HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
May 20, 2003 I used to be a democrat. I was working in social services, wanting to change the world, and basically of the opinion that while Regan was a fine president but now things were going to get better. Gradually I started to come around. But I had to do it quietly. People in my profession are mostly are liberals. It comes from a very good heart. They want to change someone's life for the better. Which is harder than it looks. But after working for a few years with single mothers, drug addicts, or abused children these professionals see that their good work isn't enough. When facing recurring problems, like housing, they start to wonder if there isn't a way to streamline the process. This is pretty good logic, but the follow though has problems. They start looking for government monies to build a housing program. Great. But the problem is that many of the people will stay in the program for years. Very quickly the program runs out space. The solution: more money. This becomes a cycle of spending your way out of a problem. We have now entered into the liberal mind. I know it comes from a good heart, and perhaps even a little guilt. If, allegedly, social causes are what you build your platform on you will never have enough money to sooth all of the pains in the world. You are guaranteed to always have people vote for you because you are going to help them as soon as you get in office. Don't ask for results, they will tell you, because this type of thing takes time. So, here is a social program that is overflowing with people, but not money. You need to either start turning people away, or legitimately give them skills and support to succeed and to go out on their own. But this is bad for business. If it looks like you are making progress then it is unlikely that you are going to be getting more money from donations or from the government. You always have to look like you have great need, or that money is going to some other more attractive cause. In business you never want to have a product that you can only sell just one time. Like a soda, you want to sell something that people will keep buying. If you actually fix a social problem, you are going to have to find a new product to sell. And that is a problem in a party that lack original thinking. When a conservative says that there should be any kind of limit set, the liberals howl and start calling people racists, money grubbing, or insensitive. Remember this, liberals don't ever want you to think beyond the emotional response of an issue. Mainly because the product they are selling just does not stand up to close inspection. They say that the schools are in trouble and we need more tax dollars. They want you to panic and vote for the person who will get the school more money. But if some little voice in the wilderness speaks up and asks why most school districts are top heavy in administrative pay, or if you mention that there is a better school across town and you want a voucher for your kid, or if you mention that Japan is kicking our tail in education despite spending less on it and having larger class sizes then you had better be prepared to duck. Because you are now asking a question, and what could be more insensitive? The Democratic Party has really changed during my lifetime. I really think that they were once a party of ideas that cared about the common man and the future. I went to a liberal school for college and graduate school and I have seen a quality that deeply bothers me. Educated liberals love the cause of the common man, but they cannot stand anything that represents the common man. These are educated snobs who want to teach literacy, and belittle someone who reads Stephen King. They will promote free speech for every deviant on the planet, but will stage protests at universities who try to have a conservative speaker. I am not castigating all democrats as buffoons. But I've got to wonder if they are ever concerned that the image of their party. When I hear democrats talking about how badly the schools are doing, or what social cause is in trouble, I cannot help but scream, "You guys had eight years. Where are the results?" They had control of the country and still could not improve their token issues? I would say that is because they either did not want to really solve anything, or they were incompetent. You choose which. ------------ About the author: Edward Lyell is politically active in New Mexico and has been a small business owner and currently works as professional counselor. Once a great Democrat, he became another one of the disenfranchised during the Clinton presidency. He categorizes himself as a firm believer in Objectivism, free trade, and the Constitution. Email Edward Lyell: Edsterl@aol.com Comment on this column in the forum. ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
