The results of your policies may drive more of our jobs offshore. Secondarily, and it is a BIG secondarily, if our laws become very stringent, and the rest of the World's are not, then our firms become even less competitive in the marketplace meaning even more job displacement and unemployment because if you are not competitive your products don't sell. There has to be a balance in these matters or there are as dire consequences for human beings as there are for the birds and the fishies. Had Kyoto happened, companies would have headed out of the US for other countries that would have been allowed more emissions. Emissions are only part of the problem. Limiting emissions won't stop those fishies from ingesting mercury. There are no simple solutions short of becoming cavemen again and even then I doubt we would give up campfires which of course go through no smokestack scrubbers. Our commitment to the environment along with unions not allowing steel plants to modernize thus our steel being more expensive than Japanese steel where computers make the steel and hence it is cheaper, played along in virtually eliminating this country as a steel maker, in spite of an abundance of raw material to produce the stuff.

The middle class always bears the responsibility for paying for the government because the middle class is the largest portion of the population and as a whole. Many rich people own their own business, therefore any tax increase they see is passed right on down the line into the price of their products/services and we the people end up paying for the tax increase. Shifting the tax burden to corporations would achieve two things: 1. Drive more jobs offshore. 2. Of the one's left, fewer working because their funds would be going to the government instead of employee's pockets.

You can talk about the last 7 years and I’ll remind you of the 8 years before that, where we had a liberal president and, surprise surprise, none of the issues actually got "solved". Don’t give me all this "Well they were on the road to being solved" stuff. So if Al Gore would have been president for these last 8 years these problems would have been solved by now? Or maybe, they would still be "on the road" to being solved. If that’s the case then I’d remind you that 15 years (1992 – 2007) is a long road. These problems do not have simple solutions...midnight basketball would have worked if that was the case.