Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Compassion, American Style

Today I wish to present a few thoughts of mine on the subject of compassion.

The word compassion has been bandied about in the political realm for sometime. President George Walker Bush, ran for president the first time announcing that he is a compassionate conservative. More recently Republicans have been accused of having no compassion for the poor in New Orleans. More about that later.

One of my biggest complaints about our President is his use of the word compassionate with conservative. It is almost as if he is acknowledging as fact, the liberal mantra….. “Republicans are heartless, they want to starve children and the elderly…..they want your grandma eating dog food, and going without medicine.” You remember the sickening lies of the left? Well the President used that beautiful word compassion, as if he would be the first conservative to be compassionate. Excuse me Mr. Bush, On this one, you are not right. The conservative religious right has been a constant source of compassion, and help for the less fortunate. Want more proof, travel to the gulf coast today. Or to the many homes all over America that are taking in strangers who have lost all to a natural disaster. (As a side trip, you might want to run by Barbra Streisand or Chers mansions to see how many families they have taken in? Or that Canadian Crooner who lives large in Las Vegas, how many families has she taken in?) She broke down and cried about the poor misunderstood looters, how many looters has she invited to live with her in her mansion?

Can a government be compassionate?

The only answer I can feel comfortable with is NO, NOT AT ALL.

But what about the billions of dollars that the government gives to the needy in America each year? What about the seven trillion ($7,000,000,000,000) dollars that the taxpayers of the USofA have spent fighting the war on poverty in the last 40 years, is not that the ultimate act of compassion?


Since the war on poverty has been lost, it wasn’t compassion; it was a waste of taxpayers money.

If I was floundering in a lake, and close to drowning, if you threw me an anvil, would it be compassion?

People in poverty, need a job. So simple, but it works, and is compassionate. If the person impoverished is able bodied and will not work…..that is another matter. With the exception of the paralyzed and mentally unstable, everyone could be given some task, some job to do. This also would be a way to build self-esteem in the needy person’s life.

But you say, there are not enough jobs for everyone. Dah, open your eyes liberal. The unemployment rate is the lowest it has been for a long time. Millions of jobs are being created each year. The Bush Economic Plan is working magnificently, and the facts don’t lie.

American workers are the most productive in the world, and our industry even employs millions of illegal aliens, at ten times the wage they could make in Mexico. And everyone who wants a job, can find one.

There is nothing wrong with our economy. Tax cuts have spurred a growth so strong, two cataclysmic happenings have not damaged the economy like the gloom and doom crowd said would happen.

Liberals will never talk much about the totally inclusive prosperity of America (our nations poor would be considered prosperous in almost every other nation of the world) because they have had very little to do with creating it. If the liberal template would have been applied to America after 9/11, we would be bankrupt with millions more in poverty (American style poverty).

George Walker Bush, has lead this nation through some of its most difficult times, like a graceful bull rider staying in the saddle for the full 8 seconds. Maybe that wasn’t the right metaphor, but I have to get a Texas dig in.

Thank God for Texas. It was definitely worth fighting for.

Back to compassion. If you still insist that the government is being compassion when it doles the taxpayers money out by the billions, to the needy, here is something you cannot explain away.

The governments, Federal, State and City take almost one half of my hard earned wages to do government charity. I must say that I don’t consider national defense or roadbuilding for commerce to be charity; they are both necessary and good. Those two tasks are ones that the constitution outlines to be within the realm of Federal Responsibility. Compassion is not a constitutionally mandated task

What kind of compassion am I being shown when government takes from me almost half of my earnings?

So even if you insist that welfare and handouts are compassion, it sure isn’t compassionate to take someone’s hard earned money to pay for that government charity.

There are millions of acts of compassion going on at this very moment in America, but they for the most part are being done by citizens, not for fame, or office. They are doing it because they care about those that have lost all.

Of course you will see nothing about all of this outpouring of compassion in the MSM, but the blogosphere will have plenty to say and show about this beautiful side of America.


Blogger Jay said...

How many families have you taken in?

Blogger web_loafer said...

First this is not about me, or bragging rights. Anything I do for charity is done in private, and not told to the world. If I do it for acclaim of the world, I lose my reward in heaven. Thanks for reading though.

Blogger mich said...

helloo...thanks for visiting my blog...nope the east and the west are not in war, its just that i wished Malaysians would be more open minded about certain things. People here can be quite uptight. Not much freedom here. And that could get pretty frustrating.
Anyway, you have a really nice blog! Love your picture!!
Take care driving your truck and have a good retirement (soon?)) God Bless!!!

Blogger Cold Pillow said...

Are you at all bothered by the fact that it's mostly conservative states that take in more tax dollars than they put out. In fact most 'Blue States' pay more in federal taxes then they get back from the government. So if your unhappy with what the gov't takes from you, you might want to ask all those alleged 'conservative' states to give it back.

Blogger Cold Pillow said...

This site says it better. Conservative states get Tax Welfare.


Blogger web_loafer said...

cold pillow, it is not explained quite so easily. The USofA is a huge country. To build roads for the farmers of Kansas to get their crops to market, there must be a lot of money spent, and a lot of it comes from federal grants.
Fewer taxpayers live in the red states, and pay fewer taxes, yet the whole nation must be protected and served. The FBI, USDA, EPA, and many more agencies of the government need a strong presence in the red states too. The large cities contribute more taxes it is true. But the next time you make a sandwich, think about the red states. If your government didn't have a presence in Kansas, you would be paying $12 a loaf for bread. If you purchase meat or poultry in the big city, it would cost you five times as much. On and on....I could give you more reasons, but you may see my point of view.
I think it is time to study the urban/rural situation in America.
When Hurricane Katrina ravaged the gulf coast, most of the National Guardmen and Guardswomen who showed up, came from red states....but they willingly helped those in a blue state out.
This may not satisfy you, but it needs to be considered. Hey, thanks for visiting the Bluff, and your views will always be treated with respect, if you are as courteous in your disagreement as you were today. It never is simple...or black and white...two honest, caring people can look at a problem and see different causes and different solutions. Later, Da Web_loafer.

Blogger Fishiferous said...

The hypocrisy is astounding. Corporate and agricultural subsidies are not welfare, but giving a poor inner-city dweller anything is welfare.

Goes to show how neocon death cultists are far from libertarians. Killing those who never attacked nor planned to attack us in the neocons bizzaro world is called "defense". All of the terrorism in the Iraq would stop almost overnight if our military stopped slaughtering and torturing civilians, but we cannot leave because Cheney has not made enough money yet.

Blogger web_loafer said...

fishiferous......over on the right side of this blog, you will find a link to a website...called The ReligionofPeace.com
If your mind is open, go to the site and count the terrorist attacks that you think would not have happened if the USofA had not declared war on terrorism.
I venture to say that 94% of these terroist attacks would have happened whether or not the USofA tackled this terrorism problem for the world.
Open your mind.......Terror is here, but some of us don't want it to stay. There probably would have been a bigger number of Islamic Terrorist attacks, if AlGore had won the election.....because thanks to the magnificant military of the USofA, there ARE FEWER TERRORIST ALIVE TODAY TO CARRY OUT ATTACKS....
The war is heating up, and I know who will win, and I know who some of the treasonous leftists want to win.
Sorry, America is going to win, with or without your help, but a lot of us are taking notes, and names. Who do you love??? America or Terrorism???

Blogger phred said...

Fish, what is the return on inner-city welfare ? Crack babies,aids, unemployment, murder, and a loss of motivation of the people recieving it.
What are the returns on ag subsidies...don`t talk with your mouth full.
Loafer is right..you are a fool if you think the terrorist would not have attacked us ( by their own words).And that they would cease operations tomorrow.
Yesterday I talked to an Iraqi truck driver that migrated here in 1991..When I asked him his thoughts on our actions in Iraq.. he said we were 20 years too late.

Post a Comment

<< home

Find sex offenders near YOU

Advanced Meta Tag Generator