Teach The Principles

The contortions that many conservatives and GOPers have gone through over the last couple of weeks trying to make sense of the election has been amusing, frustrating, and a little disconcerting. I get the sense that some seem to believe that it was simply a function of the base not showing up, or that Romney was weak candidate, and/or that the 47% comment did us in, and that we need to stop denigrating the American voting public, which was George Will’s comment. Some of this I can agree with, but if denigrating the American voting public was the reason for our loss, then how did that same tactic result in Obama’s win? I find Will’s comment to be completely off base and simply a pandering comment to make sure he is invited to the next cocktail party.

This was an election of big choices, and our side lost. Romney clearly laid out stark differences between his approach and that of Obama’s. Romney was the first candidate that I can remember to courageously put Medicare reform on the table; he was the first candidate to speak to the need of tax reform and put forth a plan, and he was the first candidate to suggest real cuts in the budget, not just a slow down of growth rates. So in my opinion Romney was not weak – he had the right plan, and the American people chose to continue down the irresponsible path we are on. They made that decision based partly on the lies told to them by Obama, the Democrats and the liberal media (think: taxes on the rich and outlawing abortion), but more on their own historical and financial ignorance having been educated in failing schools steeped in liberal philosophy. A philosophy of which blames others for personal failure, and teaches that a large centralized state can, and will, take care of their needs.

We, as conservatives, should certainly plan our attack for 2014 and 2016, by articulating a message that resonates with the growing constituencies of single women and minorities,  but if we are to preserve the ideals of this great nation in the long term, we need to begin a strategy of teaching conservative principles to our children, starting at the elementary levels. It’s much like raising a child as we all have done, and proving to them that conservative philosophy is the most compassionate towards others and offers the most rewarding personal life they will ever know. Those principles include, but not limited to:

1.      Live within your financial means – large debt restricts personal freedom and destroys relationships and lives. Be responsible with your money, and if money is important to you, then pursue education and set goals.

2.      Personal responsibility – bad decisions have consequences and you need to, and will, live with those consequences. Don’t blame others, and don’t repeat your mistakes. Good things happen to those who do their best everyday and make good decisions.

3.      Learn how to fail – no person has ever won all the time. Learning how to fail builds personal strength and character and makes winning that much more rewarding.

4.      Abstinence – abstain from drugs and excessive alcohol use. There has never been one successful alcoholic or drug user, and by engaging in this activity you can assure yourself of future health problems. Abstain from treating your body like an amusement park, whether that be sexually, or by putting ink and bolts into yourself. Treat your mind and body with respect – you only get one.

I am sure other conservative posters here can add to this list, and I hope they do, but these are four principles that I have taught my kids, and all three of them have turned out to be responsible, functioning adults. I desperately want to see this country get back to a shared sense of responsibility for moving our country forward. I look around me anymore and much of what I see is very disheartening – entitlement minded, financially illiterate, selfish, drug addicted, pierced and bolted ignorant masses, more interested in the latest brain dead Jay Z CD, or what the Kardashian’s are doing, and I suspect much of you see the same. The problem is, this is a growing constituency, so if we are to have long-term success, we need to begin building a more solid foundation of responsible, better educated children.

Advertisements

103 thoughts on “Teach The Principles

  1. neocon01 November 27, 2012 / 5:40 pm

    The next awakening?

    But now the idealism of the sixties has corroded into a corrupt ruling class of educated liberals hanging on to the shreds of its moral authority by cynically manipulating blacks and Hispanics with naked appeals to race and government loot — promises that can’t be kept, debt that won’t be repaid.

    The nation staggers from its unaffordable entitlements, its unpayable government pensions, its limping economy, its crypto-inflation, and its regulatory and environmental fascism.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/it_will_take_a_moral_movement_girls.html#ixzz2DSgEypOe

    • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 6:08 pm

      Neo,

      Excellent AT article. I think the sooner the GOP coalesces around a message of economic empowerment, the faster we’re going to get back in the race.

      I am sure other conservative posters here can add to this list

      Cluster, both of my grandsons are involved in Boy Scouts. The oldest is only 14 and just one step from Eagle Scout. The youngest, just 11, earned 7 merit badges in his first trip to camp this past summer. Scouting instills a tremendous set of values in young people, and many top executives, scientists and doctors are proud to have Eagle Scout on their resumes.

      • neocon01 November 27, 2012 / 6:35 pm

        Spook

        I had all three of my boys in scouts, baseball, football, soccer (whew) and Church.
        All three turned out to be great young men no drugs, no arrests, no alcohol abuse.etc.

  2. dbschmidt November 27, 2012 / 6:14 pm

    They made that decision based partly on the lies told to them by Obama, the Democrats and the liberal media (think: taxes on the rich and outlawing abortion), but more on their own historical and financial ignorance having been educated in failing schools steeped in liberal philosophy.

    Let’s look at your list from a Liberal perspective;
    1. Live within your financial means – CRA
    2. Personal responsibility – Get rid of God from the public square and replace it with the Dimmicrats new god which is Govern’mnt. Govern’mnt is your new Daddy—cradle to grave.
    3. Learn how to fail – No failure for anyone—see number 2
    4. Abstinence – It’s my body and I will do to it whatever pleases me at your experience.

    Think that about covers it.

    Spook, I am more about the message Whittle talked about. It will take a complete failure of government before we get the Liberals attention.

    • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 6:20 pm

      It will take a complete failure of government before we get the Liberals attention.

      And I don’t think it’s as far off as one might think.

      • neocon01 November 27, 2012 / 6:33 pm

        It will take a complete failure of government before we get the Liberals attention.

        And I don’t think it’s as far off as one might think.

        unfortunately I believe you are both right and it WILL be ugly, ( see black friday)

      • dbschmidt November 27, 2012 / 7:20 pm

        Since the line Spook was making a point on a posting of mine–please tell us all how you see the US remaining the “Shiny city on the hill.”

        Please refrain from personal outlooks and point towards empirical evidence where any society in all of history has turned from a republic (Constitutional in our case) of sorts towards any form of socialism (stepping stone) and has prospered.

        Didn’t think so.

      • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 7:20 pm

        There you go again Spook, predicting doom and gloom.

        The problem with that, James, is that I don’t see the complete failure of government as “doom and gloom”. I just see it as a necessary reset.

      • neocon01 November 27, 2012 / 7:34 pm

        jimmAH

        There you go again Spook, predicting doom and gloom.

        I believe Spook correctly predicted the fall of the roman empire, and Detroit becoming little Haiti.

      • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 8:47 pm

        I believe Spook correctly predicted the fall of the roman empire

        Come on, Neo; I’m old but not THAT OLD.

    • dbschmidt November 27, 2012 / 7:23 pm

      Better yet James,

      Reply directly to what I posted rather than sheepishly attacking another poster for commenting.

      Do it point for point with your infinite wisdom.

      Didn’t think so.

      • neocon01 November 27, 2012 / 7:54 pm

        In Reward for Their Service Barack Obama Is Firing 20,000 Marines
        Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, November 25, 2012, 11:20 PM

      • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 10:00 pm

        James,

        Please explain to me what a reserve currency is. I still don’t believe you understand that.

      • James0601 November 27, 2012 / 10:11 pm

        Maybe you don’t understand…I know I do.

        why don’t you explain to us what you think it means, and I will just correct you if you’re wrong.

      • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 10:17 pm

        That’s what I thought. Thanks for playing.

      • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 10:41 pm

        Excellent rebuttal James. You are a good example of the illiterate and ignorant younger generation that I spoke of.

  3. J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) November 27, 2012 / 8:46 pm

    You know what would be nice — for some of the liberals who post here to list the principles they teach their children.

    • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 9:25 pm

      “You know what would be nice — for some of the liberals who post here to list the principles they teach their children.”

      Okay. I’ll start with cluster’s list with some changes and additions.

      1. Live within your financial means

      2. Pursue education and set goals.

      3. Personal responsibility – bad decisions have consequences and you need to, and will, live with those consequences. Don’t blame others, and don’t repeat your mistakes.

      4. Learn from your mistakes

      5. Abstinence – abstain from drugs and excessive alcohol use.

      6. Treat others the way you would want to be treated.

      7. Work hard, no matter what you are working at.

    • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 9:58 pm

      Casper,

      While those may be the principles you teach your children, those are not born of liberal philosophy, nor are they principles that are promoted by the current democratic party. The Democratic party teaches that personal responsibility is a thing of the past. If you are sexually promiscuous and get pregnant, the state will provide and pay for an abortion, allowing the woman and the father to avoid any responsibility. If you are unemployed and don’t want to take a job, no matter what job that is, the state will provide for you. If you manage to break our laws and cross our border, the state will provide for you. If you live outside your means, the state will still help you get a mortgage, and blame big banks if you fail, and if you fail in any other way, it is most likely someone elses fault, and so on and so on. I find it strange that you actually believe in those principles yet support a party that preaches the opposite.

      James,

      Why are you so hell bent on destroying the constitution?

    • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 10:40 pm

      cluster,
      The principles I taught and teach my children are born of liberal philosophy as much as they are born of conservative philosophy. The Democratic party doesn’t teach any of the things you mentioned.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 10:24 am

        Ocatspuke

        BS ….YOU LIE

      • dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 2:57 pm

        Casper,

        Please explain the current textbooks which if not outright lie–they misconstrue history as a whole. Show me one used today where President Wilson was held responsible for segregating the Federal workforce and Military. Show me one that mention during Paul Revere’s ride a black man helped make it possible. Show me one where the “Shot heard ’round the world” or “Don’t shoot until you see the white’s of their eyes” is properly reported as half & half blacks and half whites dieing on the battlefields. Maybe you should actually read some of the indoctrination material you profess to “teach.”.

      • 02casper November 28, 2012 / 7:38 pm

        dbschmidt,
        I agree that current textbooks are pretty bad, which is why I don’t use them. I prefer using primary documents and allow students to draw their own conclusions.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 8:14 pm

        O-catspuke

        I prefer using primary documents and allow students to draw their own conclusions.

        Riiiiight Pee Wee…..

        original documents?
        LIKE………………………
        lil red book? communist manifesto? marx? alinsky? dreams of my commie father and his bastard doper kid? by ayers the anti American terrorist?

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 8:29 pm

        Teach The Principles

        GOD, COUNTRY, FAMILY!!!

        and of course the Corps….

      • dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 10:11 pm

        How many primary or original documents do you have available?

      • 02casper November 29, 2012 / 12:20 am

        “How many primary or original documents do you have available?”

        30 to 100 million between loc.gov the national archives and goggle books.

    • watsonthethird November 27, 2012 / 10:41 pm

      Cluster’s characterization of people who vote for Democrats is just an over-the-top caricature. We can come up with trite caricatures of conservatives, too, and he wouldn’t buy that for a minute. His little diatribe pretty much parrots Mitt Romney’s statements that 47% of Americans are victims who will never take responsibility for themselves.

      Regarding unemployment, employed individuals pay for unemployment insurance, the idea being that if they become unemployed, they can exercise a benefit that they themselves paid for. How is this materially different from your (Cluster’s) argument that exercising Social Security or Medicare benefits is not an entitlement, but merely reaping what you paid for?

      • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 11:05 pm

        Watson,

        It’s not so much a characterization as it is an observable fact. Small case in point that I have mentioned before. I have a friend whose daughter lives with her boyfriend and they have three children. They are not married so she receives food stamps and medical care for herself and her three children, and has received these benefits for at least the last three years that I know of. This is despite the fact that she is able bodied and her “boyfriend”, the children’s father, is an electrician and has a decent paying job. They own their home and both drive newer model cars.

        Guess who they voted for?

      • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 11:21 pm

        And I know people in similar situations who voted for Romney, which proves what?

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) November 27, 2012 / 11:32 pm

        And I know people in similar situations who voted for Romney

        You know people who game the welfare system who voted for Romney? That’s rich.

      • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 11:39 pm

        “You know people who game the welfare system who voted for Romney? That’s rich.”

        It’s also true. Of course they don’t see themselves as gaming the system.

      • ricorun November 28, 2012 / 7:42 pm

        Nice pun. But I know people who voted for Romney who game the welfare system. Of course, they pale in comparison to the number of people I know who game the tax system. In fact, depending upon how you define “game”, I could be accused of it too. I don’t do anything illegal, but sometimes what’s legal doesn’t seem very fair.

      • ricorun November 28, 2012 / 7:45 pm

        Oops, I said, “Of course, they pale in comparison to the number of people I know who game the tax system.” What I should have said is that “Of course, they pale in comparison to the number of people I know who game the tax system and voted for Romney”. My bad.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 8:09 pm

        reek-O

        define “gaming” the tax system.
        do you mean taking full legal advantage of the tax laws as they are written?

        and of course they voted for Romney….the 47% who pay NO federal income tax…… who do you think those “GAMERS” (looters) voted for??

        HINT
        he is a kenyan, marxist, muslim, santy Klause (cheech/chong)

      • watsonthethird November 27, 2012 / 11:45 pm

        Cluster said, “It’s not so much a characterization as it is an observable fact. Small case in point that I have mentioned before.”

        Of course we can bring up anecdotal evidence to prove whatever we want. Is there abuse of government? Yes. I’m all for eliminating abuse and fraud, whether it be welfare, unemployment, Social Security, Medicare, defense contractors, or tax cheats.

        (And why isn’t the threading working properly tonight?)

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 7:29 pm

        watsontheTURD

        Social Security, Medicare,

        Good Lord the ignorance………….well that is HOW we got Ubama…….a LOT of DUMBED DOWN USEFUL IDIOTS………

      • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 11:30 pm

        Regarding unemployment, employed individuals pay for unemployment insurance,

        No they don’t.

      • watsonthethird November 27, 2012 / 11:34 pm

        And how is this different from when your Social Security benefits exceed your pay in?

        And how is this different from Medicare, which is simply funded by a tax? That is, the current taxpayers pay for the health care of those on Medicare. There isn’t even a pretense of people paying into a fund that they can tap later.

      • watsonthethird November 27, 2012 / 11:35 pm

        (This was meant to be a reply to Spook’s comment above, “No they don’t.”)

      • Retired Spook November 27, 2012 / 11:58 pm

        What does the fact that EMPLOYERS pay for unemployment insurance, not EMPLOYEES have to do with my Social Security benefits? Or with how Medicare is funded?

      • watsonthethird November 28, 2012 / 12:04 am

        Yes, it is employers. My bad. What does it have to do with your SS or Medicare? Employees at least indirectly pay for unemployment insurance, much the same as their employers contribute to their employee’s Social Security fund. If an employee becomes unemployed, he is entitled to the benefit that he indirectly paid for. It is exactly the same argument you use for why your Social Security benefits–partly paid out of an employee’s salary and partially paid by the employer–and Medicare are not entitlements, but merely recouping something you paid for, regardless of whether you recoup more than you paid or not.

        And as to Medicare, like I said above, you didn’t pay for your benefits. It’s a tax, plain and simple.

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 12:24 am

        Watson,

        So you admit that employers pay unemployment insurance, but then you say that employees pay for it indirectly. Then you say it is exactly like Social Security benefits “partly paid out of an employee’s salary” — except that it isn’t. This is what I meant the other day when I said you are one of the most intellectually dishonest people on this blog.

        And as to Medicare, like I said above, you didn’t pay for your benefits. It’s a tax, plain and simple.

        This has been explained to you before, and the fact that you keep trying to make the same invalid point over and over is getting tiresome. Forget for a moment that Medicare is funded largely by payroll taxes and that half of the taxes are paid by the employee. It’s NOT FREE for people 65 and older. There is a basic monthly premium that either must be paid by the person or deducted from their Social Security check each month if they’re on Social Security. For the millions of people who aren’t on a Medicare Advantage plan, they pay a monthly or annual premium for supplemental insurance, plus co-pays, plus a deductible. The last year my dad was alive, he and my mom paid almost $5,000/year for their supplement, and it didn’t begin to cover the cost of their medical care. I’m guessing between their deductible and co-pays, they paid an additional $3 or 4 thousand a year. About half of the 50 million people on Medicare are on a Medicare Advantage plan, which requires no supplement, but has co-pays for everything. And ObamaCare is going to substantially change Medicare Advantage, if not eventually do away with it altogether.

      • watsonthethird November 28, 2012 / 3:24 am

        Spook, here’s the problem. You and others like Cluster denigrate anyone who receives any form of support from the government–except for you and your pals who receive Social Security (and only for retirement, not disability) and Medicare. You and Cluster go on and on about the 47% (even if you don’t explicitly refer to the 47%) as moochers, as though it is the biggest problem we have.

        You conveniently ignore the fact that Social Security and Medicare are by far the biggest entitlement and redistribution programs of the federal government. I just looked it up, and in 2010, federal expenditures on Medicare were $491 billion, Social Security $730 billion. It’s just intellectually dishonest in my opinion, and I’m sorry if it’s tiresome to you. If you acknowledged it, then we could move on to the question of what to do about it. If not, I’m going to keep bring it up when it’s relevant to the topic at hand.

        I understand that Medicare isn’t free. That doesn’t erase the fact that the federal government expenditure on Medicare is one of the largest federal outlays. You act as though you paid for those benefits, and yet one reason Medicare is in trouble is because the recipients are receiving more in benefits than they ever paid in Medicare-related taxes. Perhaps we should just cut you off completely as soon as the government has paid benefits equal to what you paid in taxes. That would be one way to fix the problem.

        A huge part of the entitlement expansion in this country has occurred in the middle class, not only the lower class. Middle class people like you. Have you checked to see how much Medicare expenditures have grown in the last 10 years? Social Security? And yet you evidently refuse to acknowledge this.

        As far as unemployment, the fact that the employer pays the unemployment insurance on behalf of the employee is no different than the employer paying Social Security on behalf of the employee. It is a tax per employee. It might as well come out of the employee’s paycheck, because it sure as heck isn’t money the employee is going to get. And yet you have the audacity to complain about employees who are laid off and redeem their unemployment benefits from the insurance that was paid specifically on their behalf.

        There are a couple of other principles you and Cluster might keep in mind. One is the Golden Rule. I’m surprise not one of you suggested that it might be a worthy principle to teach your children. Another is empathy.

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 8:35 am

        I just looked it up, and in 2010, federal expenditures on Medicare were $491 billion, Social Security $730 billion. It’s just intellectually dishonest in my opinion, and I’m sorry if it’s tiresome to you. If you acknowledged it, then we could move on to the question of what to do about it. If not, I’m going to keep bring it up when it’s relevant to the topic at hand.

        OK, Watson, this is the last time I’m going to respond to you on this topic. Conservatives on this blog have repeatedly said that entitlement reform is an absolute must if we are to ever get our fiscal house in order. As far as I can recall, you are the only Liberal who has ever even brought the subject up. I have personally said I could survive without either Social Security or Medicare, and would much preferred to have kept all the money I paid in and dealt with retirement and medical care on my own. It’s YOUR PARTY that has consistently rejected attempts at entitlement reform and continues to do so. Obama promised it in 2008 as one of his highest priorities, and hasn’t been heard from on it since. The last time a member of the Democrat Party made a good faith effort to solve the problems you note was in 1983.

        And yet you have the audacity to complain about employees who are laid off and redeem their unemployment benefits from the insurance that was paid specifically on their behalf.

        My “audacity” is aimed at a government that has perpetuated an artificially high unemployment rate by expanding unemployment benefits from the traditional 13 weeks to 99 weeks.

      • Cluster November 28, 2012 / 9:16 am

        Watson,

        Just like Casper did earlier, you are now advocating policies that are antithetical to the party you support. Evidently you are now in support of entitlement reform of which Romney spoke to, and of which I voted for at my own expense. I am not yet 55, but I voted to increase my retirement age and reduce my benefits to ensure that these programs are there for my children and grandchildren. You voted to keep the status quo, and are now complaining about it.

        And in regard to the Golden Rule – I would never teach my children to treat others in the manner many liberals, including Obama, treat others. I would hope they have much higher standards.

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 9:42 am

        Just like Casper did earlier, you are now advocating policies that are antithetical to the party you support.

        Cluster, it’s pretty clear from both of their comments that neither of them has the slightest grasp of what the Democrat Party stands for. They have the talking points down pretty good, but the basic ideology — not so much. Kind of confirms what Amazona has said on too many occasions to count.

        Perhaps Watson can write a letter to Harry Reid and President Obama, asking them to quit blocking entitlement reform, and then post a copy of the letter here for all his contemporaries to see.

      • Cluster November 28, 2012 / 9:55 am

        Let’s come at this from another angle. Obama won the vote of people 44 years old and younger, while Romney won the votes of people 45 years and older:

        The divide between young voters and older voters was as stark this year as it was in 2008. While Obama lost ground among voters younger than 30, he still won this age group by 24 points over Mitt Romney (60% to 36%). He also maintained a slimmer advantage among voters 30 to 44 (52% Obama, 45% Romney), while losing ground among those 45 to 64 and those 65 and older.

        Now it can be easily argued that those over 45 were subject to much more of a traditional education of the principles I mentioned including lessons in the founding of this country and constitutional governance, while those younger than 45 have been largely taught the principles of the left, ie; that of big government, with less of an historical understanding of the constitutional governance.

        The older folks, specifically those under 55, voted in favor of policies that would have decreased their benefits and subject their income to more taxation in an effort to sustain the constitional republic for future generations, while the younger folks voted to keep their gravy train rolling with zero sacrifice. And not only did they vote in favor of that, but people like James voted in the hopes of dismantling the constitution altogether, obliterating states rights in favor of a large centralized parental bureauracracy, thus supporting my contention of constitutional and financial illiteracy amongst the younger generations.

        Despite Watsons and Caspers objections, this pretty much clearly spells it out.

        http://www.people-press.org/2012/11/26/young-voters-supported-obama-less-but-may-have-mattered-more/

      • watsonthethird November 28, 2012 / 10:15 am

        Spook said, “OK, Watson, this is the last time I’m going to respond to you on this topic. Conservatives on this blog have repeatedly said that entitlement reform is an absolute must if we are to ever get our fiscal house in order. As far as I can recall, you are the only Liberal who has ever even brought the subject up.”

        I’ve tried to tell you before that I’m not a “Liberal,” but you insist on pigeonholing anyone who disagrees with you as a “Liberal.” Whatever.

        I can’t take seriously your claims that conservatives want entitlement reform until they accept the fact that by in large they are also receiving entitlements. It’s intellectual dishonesty, slight-of-hand, and divisive. So far as I can tell, the favorite topic of you folks is redistribution and undeserving people possibly get away with something for nothing. You (the collective you) never look in the mirror.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 10:25 am

        watstoop

        I can’t take seriously your claims that conservatives want entitlement reform until they accept the fact that by in large they are also receiving entitlements

        RUBBISH!!

      • watsonthethird November 28, 2012 / 10:25 am

        Cluster said, “Just like Casper did earlier, you are now advocating policies that are antithetical to the party you support.”

        And I’ve told you before that I’m not a Democrat and never have been. As far as “supporting,” if you mean that I voted for President Obama instead of Mitt Romney, then I guess I support the Democratic party. Sorry, but I don’t vote on party lines. Evidently that’s a hard one for you to wrap your head around.

        Cluster also said, “And in regard to the Golden Rule – I would never teach my children to treat others in the manner many liberals, including Obama, treat others. I would hope they have much higher standards.”

        That’s an amazing perversion of the Golden Rule. Are you a Christian? A Jew? Any religion? Do you have any ethical tradition at all? It’s a pretty universal concept.

        “”So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the Law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12

      • Cluster November 28, 2012 / 11:19 am

        Watson,

        In regards to the Golden Rule, my comment was largely tongue in cheek, so you really need to get over yourself. However, considering Obama’s comments to the Hispanic caucus that they should “punish” their enemies, there is some truth to it.

        In regards to entitlements – medicare and social security are programs FORCED upon us, and of which we largely pay for via payroll taxes and general fund taxes which are also used to support the programs. Many of us conservatives support means testing and would opt out altogether if we had the choice. So this incessant and childish need of yours to want us to acknowledge them as entitlements is weird.

        The fact is though my dear watson is that you do support a party that promotes policies and principles that are in contrast to what you have espoused here. Maybe you can explain why?

      • Cluster November 28, 2012 / 11:23 am

        Actually, what’s clear is that you don’t have the slightest grasp of what the Democratic Party stands for. – Casper

        Casper, you have the debating skills of a 5th grader. In order to support one’s position, one should offer empirical evidence, actual policies, or legislation that support your position, and that refute the others. Merely stating the opposite of someone’s original comment doesn’t qualify. Just FYI.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 12:27 pm

        O-catspuke

        Actually, what’s clear is that you don’t have the slightest grasp of what the Democratic Party stands for. – Casper

        SURE we do
        abortion on demand, sodomy, free sex, marxism, OWS, OPM, hate, anarchists, union thugs, class envy, class warfare, islam apologists, Jew haters, freeloaders, plantation dwellers.
        just to name a few…….OH yes and the KKK YOU OWN THEM!

      • tiredoflibbs November 28, 2012 / 1:26 pm

        Watty: “I can’t take seriously your claims that conservatives want entitlement reform until they accept the fact that by in large they are also receiving entitlements.”

        Of course you can’t since it is outside your dumbed-down talking points. But answer me this, which party proposed “privatizing” Social Security and which party stood for the status quo?

        As Spook said, if I were allowed to keep all my SS contributions and invest them into the least risky investment, my payback would be more than the minuscule return that the government pays. PLUS it would be ALL MY MONEY that I would be able to keep and pass on to surviving family members.

        You can’t take it seriously? You can’t think for yourself.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) November 28, 2012 / 2:59 pm

        Watson: I’ve tried to tell you before that I’m not a “Liberal…..And I’ve told you before that I’m not a Democrat and never have been

        I may not know you as well as some of the old timers here, Watson, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck………

      • 02casper November 28, 2012 / 9:57 am

        “And in regard to the Golden Rule – I would never teach my children to treat others in the manner many liberals, including Obama, treat others. I would hope they have much higher standards.”

        Which has nothing to do with the golden rule which is

        “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

        “Cluster, it’s pretty clear from both of their comments that neither of them has the slightest grasp of what the Democrat Party stands for.”

        Actually, what’s clear is that you don’t have the slightest grasp of what the Democratic Party stands for.

      • tiredoflibbs November 28, 2012 / 1:18 pm

        The Golden Rule of the Democrat Party is: “he who has the gold makes the rules”. You can see it in the never endless expansion of government dependence and wealth redistribution – schemes to buy votes.

        ObAMATEUR’s “recovery” was non existent due to the expansion of the welfare and food stamp states. Plus the massive expansion of unemployment that went from 6 months to almost TWO YEARS. Unemployment “insurance” was NEVER meant to be this long nor priced (taxed) to be so.

        So cappy, here ARE MORE FACTS in which you can dismiss with the usual, “I never heard of that” or everybody’s favorite “nuh uh!”.

      • tiredoflibbs November 28, 2012 / 1:10 pm

        Spook, Watty will never get it. He has his dumbed down talking points and NO FACTS has or will ever change him from his mindless regurgitation of those points.

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 1:19 pm

        Tired,

        You have to be pretty much brain dead to not be able to differentiate between people who have been productive members of society their whole lives, forced to contribute to programs that they may or may not support, who then draw upon those programs in retirement; and people who are not productive members of society who expect the government to take care of them. Watson seems to think we are accusing people who are laid off from their jobs and draw unemployment benefits of being mooches. I only consider them mooches if they draw unemployment for 99 weeks and then miraculously get a job in the 100th week, or, worse, miraculously have an injury that qualifies for SS disability benefits immediately after their UE benefits expire. It’s people like the free Obama phone lady in Cleveland that I have a problem with, not hard working people who, through no fault of their own, fall on hard times for a brief period.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 1:44 pm

        Random Placement Gnomes!

        Teach the Principles?

        Sheesh Cluster, you sound like my father. Damn kids are making too much noise, and what’s this beetle nonsense? Sounds like a jet airplane crashing into a guitar factory. Where’s the melody? What happened to responsibility? Cut yer hair ya’ damn hippy!

        Should I try to lecture my kid on the principles my father taught me, when she should just roll her eyes and ignore me like I thought I was ignoring him?

        And here’s why;

        Dad did what he thought was the right, asked himself how will my life be judged on a scale of good and evil? Tried to keep a smile in his heart, be kind to others, help those less fortunate, refrain from excesses in all things except charity, treat customers fairly, stand by your word, follow the Ten Commandments and read from the Bible daily.

        He built a business, lost it, built another, lost it, built a third and when he died the government took so much of the value the business had to be sold to pay the debt. (And I don’t want to hear from any smart-ass that thinks this was avoidable or that he wasn’t entitled to pass on the sweat of his brow to whomsoever he felt should have had it. Save your breath, you don’t know what you’re talking about.)

        Dad felt his immortality was what he left behind; so he denied himself the pleasures he worked so hard to achieve and gave everything he had to his legacy, charity and his family. He raised four sons and we’re all living his nightmare again and again.

        Now it’s my daughter’s turn.

        From the beginning of her interaction with others she saw the error of my dad’s principles. She watched as students cheat at every opportunity because there is a reward for doing so. I tell my daughter to take only what she’s worked for, and accept what is freely given to her by others. The winners in this game take what is not theirs, and demand more be given. My daughter learned to take credit for her accomplishments. The winners take credit for happenstance.

        Lying is always wrong, cheating is always wrong, stealing is always wrong. Absolutes I learned from my dad I taught to my daughter. Know right from wrong, and when you see someone doing wrong don’t be afraid to call it what it is. Learn from them, Help them, don’t let the wrongs pass without comment. You have choices, know that to tell a lie is wrong and judge in yourself if you are willing to commit this wrong and live with the consequences. Think of what these wrongs do to you, and to others before committing to them.

        But, in school she’s taught that she is not allowed to “judge” others. It’s not right and wrong; it’s a different understanding, it’s just they’re interpretation of right and wrong. Stealing is okey-dokey if a man steals bread to feed his children, lying to save someone’s feelings is just dandy because your motives are essentially good.
        (and before you hand me that crap about Jesus’ admonishment remember that He never intended for us to ignore sin; only that we are not to assume G-d’s prerogative to condemn the guilty.)

        My wife is an Indian; Blackfoot. She was born in Texas her brothers were born in Alaska. The entire family is entitled to “free” education, housing, health care, sustenance and support from cradle to grave. They’ve never taken a dime owed to them by virtue of birth, my daughter is also entitled to such largess by inheritance, yet we paid for her private education from Pre-K through undergraduate degree by sacrifice. Who’s the SAP now?

        From our example, she puts ½ of her net earnings in a savings account every payday; she has since her first part-time job at a video store. She plans her expenses with an eye toward buying a house and starting a business.

        My wife is a conservatee advocate, she witnesses daily the absolute bottom of the human existence in terms of greed and malice; a constant parade of family members in never ending battle to cheat one another to gain control over the assets of an elderly relative. By the dozens these vermin, unchained from simple human compassion have their greed rewarded by lying, cheating, stealing and vicious rancor directed to anyone; family or stranger that stands in the way of the object of desire. Every man-jack of them is already living on the public dole, but Uncle Jaime has cash and he’s senile, so he doesn’t need it.

        The winner is the biggest liar of the bunch with the least amount of conscience. How do I teach my daughter to do onto others when the biggest rewards go to those that ignore the Golden Rule the best?

        My father wouldn’t have changed a thing in his life, he was a good man. He could have lived the good life, spent freely, enjoy life and never look back. But he was trampled by his own principles.

        Perhaps he should have lived by this creed; one can never be truly free until he no longer cares what other people think.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 1:52 pm

        Oh, and Churchill was not an alcoholic; he was an alcohol abuser.

        Drunken Irish poets don’t count as “successful” since most of them died penniless and severely in debt.

      • bardolf2 November 28, 2012 / 2:02 pm

        ‘ Ulysses’ will be relevant for the next hundred years no matter what pot smoking freshman lit profs said back in the 60’s. ‘Howl’ on the other hand will die with the worst generation ever.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 2:05 pm

        Hemingway was also an alcoholic; worst-American-Author-EVER!

        “Yeah” said the captain.
        “Yeah” said the first mate, “Yeah”

      • Cluster November 28, 2012 / 2:35 pm

        When FDR was asked by a reporter if Churchill was an alcoholic, FDR said:

        “Churchill is not an acoholic. No acoholic could possibly drink that much”

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 4:29 pm

        was that Captain Morgan?

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 4:50 pm

        Count, don’t you mean Arrrrrrgh?

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 5:30 pm

        Arrrrrrrrrr….gh matey….

        ya gotta LOVE this leftists heads EXPLODING!!!!

        Critics Go Berserk, Hurl Insults at Beck Over ‘Obama in Pee Pee’: ‘F**kwit,’ ‘Worse Than Feces’ & ‘Enjoy Hell’

        Flash: Ebay removes the artwork from its website.

        ROTFLMAO……..

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 5:32 pm

        Bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha

        Arrrrrrrrrrrrr(gh) matey………..

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 5:46 pm

        Ahhhhh some of O-catspukes democRAT “principles”……….

        “Which Liberal Radio Host Wishes an ‘Angel of the Lord’ Would Come Down and ‘Lob’ the Heads Off All the ‘Tea Bag Bastards’?

        “Instead of killing the first born in all the households of Egypt just wipe out all the Tea Baggers…lob their heads off!”

        radio host Mike Malloy

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 5:48 pm

        PS

        mike why dont YOU lead by example?
        you COWARD LOUDMOUTH PUNKASS D**K!

      • Retired Spook November 28, 2012 / 8:53 pm

        Critics Go Berserk, Hurl Insults at Beck Over ‘Obama in Pee Pee

        What was really funny was that they had to weight down the Obama bobblehead to get it to sink to the bottom of the jar because, well, sh*t floats.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 5:34 pm

        count

        two versions, one sober, one drunk,
        we call a gal friend with an eye patch AHOYTY matie (drunk version) it stuck.

      • ricorun November 28, 2012 / 7:46 pm

        BeanCounter: Oh, and Churchill was not an alcoholic; he was an alcohol abuser.

        Good parsing!

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 8:49 pm

        I vote for reek-O to STFU

      • bardolf2 November 28, 2012 / 10:38 pm

        If you’re quoting malverninstitute as an authority on anything but conning people out of their money, well you probably need to go there for more treatments.

      • Caveat Emptor November 29, 2012 / 2:08 am

        If they didn’t help you with your addiction get a refund Bardolf.

      • neocon01 November 29, 2012 / 8:09 pm

        LOL

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 7:26 pm

        waspStooge

        Regarding unemployment, employed individuals pay for unemployment

        Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzttttttttttttt the ***EMPLOYER*** pays it to Moron!

    • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 10:53 pm

      Another principle I believe in. Freedom of speech. Even if I disagree with what the person is saying.

  4. Cluster November 27, 2012 / 10:50 pm

    Sure they do Cap. You need to pay attention. By promoting abortion on demand, the democratic party is absolving mothers and fathers of personal responsibility. By promoting, extending and advertising the availability of welfare, food stamps the democratic party is absolving people of having to take care of themselves. By promoting school breakfasts, lunches and now dinners, the democratic party is absolving parents of having the responsibility of providing for their children. By blaming nearly everything on race, the democratic party is weakening standards and indirectly and absolving the black population from personal responsibility.

    The democratic party is permeating society with the notion that the state is a better parent and a better provider and will be there when you fail, stripping away the ideals of self reliance and personal responsibility. You really need to pay closer attention.

    • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 10:58 pm

      cluster,
      I do pay attention. Which is why I know that everything you stated isn’t true.

      • Cluster November 27, 2012 / 11:05 pm

        Then prove me wrong

      • 02casper November 27, 2012 / 11:23 pm

        James did a pretty good job of taking down your talking points earlier and had his posts deleted. I’m sure the same would happen to me.

        James was given many warnings about racist and ageist comments and religious bigotry and when he continued to post this way he was cut off. What he says now has nothing to do with his posts being deleted. Every time he was allowed to come back he would quickly go back to his racism and attacks and now he is not allowed to post at all. You read this blog often enough to know this. Please try to be honest. No post has ever been deleted just for giving an opposing opinion and you know it. //Moderator

  5. Cluster November 28, 2012 / 9:54 am

    Let’s come at this from another angle. Obama won the vote of people 44 years old and younger, while Romney won the votes of people 45 years and older:

    The divide between young voters and older voters was as stark this year as it was in 2008. While Obama lost ground among voters younger than 30, he still won this age group by 24 points over Mitt Romney (60% to 36%). He also maintained a slimmer advantage among voters 30 to 44 (52% Obama, 45% Romney), while losing ground among those 45 to 64 and those 65 and older.

    Now it can be easily argued that those over 45 were subject to much more of a traditional education of the principles I mentioned including lessons in the founding of this country and constitutional governance, while those younger than 45 have been largely taught the principles of the left, ie; that of big government, with less of an historical understanding of the constitutional governance.

    The older folks, specifically those under 55, voted in favor of policies that would have decreased their benefits and subject their income to more taxation in an effort to sustain the constitional republic for future generations, while the younger folks voted to keep their gravy train rolling with zero sacrifice. And not only did they vote in favor of that, but people like James voted in the hopes of dismantling the constitution altogether, obliterating states rights in favor of a large centralized parental bureauracracy, thus supporting my contention of constitutional and financial illiteracy amongst the younger generations.

    Despite Watsons and Caspers objections, this pretty much clearly spells it out.

    http://www.people-press.org/2012/11/26/young-voters-supported-obama-less-but-may-have-mattered-more/

  6. bardolf2 November 28, 2012 / 11:21 am

    “There has never been one successful alcoholic.” – Clueless

    James Joyce
    Alfred Hitchcock
    James Boswell
    Winston Churchill

    Of course these gentlemen pale in comparison to the successes on B4V. Romney lost because he was a horrible candidate and many in the GOP stayed home.

    Only on the topics of interest to Clueless were there fundamental differences between Obama and Romney. Clueless thinks that Obamacare and tax increases on the rich are what will ruin this country, others in the GOP disagree.

    On drones, ag subsidies, war on terror, war on drugs, big deficits and on and the differences were slight.

    Obama went to the portion of his base which is chiefly socially liberal and said he’d promote abortion. Romney went to the portion of his base which is chiefly socially conservative and said he’d promote tax cuts.

  7. Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 1:43 pm

    Teach the Principles?

    Sheesh Cluster, you sound like my father. Damn kids are making too much noise, and what’s this beetle nonsense? Sounds like a jet airplane crashing into a guitar factory. Where’s the melody? What happened to responsibility? Cut yer hair ya’ damn hippy!

    Should I try to lecture my kid on the principles my father taught me, when she should just roll her eyes and ignore me like I thought I was ignoring him?

    And here’s why;

    Dad did what he thought was the right, asked himself how will my life be judged on a scale of good and evil? Tried to keep a smile in his heart, be kind to others, help those less fortunate, refrain from excesses in all things except charity, treat customers fairly, stand by your word, follow the Ten Commandments and read from the Bible daily.

    He built a business, lost it, built another, lost it, built a third and when he died the government took so much of the value the business had to be sold to pay the debt. (And I don’t want to hear from any smart-ass that thinks this was avoidable or that he wasn’t entitled to pass on the sweat of his brow to whomsoever he felt should have had it. Save your breath, you don’t know what you’re talking about.)

    Dad felt his immortality was what he left behind; so he denied himself the pleasures he worked so hard to achieve and gave everything he had to his legacy, charity and his family. He raised four sons and we’re all living his nightmare again and again.

    Now it’s my daughter’s turn.

    From the beginning of her interaction with others she saw the error of my dad’s principles. She watched as students cheat at every opportunity because there is a reward for doing so. I tell my daughter to take only what she’s worked for, and accept what is freely given to her by others. The winners in this game take what is not theirs, and demand more be given. My daughter learned to take credit for her accomplishments. The winners take credit for happenstance.

    Lying is always wrong, cheating is always wrong, stealing is always wrong. Absolutes I learned from my dad I taught to my daughter. Know right from wrong, and when you see someone doing wrong don’t be afraid to call it what it is. Learn from them, Help them, don’t let the wrongs pass without comment. You have choices, know that to tell a lie is wrong and judge in yourself if you are willing to commit this wrong and live with the consequences. Think of what these wrongs do to you, and to others before committing to them.

    But, in school she’s taught that she is not allowed to “judge” others. It’s not right and wrong; it’s a different understanding, it’s just they’re interpretation of right and wrong. Stealing is okey-dokey if a man steals bread to feed his children, lying to save someone’s feelings is just dandy because your motives are essentially good.
    (and before you hand me that crap about Jesus’ admonishment remember that He never intended for us to ignore sin; only that we are not to assume G-d’s prerogative to condemn the guilty.)

    My wife is an Indian; Blackfoot. She was born in Texas her brothers were born in Alaska. The entire family is entitled to “free” education, housing, health care, sustenance and support from cradle to grave. They’ve never taken a dime owed to them by virtue of birth, my daughter is also entitled to such largess by inheritance, yet we paid for her private education from Pre-K through undergraduate degree by sacrifice. Who’s the SAP now?

    From our example, she puts ½ of her net earnings in a savings account every payday; she has since her first part-time job at a video store. She plans her expenses with an eye toward buying a house and starting a business.

    My wife is a conservatee advocate, she witnesses daily the absolute bottom of the human existence in terms of greed and malice; a constant parade of family members in never ending battle to cheat one another to gain control over the assets of an elderly relative. By the dozens these vermin, unchained from simple human compassion have their greed rewarded by lying, cheating, stealing and vicious rancor directed to anyone; family or stranger that stands in the way of the object of desire. Every man-jack of them is already living on the public dole, but Uncle Jaime has cash and he’s senile, so he doesn’t need it.

    The winner is the biggest liar of the bunch with the least amount of conscience. How do I teach my daughter to do onto others when the biggest rewards go to those that ignore the Golden Rule the best?

    My father wouldn’t have changed a thing in his life, he was a good man. He could have lived the good life, spent freely, enjoy life and never look back. But he was trampled by his own principles.

    Perhaps he should have lived by this creed; one can never be truly free until he no longer cares what other people think.

  8. dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 2:05 pm

    Well, according to the liberal “bible” of the internet–HuffPo; these are some of the highlights of the Democratic Platform for 2012: You can find it for yourself at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/03/democratic-party-platform_n_1853120.html
    [ emphasis original, comments mine ]

    Health Care: The party touts the achievements of the Affordable Care Act but pledges to keep building up reforms. [ Insurance reform at best. Doctors fleeing and largest tax increase in history directly on the middle class you profess to care about ]

    Medicare: The party appears undeterred by fact-checkers who claim it’s unfair to say Republicans will end the program as it’s currently conceived.
    The Republican budget plan would end Medicare as we know it. Democrats adamantly oppose any efforts to privatize or voucherize Medicare…
    [ Little or no reform of true entitlement programs. I, like many others, would have opted out if that was an option. Kick the can down the road once more. ]

    Taxes: Democrats join Republicans in embracing the groundwork for corporate tax reform.
    [ How high can we go? We are already the highest as far as corporate tax rates go and with the individual over $250K we can be assured of no new corporate growth plus high unemployment for 4+ more years ]

    Unions: The Democrats give a hug to Big Labor.
    [ There is a great idea. Goodbye Twinkies plus more to follow. Union bosses making 500% + (up to 5,000%) shattering the corporate boss pay scale but can not forget to recycle the bundlers money. Paybacks–the Obama way. ]

    Immigration Reform: The party reaffirms its commitment to a comprehensive plan beyond the Dream Act.
    [ We don’t need no stinkin’ borders. One world. Come get your hand outs. It is on the “Welcome to the USA website. ]

    Arts Funding: Democrats ignore Romney’s insistence that these things should be cut from the budget.
    [ Yeah, 16+ trillion in debt and we need to spend money of NPR and jars full of urine with crosses in them. We need to get our fiscal house in order first. ]

    Abortion: Democrats support both the right to choose and the funding of providers.
    [ Abortion is horrific enough but now we also get to pay for it??? What-a-deal. ]

    Gay Marriage: As expected, the party takes the plunge, offering its first formal support for same-sex marriage rights.
    [Gays, among others, already have the same legal rights but need to be more equal by hijacking a word? ]

    Guns: The party supports “regulation” in theory, albeit in carefully worded terms.
    We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation.
    [ Liberals will keep trying to “regulate” all guns out of private hands. Don’t try and deny it. Go look up the statistics sometime and you will actually find more violent crimes were prevented (by 2.5 X) than committed. ]

    [ Plus. if you visit the website you can see some of the ]
    Most Iconic Photos Of Obama’s First Term
    [ including the picture of him hastily dragged off the course for a photo-op in the situation room when either Valerie allowed Obama to or Penetta and Hilary went behind his back to get Osama–viewer’s choice ]

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 2:47 pm

      Hug to Unions:There is a great idea. Goodbye Twinkies plus more to follow.

      Actually, the government was delighted at the demise of Hostess;

      The State Department hired all the Twinkies,

      The Secret Service hired all the HoHos,

      The Generals are sleeping with the Cupcakes, and

      The voters sent all the Ding Dongs to Congress.

      • ricorun November 28, 2012 / 7:19 pm

        I like that. Very witty. Unfortunately, it also appears to be plagiarized. Why doesn’t anyone source their comments when their comments are taken from someone else? Is it so hard? C’mon guys, give credit where credit is due.

      • neocon01 November 28, 2012 / 7:25 pm

        reek-O

        lighten up dude it was a joke and ALL jokes are “plagiarized” or do you give “credit” before telling the …….farmers daughter???

      • ricorun November 28, 2012 / 10:00 pm

        BeanCounter: What an ass.

        It is NEVER appropriate to say something which isn’t your own without credit to the person(s) who said it first. There is no excuse for that. But the most ironic part about it is that it occured in a thread entitled, “Teach the Principles”.

        And somehow I’M the ass? Oh please.

  9. dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 2:07 pm

    Count,

    Even though I do not know much about the treaties–I do know that it one of the worst things the US Government has done to another group of people. Mainly in not giving them the right to own their own property. Part of a long, sad history from my side of the coin.

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) November 28, 2012 / 3:02 pm

      db,

      The government pays out big bucks to “Native Americans” (my wife despises that term; she’s an Indian), if you know how to game the system.

      My wife, nor her father were adversely affected by any treaties or mistreatment from the government. In fact, just like the blacks and slavery, she doesn’t know anyone personally involved in the mistreatment of Indians and none of the relatives that were involved are yet alive.

      The grievances died with her grandparents. It’s a historical footnote to her family now.

      I’ve got a closer claim to government redress since my grandfather’s estate was taken away by the Nazis in Germany, at least one of my uncles who lived there is still alive today. True, it’s the German government and not mine, but still …

      • dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 4:05 pm

        My comment, mostly from ignorance, was one towards having a “beneficial” government overload. No one needs to work because we will pay you to stay on the reservation which you don’t own. You cannot get a loan to start a business because you don’t own the property. etc. I was not a part of the original deals but it is well past time we correct it.

      • dbschmidt November 28, 2012 / 4:07 pm

        overload or overlord–Same Difference

Comments are closed.