Update (12:42 p.m.): Someone just e-mailed and said my comments about Bush’s speech were on MSNBC just now. Can anyone verify when and where? (Update: Got the info I needed. Thanks.)
——————————————————
I didn’t listen to George Bush’s speech last night, but I’m told he plans to do what he does best: spend, spend, spend other people’s money. True?
And he didn’t sufficiently address the rampant Hurricane Katrina race-baiting. If he didn’t, that’s his fault. When it comes to liberals and the media, Bush is like the proverbial deer caught in headlines. What he’s afraid of, especially at this point in his presidency, I don’t know.
Bush could easily disarm the whole lot with a few “Who cares what you creeps think?” speeches from the heart designed to communicate the essence of conservatism and why it works in ways liberalism can’t begin to. Liberals and MSM hate him anyway, so what’s he got to lose? I wish I knew why he’s so timid and…hate to say it…ineffectual.
I’ll listen to the speech sometime today and give you my thoughts. In the meantime, read what these bloggers have to say:
Pundit Guy: “Presidents who give away other peoples money have always given me a bad taste in my mouth. And tonight, while watching George W. Bush, that taste showed up.”
Info Theory: “While acknowledging his responsibility, he can present no specifics as to what he should have done better. By confining the review to the subordinate departments, he is placing himself out of bounds.”
Funny man Scrappleface: “White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett said he still does not know how the text of an address he had personally rejected as “too DNC” wound up in the president’s hands last night.”
Sister Toldjah: “I consider myself a social moderate but on fiscal issues, I am solidly conservative. I am upset at how a Republican-controlled Congress and administration have spent like wildfire over the last five years with very little concern for fiscal responsibility and accountability.”
Louisiana Conservative: “It’s one thing to assist with government money but to call congress and the President compassionate because of it is misleading.”
Heather Mac Donald: “The unstoppable charity towards New Orleans’s largely black survivors is so massive that even the racial demagogues cannot completely ignore it.” (via MM)
Other stuff: Political Teen (video), CNN transcript, Lorie Byrd, Michelle Malkin, The Moderate Voice…
Almost forgot this tidbit. I’m told ABC News’s planned race-baiting bash-Bush session failed spectacularly. The black folks didn’t play along, you see. Political Teen has the video and Lorie Byrd has the reaction.
From a commenter:
La Shawn, you are right about ABC. They pulled a half-dozen black people out of the Astrodome to have them watch the speech and give their reaction. It was a very transparent attempt to get the race-baiting going. It failed miserably because all these evacuees were pleased as punch. And why shouldn’t they be? The President promised so much free money, I would have been tickled to death if I were one of them.
Addendum: Is it Friday already? Good grief. Slow down.
Update: OK, I’ve listened to the speech. The first and last third were inspirational, but the middle justifies the “sugar daddy” title. More government handouts. How many of the displaced are willing to accept a job and work for a living when the government is giving away houses, apartments, and money like it’s Christmas? (Remember the 2K debit cards?) Many of the evacuees, at least the ones shown on TV during the aftermath, were living on government subsidies in the first place.
Subsidizing “poor” people will not keep them out of poverty. The empowerment of a can-do attitude, a strong work ethic, and the pride and dignity that come with supporting yourself without the government’s help are a few things Bush needed to talk about. Didn’t hear it. Just more skin color set-aside programs (money) for “entrepreneurs” and checks for people already feeding at the government trough.
What Bush proposes is not an improvement; it’s just a lateral, welfare-dependent move to different cities and states. It’s certainly not his job to vanquish poverty. That’s the job of individuals. But an honest speech would’ve acknowledged that government dependency does not improve lives. Part of the reason so many were stranded in the storm without food and water in the first place is because they were too dependent on the government for subsistence. Why couldn’t he say that?
Another Update: In America, many are duped into believing that the only way to have equal rights is for everyone to have equal resources. In all of human history, such has never been nor will ever be. Ironically, diversity, which liberals claim to love, is the main reason why.
Some people work hard; others are lazy. Some are more generous, motivated, talented, driven, etc., and others are not. No amount of government cash will ever change human nature. If the failure of half a century worth of social programs, despite billions upon billions of dollars, doesn’t prove it to you, you’re willfully deaf and blind.
Sane Nation: “Above all, let’s not buy into a mass-contrition experience based on some idea that the way to expiate the ’sin’ of our lack of preparedness is to throw massive money in the wrong directions with no real accountibility.”
{ 13 trackbacks }
{ 47 comments }
I watched the speech, and I was shocked by the content. I think he did address the race-baiting by NOT addressing it, and speaking about positive things. He was contrite, to an extent, as he should have been. Regardless of what he did or did not do in regard to the Hurricane. He is the President, and he is ultimately responsible. Just as much as I am responsible for the actions of the men in my platoon whether I am there or not. “To the extent that the federal government did not function, I take responsibility.” A lot of people thought it was too much, some thought it was avoiding responsibility. As a leader I understood it, and I respect his word. I am not in agree ment with a lot of things that the President says/does, but I respect him for stepping up as a leader and doing what is not popular. He may not please the Conservatives, and he may not please the Liberals. Dan Bartlett may have thought it was too DNC, but perhaps it was apropos for this situation. His anecdote about the New Orleans Jazz funeral. (I am a huge Jazz fan by the way), could not have been more appropriate. Regardless of the size of the Hurrican, New Orleans will rise again, and regardless of the mud-slinging and the name calling between liberals and conservatives America will go on. Many people are better writers than I am, more adept at analyzing politics, but few people that post here have the responsibility for other people’s lives in their hands like I do. So, in a small way, I think I may understand what Bush was saying last night more than a lot of people. Its not too often that I feel like a SME (Subject Matter Expert) at LBC. Have a good weekend everybody.
I suggest Gen. Tommy Franks (Ret.) for the reconstruction Czar who will have to wrestle with the entrenched Democrat power players in Louisiana. Democrat political corruption in Louisiana makes anything ever claimed about Halliburton look like a charity fair.
There is no way Bush could (and he never would) stand up and take on all the snakes that have been let out of the bag in this disaster. Besides which, the MSM would pummel him three times harder than they have been.
The Port of New Orleans is a critical part of our economy. I admit this after initially supporting moving the French Quarter to Las Vegas and turning the rest of the area over to the gators and sand crabs.
President Bush took the high road, and he is right to do it.
La Shawn, you are right about ABC. They pulled a half-dozen black people out of the Astrodome to have them watch the speech and give their reaction. It was a very transparent attempt to get the race-baiting going. It failed miserably because all these evacuees were pleased as punch. And why shouldn’t they be? The President promised so much free money, I would have been tickled to death if I were one of them.
I was switching between ABC and FOX News Channel for reactions. On FOX, Brit Hume said “The President’s promises sounded an awful lot like an FDR proposal.” On ABC, Ted Koppell said, “If those folks at the Astrodome are representative of the nation as a whole, President Bush made remarkable progress tonight.”
I agree with both statements, and that’s exactly the problem, unfortunately. Many people expect the government to do EVERYTHING for them, and the “Republican” government likes to spend so much money they make FDR look like a tightwad.
What greater thrill than spending OPM? (Other People’s Money) Does sound like a drug, doesn’t it?
Actually, Bush’s grandfather wasn’t a conservative Republican–he was into big spending, too, and was quite a moderate in other areas.
Don’t worry. The spending will be a lot like iraq. Focused on right wing pet theories and conservatively connected groups. Not completely, but mostly. Rove is running this thing.
I live in a Houston suburb and on the news last night a reporter had a piece on people abusing their Red Cross debit cards (more free money). He had gotten a tip from someone so he made the rounds of the men’s clubs and strip joints in town. Men (and I use the term loosely) are coming in using these cards for cash, drinks and ultimately lap dances. Apparently there are no restrictions on this card. People are also lining up several times to get them. Ah, the spirit of sloth is alive and well. I bet tomorrow night the reporters hit the electronics stores, massage parlors, liquor stores, etc.
Unrelated, but interesting… Here in Houston our Mexican workforce, both legal and illegal alike, are moving East into Louisiana to make $20 an hour doing cleanup work. There is a problem with getting skilled and unskilled laborers. My sister is currently having a pool installed (yeah, I know, how elitist…but hey, it’s hot in Texas as she’s worked really hard for it.) and the work has come to a standstill, as all of the skilled (legal) Mexican laborers loaded up and left. The pool company won’t hire just anyone, so much of their work is on hold. I’ve heard this is a problem all around town in all labor markets. Why aren’t so many of those that are out of work because of the storm going back and getting paid to put their city back together?
I also wondered why so many volunteers were and still are needed at all of the shelters when so many able-bodied people are just sitting around.
The Astrodome and now the Reliant Arena put out the call to Catholic Charities to staff certain areas - babysitting, personal item distribution, etc., with a LOT of people. I just don’t see why there can’t be a few people organizing and have the residents help out and running things. If you’ve got kids, take ‘em to the babysitting area and you help out. The younger adults should take the senior citizens to an area and help them organize activities to keep them entertained and mobile. Serve some sandwiches, pass out toothpaste, whatever.
Charity can be a crutch.
Bush should let Condi handle any race issues; just ignoring them if they’re ignorable at the Federal level.
The Reps in power are more addicted to OPM, since the Dems only ever want to spend more. As long as the Dems alternative is higher taxes to spend even more than Bush, don’t expect the Reps to spend less on their own.
At least Bush supported home ownership (good) and entrepreneurs (very good). Low efficiency spending on these areas is much better than negative efficiency spending on mere comfort for non-workers.
I wish he had identified a metric for measuring effective development aid — how many jobs did it create. When all aid agencies are measure on well they support job creation, entrepreneurs, real poverty will be going down.
Maybe you should have watched it. I thought it was a very effective and inspiring speech, and its “ownership” versus “entitlement” theme was very neo-con republican to me. It talked about getting people involved in investing in the area with incentives, not handouts.
Far from being plain old sugar-daddy, it struck on the very themes that draw me to this president to begin with.
That is not to say that I do not take issue with some of his other positions, but ownership versus entitlement and the enthusiastic support of faith based charities are two things that I will cheer for loudly, both of which were a part of his speech last evening and a summary of his actions in the white house.
“Bush should let Condi handle any race issues”–is such a racist statement that liberty dad should be ashamed of himself. She’s the Secretary of State because of her qualifications, not some token appointment, and it’s not her “job” to handle ‘race issues’ just because she’s black. Her job is advancing the Country’s foreign policy.
Momotrips: That is disgusting. I knew that type of stuff would happen. We’re such a rich country with dumb, lazy, slothful people who will take advantage of any handout. Human nature, no matter where you go.
A brutally frank question, but one I find myself asking: If money is going to taken from me by force, why should I (or perhaps, how much can I afford to) give voluntarily?
New Orleans is a major port city. The longer that port is “out of commission”, and the longer the finger pointing and partisanship continues, the worse the long-term affects - for the entire country.
Pres Bush may not always do what I think I’d do, but he is promoting some solutions, and is attempting to move this all forward, as quickly as possible. Seems to me this is far more productive than preaching, whining, and accusing. Talk is cheap. Actions matters.
Also, if there has been such a welfare state in NO and Louisiana (as has been shown through stats, e.g.), people need to weaned off, much like a spoiled child. (Sorry, but that is the best analogy I’ve heard to date.) If Pres Bush backed off the federal aid, pontificated about personal responsibility … how would that help ease the suffering right now? Would that help rebuild infrastructure? Attract business back to the area?
Lastly, Pres Bush is not seeking re-election. Not sure, but I suspect he is also attempting to smooth things a bit for a Republican successor. A successful rebuilding of the New Orleans area and revitalization of that port to something better than the pre-hurricane state of that city - that would do much to help his party, I would think, especially in Louisiana.
La Shawn, I posted a text of President Bush’s speech on my blog and posted my comments as a Louisiana resident on there.
Diffus: Give to charity because (by and large) approx 80 cents of every dollar given to reputable charities gets the the intended recipients. Tax dollars are just the reverse - nearly 80 cents is eaten up by the bureaucracy, leaving about 20 cents for the intended recipients.
Actually I approach this from two angles: Give more to charity, and write my Representatives. Our Reps can do more to change government spending (although most refuse to even cut the “pork”). -
Nevertheless, if enough constituents demand change (even if change means pork projects in your community are nixed), change will occur.
I say do something like what Roosevelt did 65 years ago. Hire these NO folks and pay them a wage to rebuild the city. Or, have them work at rebuilding it by offering them a mortgage and room and board while they rebuild. Get them in there to work. I’m with you on the “hand-outs.” As tragic as the Hurricane was, I think work needs to be done by the residents to get their city back up.
By Jove, I think he’s got it! - Admin
LaShawn, entrepreneurialism and economic enhancement through wealth redistribution is 180 degrees different from welfare.
You may disagree with the fundamental principle of any form of wealth reallocation, but to compare business creation to welfare doesn’t make sense.
LaShawn, entrepreneurialism and economic enhancement through wealth redistribution is 180 degrees different from welfare.
Well said. The money spent on rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast will mostly go to local businesses and the people they employ. There isn’t that much of a difference between creating business through tax reductions, and giving tax money back to business through federal grants.
Laissez faire for now. Laissez bon temps roulez to come.
La Shawn - well said on this …
“Subsidizing “poor†people will not keep them out of poverty. Empowering them with a can-do attitude, a strong work ethic, and the pride and dignity that comes with supporting yourself without the government’s help is what he needed to talk about. Didn’t hear it. More skin color set-aside programs (money) for “entrepreneurs†and checks for people already feeding at the government trough.”
As for the race issue on this, please!
Makes you realize how desperate liberals are that they are ready to go there at the first opportunity. That “man of God” (sorry choking), Jesse Jackson, works overtime at re-enforcing the message African Americans are tiring of hearing of hearing, namely that they are victims and Jackson is their High Priest - the Pope of the Church of Victimology. I mean, he has the nerve to compare the suffering citizens of new orleans to slaves in a ship … and he said it without blinking. I think the guy is suffering from time warpitis - he’s stranded somewhere in the mid 1960’s and can’t fast forward.
Great site - just found it! Keep up the great work La Shawn!
I am a life mentor that works with inner city youth. I have a deep passion for helping the poor and helping kids turn their lives around to get out of generational poverty. But I have to be honest and say that Katrina has brought up a lot of feelings and problems that need to be addressed. New Orleans was a poor city before Katrina hit. Many of the people were already being helped by the government. I can’t see how throwing more money at them and then running is going to help. In fact I think that it will enhance the problems.
Our biggest problem with our kids is getting them to take education seriously, be responsible for their choices, plan ahead and trying to help them develop a good work ethic. First they have never seen the advantages from other family members getting an education, second it is too easy to blame bad choices on being poor, and third some of the families we work with are quite fine with living day to day on food stamps and government housing. They have learned to make it work for them, that is their job. I see so much potential and gifts thrown down the tube everyday. But I also see kids changing their mindset after learning to work hard and see the fruits of their labor, or seeing them pass a test they have been studying for. A sense of accomplishment, new sense of worth, new dreams, but most of all hope.
I have several questions for anyone who has the power to bring change. What is the percentage of people affected by the hurricane that were already on welfare? What is the percentage of people already on housing? What is going to stop these people from double dipping, getting the original government check and now the hurricane government check.
I am all for helping the poor, in fact it is my life calling, but there are other ways of doing it. Instead of throwing that money away for a quick fix, because eventually the money will be gone, then what, invest the money in helping those programs that are already helping the poor. The long term fix is helping people gain job skills, work ethic, planning ahead skills, making good life choices,finance awareness,family unit restoration, education, talent development and restoring faith in God who brings the biggest change of all.
I think Bush was so beat up early in the Hurricane the only way he feels he can rebound is to show us the money, but Mr. President, I don’t want to see the money, I want to see leadership by saying here’s a little temporary help but lets provide some generational forever help. Financial help is easy, here’s the money and then you are on your way. Permanent help is hard, it means committing lots of time, intense energy, heartache, joys. It means training people to take control of their lives in a new way. It means walking with people on a day to day basis, sometimes for years. It means giving people skills to take care of themselves. It means raising the standards and expectations of what these people can be.
They are like the rest of us, human beings with great potential and beauty. They are worth investing in, lets just do it in a way that is going to actually make a life change for good difference.
Double dipping.
I think we are already there. I don’t understand the logic behind the debit card fiasco. Supposedly, the Red Cross has already raised millions? in private donations. Miscellaneous donated incidentals. Public Shelters that evacuees can be fast-tracked right in to, in nearly every State. Jobs being offered on Craigslist tailored specifically to them. The Evacuees received their Government checks at the first of the month…..
….and yet, even that’s not enough. Now, the Government needs to toss each refugee a 2k Debit Card????
When does it end? How long are the public shelters expected to stay open? Ok, the Holidays are coming up. But after December— After January, into February….
I think the Public is going to start questioning how long should it take to get back on your feet.
At some point, the public is going to become distinctly uncharitable, and rightly so. Maybe it will happen after the Holidays. Maybe sooner.
I know I already feel bombarded and taken advantage of with the whole “charity” act.
2K debit cards absolutely make my blood boil.
I hate the term refugee. How about citizens instead. I think that really says the most about each of us.
Very nice La Shawn, well put.
I second your assessment of the speech. Katrina has laid waste to any hope of the Bush White House ending its run with manageable deficit numbers. This will be a wonderful weapon for the Dems in ‘08 to use against Condi (she laid some careful groundwork the past week or so, I thought).
The thought at the end of the post is spot on as well. The Left’s interchangeable rhetoric of diversity and equality is twisted and dangerous.
It has successfully frightened most non-blacks from repeating what you’ve stated…
So basically it’s up to you and only you La Shawn; in short, the survival of the Western world is on your shoulders!
Have a relaxing weekend!
Just a thot on how Katrina could change the demographics and face of NO.
Reckon NO will turn Red, if the ones coming back are “workerbees” trying to rebuild their city & coommunity?
Meanwhile the freeloaders enjoy the change of scenery and media/charity attention as refugees, given a few months, their ‘visit’ is bound to be permanent, since moving back will entail work.
Interesting how the so-called poor areas will take longer to be reclaimed from nature than others — those who know me will understand where I’m coming from. But if this ain’t a spiritual wakeup call for the sloths, then the Books of Proverbs, Daniel on thru to Revelations is probably lost upon them as it already is on Jesse Jackson and the OPG (Other people’s guilt)-pimps.
Yep! Spend, spend, spend other peoples money. That’s what I got out of the speech. And that’s what I wrote immediately after the speech on my blog. GW looks more and more like a liberal Democrat with each disaster.
Kanye West really busted the money levee when he said Bush doesn’t care about black people. Now Bush has to prove that he does care by giving away more money and free land to black Americans. A disgusting display of pandering.
I have to get my two cents in on the “OPM” thing: A solution, I think, is Representative Linder’s (R, GA) Fair Tax Plan, for a number of reasons; not least of which, it could thwart the ‘politics of greed and envy’ hacks.
Unfortunately, it seems to be targeted for burial by the usual suspects.
For anyone not familiar with the provisions - it would repeal the 16th Amendment and abolish the IRS - you can pull up all details on the Congressman’s site (there’s a link to it on my new blog, in the item “Sixteenth Amendment: RIP.”
http://home.earthlink.net/~mjwhitney1/index.html
Merry
Andy #37
AMEN!!!
John, are you feeling OK? Is this tongue-in-cheek? If not, such a comment seems uncharacteristic of you. - Admin
Hello, blogosphere troll. So you’re using “taminka jennings” this time? It was “jenkins” last time. Sad. Anyway, I didn’t write that ALL evacuees were on welfare, but most of the blacks shown stranded on the overpass, for example, came from the nearby projects, which, I’m sure you know, are government-subsidized dwellings. - Admin
I’m obsessed with those debit cards.
Does anyone know if the 2k debit cards needed to be paid back?
Private charity is one thing. But giving people free Federal Money apart from insurance…..I could get on board with that only if it were done in the form of loans which must be paid back.
Granted people default on student loans (Government Loans), all the time…..but still, there are ways to collect, and it’s a little bit more responsible than dumping a pile of free money on people who may or may not be deserving.
And yes, I do believe in the concept of the undeserving vs. the deserving poor.
The MSM playing the race card again? Talk about a dog-bites-man story….
Re: #44 - Sorry La Shawn, I sent it before finishing my thoughts. What I wanted to add was this: When has the MSM not played the race card?
Reminds me of the old joke: A racist is a person who is winning an argument with a liberal.
Keep up the good work, La Shawn!
La Shawn Barber for 2008!
Gin - That sounds very much like “do something, anything, even if it’s wrong, just look busy.”
What ever happened to small-government Republicans? I’ve posted some thoughts I think you’d agree with at http://smalltownveteran.typepad.com/posts/2005/09/i_dont_think_da.html
I appreciate LaShawn’s perspective on this type of thing and watch to see her reactions. I just abhor the fact that people are bringing up race AT ALL…like Kanye West’s statement. Look at all the people that went in to help. For the media to start beating on the race card is really hypocritical IMO. “Rightwingers” are racists, but leftists promote programs like affirmative action as though they recognize that certain people with different skin colors deserve more “help” than others. It’s a slap in the face to everyone. Great post.
I suggest Gen. Tommy Franks (Ret.) for the reconstruction Czar who will have to wrestle with the entrenched Democrat power players in Louisiana. Democrat political corruption in Louisiana makes anything ever claimed about Halliburton look like a charity fair.
Funny you mention Halliburton. They’re one of the select few companies given no bid contracts in the Gulf Area. Nothing like giving charity to your friends like Halliburton and Bechtel.
Bush should let Condi handle any race issues; just ignoring them if they’re ignorable at the Federal level.
That’s a very ignorant statement to make. Bush is the country’s President. He should be able to speak to all of the country’s citizens.
The Reps in power are more addicted to OPM, since the Dems only ever want to spend more. As long as the Dems alternative is higher taxes to spend even more than Bush, don’t expect the Reps to spend less on their own.
I haven’t been around that long, but I’ve never seen any spending by the Dems compared to what Bush and the GOP Congress have done in the past five. The current GOP is a new animal. They’re definitely not fiscally responsible.
Bush’s speech was ok, but he never specified how we’re going to pay for the reconstruction effort in the Gulf Area while we’re spending billions of dollars per month in Iraq. I just saw on the Wall St. Journal that Bush ruled out raising taxes to rebuild the Gulf Area. Where’s the fiscal responsibility from the GOP?
I don’t trust these estimates of 250 billion dollars to rebuild the city. They said the entire debacle in Iraq would only last a few months and cost 87 billion dollars. Someone needs to reign this spending in or at least be square with the American people about what the reconstruction effort means.
I say restore federal taxes as they were when Bush got into office and inherited a surplus. We all have a stake in rebuilding one of our own cities. Moreso than anything we’ve done in Iraq. These borrow and spend Republicans are much worse than anything I’ve seen from the so-called tax and spend Democrats.
Again LaShawn, you are not making an appropriate analysis.
“Some people work hard; others are lazy. Some are more generous, motivated, talented, driven, etc., and others are not. No amount of government cash will ever change human nature. If the failure of half a century worth of social programs, despite billions upon billions of dollars, doesn’t prove it to you, you’re willfully deaf and blind.”
You start at the back end of the equation as opposed to the front end of ‘what makes people motivated’ and get mixed up in the middle.
For example, you say liberal policies and welfare act as a deterrent to motivation. So you assign value to an external policy as a cause for human behavior.
But before that you routinely make the statement that ‘no amount of government cash can change that’. Implying that social policy does not change behavior inherent to human beings.
So what is it? Individual motivation irrespective of social policy that makes somebody ‘less equal’ ultimate in terms of resources and ‘progress’. Or is ‘equality’ (or lack there of) from a resource standpoint, based upon motivation determined by social policy?
You keep bouncing back and forth. On one hand you say irrespective of social situation the individual is accountable for behavior particularly in moving out of poverty. Then on the other hand you say a social policy, in the form of welfare in general, is the cause of so many remaining in poverty.
Secondly, if you attempt to reduce ‘performance’ in America solely to individual responsibility based upon what you call features inherent to the human condition - “Some work hard, others are lazy…etc.” Like you mentioned above. Then by default and basic logic, you assign a lack of these characteristics to ‘group collectives’ that have a higher percentage of poor, and an increase in these characteristics to individuals who are not poor or wealthy. You do this based upon ‘intrinsic/internal character’ as opposed to external environmental and social policy factors.
Which means, logically, that YOU believe blacks are inferior because they possess less of these ‘positive intrinsic/internal’ characteristics as demonstrated by the fact that they are poor.
I am sure this post will be tossed out as usual. But nevertheless I want to see someone answer the question of the back and forth on this issue that the ultra-right continually has.
Secondly, you still miss the macro implications of what it is your are saying. If Is it social policy that creates and maintains poverty, which is what you routinely say about the liberals and ’social engineering’ or is it it individual personal accountability and failure by the individual that is poverty?
Dell, macro-schmacro.
I haven’t got time to fisk #53, but I will say that once again, you’ve substituted Man’s theory on human nature/motivations at the expense of God’s facts as provided in his “Weak Flesh Owners Manual” from which La Shawn has based her analysis.
Proverbs comes readily to mind vis a vis fools and sloths, as does our favorite parables on the 10 virgins, 10 talents etc. People are born to be prodigal, some come to their senses early, some late, and for many never, even if the Archangel came down and smacked them upside the head with the truth.
Sloth is sin! Poverty is sometimes fate, sometimes the sins of the parents passed on down and sometimes self-inflicted. Throwing good money indiscrimnately does no one any good.
You should know that by now as to where La Shawn is coming from. It doesn’t matter how you slice your stated position, you and God can’t both be right yet at odds. And certainly in this case, there is no such thing as a 3rd way, so guess which set of theorems I’m banking on.
I know, LaShawn, you can defend and express your own views better than anyone else, but Dell Gines’ comments and tone (#53) riles:
“So what is it? Individual motivation irrespective of social policy that makes somebody ‘less equal’ ultimate in terms of resources and ‘progress’. Or is ‘equality’ (or lack there of) from a resource standpoint, based upon motivation determined by social policy?”
It’s neither, and both: The welfare state mentality and policies stifle individual motivation, and prohibit aid recipients from helping themselves.
Once on the dole, the system punishes incentive to get off the dole. Recipients are not allowed to incrementally improve their economic situation toward a point of self-sufficiency, because anything they can earn will be deducted from their “benefits,” or all assistance will be withdrawn.
For the individual in poverty, it’s a Catch-22 that was institutionalized by liberals and their social engineering.
The way he detailed the programs to be used to help out, were all the way Republicans have tried to address certain issues.
So, in one way I don’t see why conservatives are not happy. Bush wants to use government to address ills in the way Republicans want to use government, not the way Democrats want to use the government.
Oh…
Wait….
Spending? What spending?
</sarcasim>
BTW, heard you on the radio. Unable to call in because I called in on the previous segment.
Thanks for listening, DS.
- Admin
As a Houstonian, I strongly disagree with the hand outs, especially due to experience with the evacuees.
Why did I see these ‘evacuees’ shopping in the Galleria at Neiman Marcus? I don’t even shop at Neiman Marcus (I was there getting someone a wedding present btw), and I’m pretty sure I make more than all of them.
And so many of the young boys were getting new shoes and games at Footaction and Gamestop.. These people need education and spiritual wellness, not more money.
What I got out of the speech is that he wants New Orleans to be built better by encouraging more entreprenuership. Sounds like he wants to take tragedy and turn it into a capitalists dream. I found it encouraging, but of course, the big government spending is sad. I noticed he said FEMA will pretty much take over control of disaster relief and such. Interesting grab of power there.
RepJ…
Nail. Hammer. Head.
Comments on this entry are closed.