Emboldened by fickle polls that reflect a troubled presidency, Democrats have grown increasingly critical of President Bush in recent weeks. In all fairness to the minority Party of America, at least now they are starting to act like the liberals they’ve always been, a hodgepodge cadre of anti-American, anti-military, anti-free market Socialist sympathizers with a peculiar hostility toward Christianity. Americans once again can see the Left’s true colors. For quite some time, liberal Democrats had been masquerading as moderate conservatives, offering stale rhetoric in support for the President’s decision to go to war in Iraq and America’s broad agenda to fight the war against terrorism. Ever since the attacks of 9-11, liberal Democrats had been feigning enthusiasm for the military (an institution the far-Left has always despised, in favor of effeminate “peace” organizations comprised of aging, drugged-up hippies). Liberals were caught in an awkward position as a result of the public’s overwhelming support for President Bush. It was a most bitter pill for them to swallow, forced to heap praises upon the two things they most hate, the military and the President in exchange for the chance of remaining relevant in American politics. They were deeply terrified that, if ever their treasonous track record of anti-military scheming were fully exposed before the public’s eye, it would inflict a fatal laceration on the jugular of their political body. As a result of this threat, liberal Democrats have put together an impressive yet deceptive pantomime of mimic support for the president in style, all the while maintaining obstinate obstruction in substance. They calculated that if, in the very least, they proffered the mere semblance of conservatism to the people through talking (though not acting) tough about the fight against terrorism, the American public would be duped into thinking the Democrats could be trustworthy and maybe eventually be elected back into power.
Things have changed somewhat in the fortunes of liberals due to the widespread perception of an enfeebled President. As a result, the political nerves of the far Left have been stimulated into reasserting their true agenda, always cloaked though never extinguished. The continual harping by the principle political bombasts on the Left, who relentlessly accuse the administration of “misleading” the nation by manipulating pre-war intelligence, is deeply perilous to the objectives of the military stationed in Iraq and elsewhere. The potential psychological wounds these calumnies may inflict upon our troops are enormous. Such rhetoric will sow seeds of doubt in the minds of our young soldiers, already heavily burdened by extremely harsh circumstances, that will mature into suffocating weeds of discouragement, resulting in a sense of wasted sacrifices and lost hope. Anyone who has spoken to soldiers stationed in Iraq knows how important moral support from back home is in terms of a soldier’s ability to carry out his or her mission well. The world’s strongest military can be made impotent and then cut down by even a small prick in the center of its heart, resulting in a gradual, drop by drop bleeding of its reservoir of determination. The irresponsible attacks carried out by conniving Democrats, taking aim at the Commander in Chief, will no doubt take a toll on the minds of those who serve under his command. From the point of view of the terrorists, the Left’s divisive vitriol is welcome news and bolsters them in their belief that, if they couple persistence with patience, they can succeed in slaying the American juggernaut by allowing it to cannibalize itself from within. Terrorists will continue to attack our troops abroad, all the while working in coordination with the Left, who will handle the battle on the home-front, whittling down the nation’s desire to fight via their poisonous, vituperative lies and calumnies about the Commander in Chief.
Ever desirous to see the hated American military defeated and an even more despised President humiliated, the Left will stop at nothing to accomplish its malevolent, Machiavellian goal of regaining the levers of power. Hope is found in the candor and integrity of the average American who has the ability to shine rays of light and truth on the shadows and obscurities of liberal political intrigues and pull away the curtain that conceals the sphinx-like Oz of liberalism.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Europe Still Doesn't Get It
After witnessing the latest in a series of Socialist-inspired demonstrations here in Italy, I can only put my pen to paper and hope that, by unpacking my thoughts, an explanation will reveal itself as to what went wrong here. The most recent demonstration was particularly nauseating: disgruntled, ragtag teenagers with too much time on their hands took to the streets en mass to protest what they perceived as abuses in the education system. I will be the last to defend the perilous predilections of a public education system, but there was clearly more on the agenda of these youth than just education reform. Wrapped up in all the heresies of Socialism and anarchy, the young marchers gloried in their sheer hatred for America and the free-market and their infatuation with dead, irrelevant, Socialist rabble-rousers like Che Guevara. The obvious question is why? Why, after so many failed attempts and millions either dead or hopelessly impoverished have the empty promises of Socialism remained in vogue in Europe? How has Communism helped the people of Cuba, burdened under the heavy shadow of a fossil-dictator? And yet America, the prime recipient of the far left’s most poisonous hatred and vitriol, remains the Promised Land for millions around the globe seeking opportunity, hope and freedom to pursue their own dreams guided by their God-given talents.
To the Socialist, the very thought of someone pursing his or her own interests for the purpose of establishing security and independence is construed as avarice. Everything is seen through the prism of continuous class warfare, us against them, rich against poor. Equality, from the point of view of the Socialist, is understood strictly in material terms. It is the function of the state to redistribute the earnings of the people, often by force, making certain that no one accumulates more than what the state determines to be a just wage, regardless of demand for the good or other rules of economics. This way, the “rich” will be cut down and the “poor” elevated and equality realized. Open competition is also scorned as one of the many side effects of the free-market system and is thus stifled. What Socialism fails to realize is that individuals who have their talents straight-jacketed by an omnipotent government will naturally lose the incentive to work since they are being denied the just reward for their labors, and as a result, the overall level in quality of the goods will fall. Who does anything well once they’ve lost their motivation to do the job?
Profit is another frequently misunderstood and misconstrued term. A company’s profit is indicative of its positive or negative correlation to the needs of the public. There seems to be a popular myth that all profit is hoarded by an avaricious chief or by a select clique in the highest echelons of the company while the rest of the employees slave away under the harshest of conditions. The truth is that a large percentage of a company’s profit is normally injected right back into the company to improve the all around standards of the business, which include the hiring of new employees, salary increases, promotions or better health care plans. It’s in the best interest of the company to ensure that its workers are taken care of to avoid a high turnover rate among its employees, which would certainly reflect poorly on the company’s image. If everyone is allowed to earn a just profit from the sale of his or her product, apart from government meddling, society at large will benefit as a result, in addition to the individual. The average citizen will have more money in his or her pocket and will be able to put that money back into the market or perhaps a voluntary association or church.
Most people prefer goods they know are of dependable quality. Businesses that recognize that customers have a choice when selecting a product will work hard to improve their product’s quality. Customer choice and competition work together as natural obstacles to poor quality and corrupt scheming by a company. The freedom of the consumer to choose is a blessing to the hard-working corporation driven by a solid work ethic, but a curse to the underhanded company seeking to cheat the customer by crafty shortcuts. Similarly, if someone has a choice either to come to the United States and market his or her talents, or to remain shackled in Cuba, he or she will most likely select the former. This isn’t greed but common sense. How many Americans do we read about risking their lives to immigrate to Cuba? Isn’t it the other way around? Not many people interested in making a living say “I’m off to Cuba.” The simple truth is that governments lust after power and expansion, as Jefferson realized acutely. “The government that is strong enough to provide everything is strong enough to take everything away.” Politicians will offer the excuse of wanting to help the poor or remedying a host of other social problems, that are best left in the more competent hands of private initiative, as a rational to steal from the citizens, toss some pennies to programs for the poor and pocket the rest. Machiavellian politicians will pander to minorities, who seem to love playing the role of the victim, and the poor who are generally less educated in the intricacies of economics and history, all the while making wild promises of a new life via a boundless flow of federal handouts. It’s a particularly shallow way of accruing votes, taking advantage of the less fortunate for the purpose of climbing the ladder of power. One can see how most Communist takeovers have succeeded, especially in Latin America but also elsewhere, via this type of manipulation of the poor.
With the singular exception of Poland (thank you John Paul II!), all this common sense economics falls on deaf ears here in Socialist infested Europe. The promise of Utopia has become for the youth of Rome, a kind of religion. They’ve traded in their rich religious and cultural heritage for the political heresies of Marx and Stalin. From the American’s perspective, the most frustrating thing about the average European’s political and economic foibles, follies and naiveté is the certainty that if Europe gets itself into another self-made crisis, (WWI, WWII, the Cold War, etc.) the continent will once again be salvaged from its own self-cannibalization by the United States, and America will still be the bad guy.
To the Socialist, the very thought of someone pursing his or her own interests for the purpose of establishing security and independence is construed as avarice. Everything is seen through the prism of continuous class warfare, us against them, rich against poor. Equality, from the point of view of the Socialist, is understood strictly in material terms. It is the function of the state to redistribute the earnings of the people, often by force, making certain that no one accumulates more than what the state determines to be a just wage, regardless of demand for the good or other rules of economics. This way, the “rich” will be cut down and the “poor” elevated and equality realized. Open competition is also scorned as one of the many side effects of the free-market system and is thus stifled. What Socialism fails to realize is that individuals who have their talents straight-jacketed by an omnipotent government will naturally lose the incentive to work since they are being denied the just reward for their labors, and as a result, the overall level in quality of the goods will fall. Who does anything well once they’ve lost their motivation to do the job?
Profit is another frequently misunderstood and misconstrued term. A company’s profit is indicative of its positive or negative correlation to the needs of the public. There seems to be a popular myth that all profit is hoarded by an avaricious chief or by a select clique in the highest echelons of the company while the rest of the employees slave away under the harshest of conditions. The truth is that a large percentage of a company’s profit is normally injected right back into the company to improve the all around standards of the business, which include the hiring of new employees, salary increases, promotions or better health care plans. It’s in the best interest of the company to ensure that its workers are taken care of to avoid a high turnover rate among its employees, which would certainly reflect poorly on the company’s image. If everyone is allowed to earn a just profit from the sale of his or her product, apart from government meddling, society at large will benefit as a result, in addition to the individual. The average citizen will have more money in his or her pocket and will be able to put that money back into the market or perhaps a voluntary association or church.
Most people prefer goods they know are of dependable quality. Businesses that recognize that customers have a choice when selecting a product will work hard to improve their product’s quality. Customer choice and competition work together as natural obstacles to poor quality and corrupt scheming by a company. The freedom of the consumer to choose is a blessing to the hard-working corporation driven by a solid work ethic, but a curse to the underhanded company seeking to cheat the customer by crafty shortcuts. Similarly, if someone has a choice either to come to the United States and market his or her talents, or to remain shackled in Cuba, he or she will most likely select the former. This isn’t greed but common sense. How many Americans do we read about risking their lives to immigrate to Cuba? Isn’t it the other way around? Not many people interested in making a living say “I’m off to Cuba.” The simple truth is that governments lust after power and expansion, as Jefferson realized acutely. “The government that is strong enough to provide everything is strong enough to take everything away.” Politicians will offer the excuse of wanting to help the poor or remedying a host of other social problems, that are best left in the more competent hands of private initiative, as a rational to steal from the citizens, toss some pennies to programs for the poor and pocket the rest. Machiavellian politicians will pander to minorities, who seem to love playing the role of the victim, and the poor who are generally less educated in the intricacies of economics and history, all the while making wild promises of a new life via a boundless flow of federal handouts. It’s a particularly shallow way of accruing votes, taking advantage of the less fortunate for the purpose of climbing the ladder of power. One can see how most Communist takeovers have succeeded, especially in Latin America but also elsewhere, via this type of manipulation of the poor.
With the singular exception of Poland (thank you John Paul II!), all this common sense economics falls on deaf ears here in Socialist infested Europe. The promise of Utopia has become for the youth of Rome, a kind of religion. They’ve traded in their rich religious and cultural heritage for the political heresies of Marx and Stalin. From the American’s perspective, the most frustrating thing about the average European’s political and economic foibles, follies and naiveté is the certainty that if Europe gets itself into another self-made crisis, (WWI, WWII, the Cold War, etc.) the continent will once again be salvaged from its own self-cannibalization by the United States, and America will still be the bad guy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)