Saturday, November 18, 2006

Niggardly Liberals vs. Compassionate Conservatives

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
Niggardly is a word synonymous with stingy and miserly, and a niggard (noun) is a miser. They are both derived from the Old Norse verb nigla, meaning "to fuss about small matters". (The English word "niggle" retains the original Norse meaning.) The word is not related to the word nigger, (and only an idiot) unfamiliar with the word "niggardly" might take offense due to the superficial phonetic similarity between the words.

For many decades the Left has trumpeted that Conservatives “don’t care about the poor.” Liberals have painted Conservatives as heartless, stingy, uncaring, exploitative, and selfish. So, knowing the track record of Liberal truthfulness, it came as no surprise to me to find that the opposite is true.

The proof has arrived in a book written by Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks, titled "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism" (Basic Books, $26), due for release Nov. 24.

The child of academics, raised in a liberal household and educated in the liberal arts, Brooks has written a book that concludes religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.

In the book, he cites extensive data analysis to demonstrate that values advocated by conservatives -- from church attendance and two-parent families to the Protestant work ethic and a distaste for government-funded social services -- make conservatives more generous than liberals.

When it comes to helping the needy, Brooks writes: "For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice.".

It has been my experience and belief that the only time Liberals care about the Poor is when they need votes. In fact, Liberals need to keep the Poor poor or they will lose their most reliable supporters.

As an example, the Liberal dominated public education system appears to be designed to keep the Poor uneducated, so they will stay poor and Democrats. “You poor people, you’re miserable now, but just think of how miserable you would be if you didn’t have Democrats to take care of you.”

(The above, of course, is another of my made-up quotes that, although false, illustrates the truth of the matter. I’m not like CBS and Dan Rather, who never admit the stuff they make up. I’m proud of mine, and I know I could find a Democrat who would say it, if only I could find a Democrat who would ever tell the truth.)

Dr Walter Williams on black education: “Education in Philadelphia's public schools is so rotten that the state government is threatening a takeover.

"There are 176 out of 264 schools on the failing list. The primary victims of Philadelphia's public schools are black students whose chances for upward mobility are being systematically destroyed by callous politicians and teacher's unions.

"If the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan set out to destroy black academic excellence in Philadelphia, I doubt whether he could achieve as much damage.” Dr. Williams, in later comments, applied this observation about black education to the entire Liberal dominated American public school system.

Conservatives are compassionate because the core of conservatism is the empowerment of the individual, not dependence on the welfare state. Conservatives donate more time, more money, even more blood, than Liberals. Conservatives believe the answer to welfare needs is private sector jobs, the answer to educational deficiencies is opening the education establishment to competition, and the salvation of Social Security is personal savings accounts.

Compassionate Conservatives have an answer to the illegal immigration problem, too. They begin by asking the question, what is compassionate about supporting a system that encourages people to leave their families, their homes, their culture, and make a dangerous journey to a strange land to support themselves and the ones they leave behind? Once in America, the illegal immigrants do not have legal standing to protect themselves from victimization and exploitation. The money they send back to their families only serves to increase their dependency, and the long separations destroy the chances of having healthy family relationships.

Liberals play for votes in the immigrant community by advocating not enforcing immigration laws, and making it easier to find a path to American citizenship.

Conservatives ask, how does encouraging illegal immigration help solve the problem? If Mexico and other illegal immigrant donor states would work to free their economies and strengthen the rule of law and property rights in their own countries, the resulting prosperity would reduce their reliance on the United States being a beacon of hope to their rapidly growing excess of impoverished citizens.

Liberals found years ago they could practice painless compassion by spending other peoples’ funds, and then make political hay by labeling Conservative tax cuts as selfish.

Thanks to Professor Brooks, their monumental hypocrisy is exposed.

Please click on the label below to see all my articles on this topic.

No comments: