When one declares oneself to be a conservative, one is not, unfortunately, thereupon visited by tongues of fire that leave one omniscient. The acceptance of a series of premises is just the beginning. After that, we need constantly to inform ourselves, to analyze and to think through our premises and their ramifications. We need to ponder, in the light of the evidence, the strengths and the weaknesses, the consistencies and the inconsistencies, the glory and the frailty of our position, week in and week out. Otherwise, we will not hold our own in a world where informed dedication, not just dedication, is necessary for survival and growth.

William F. Buckley Jr., Feb 8, 1956, NR

Monday, January 26, 2009

Bootstraps By Patrick (Our New Author)

This post is by Patrick at Sane Political Discourse, and I am happy to announce that he has agreed to join our team. I've been reading his blog for a while and I love his no-nonsense way about him. He tells it like it is. It is not only refreshing but desperately needed at this critical time in history. Welcome aboard Patrick!

Let me begin by excerpting one more sentence (with critically necessary edit) of the president's inaugural address:

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies.

While I was reading through the multitudinous comments to my Wednesday and Thursday posts, one thing tied them together. And it also reminded me of some of the dumbest comments of the dumbest Obama voters (the ones who expect Obama to magically make their problems go away). And

Far too many people have become dependent on others to survive.

I know, it's a statement of the obvious, but it had to be done. Because at this point, with the deepening recession, we're approaching the point where we can be cast irrevocably into the type of command economy that worked so well for the Soviets. And with the mentality that others must provide us stuff, we're poised to accept it.

Now here's where I tie my earlier posts together. The Obama/Newdeal v2.0 post was about, in essence, unrelenting assumption of power and responsibility over our daily lives. My post arguing that the old guard of the civil rights movement are becoming the source of racial tension now has a side corollary: far too many in the black community still cling to the idea that the deck is stacked against them, and therefor government is required to "balance" things for them.

Other things catch my eye. Walking past the TV a minute ago, I saw two stories mentioned at the bottom of the screen (over the three seconds it took me to get from the kitchen (for coffee) to the bedroom (to type this)) indicating two states were having financial problems keeping up with unemployment. Every news break on the radio details the latest bad numbers. Hell, the damn commercials try to sell shit based on the idea the economy's doing a swirl around the crapper.

Oh, and don't even get me started on the assload of bailouts pouring forthwith from Washington, and how people claiming to be conservative saying that they "have to do something" to justify it.

But this post is not about blaming the government. Because blaming other people is a step on the road to expecting government intervention in the name of "fairness." And the simple fact is that we are reaching a point where we're simply going to run out of money trying to "help" people.

I know, because I've been there (and am still not wholly free of government largess).

So here's the point. We need to get responsible for ourselves and for our families, and encourage others to do the same.

Now I know many of you are already self-sufficient. And I know there are people who have had bad things happen that are overwhelmed by the hits that keep coming. But for this to work, it's time to take it to the next level.

I'll be honest, it won't be easy. But the idea is that we take care of our friends, our family, and ouur neighbors so that the government doesn't have to. I do make exceptions, though, if people seek self-destruction despite our help. But you all know the differnece between the person who blows his money on crap while his ouse gets foreclosed and the family that's struggling to keep up with medical bills while one parent is on the roles due to layoffs. We need to embrace our common faith, both in each other and in God (or an equivalent morality for you atheists). We need to support those businesses that serve us best and that strengthen our community (even to returning to some semblance of the Buy American mentality). And charitable giving should be embraced to help other people, tax deductions be damned, which means donating time, food, personal items, and clothes instead of just money to a charity.

And we need to demand that people in our personal circle take care of the messes they have created, the children they have produced, and others they impact daily.

Simply put, we're not going to drag ourselves out of this mess by waiting for the Stimulus of the Week (add that under Asshat of the Week?) to show up from Washington or the next check from the state to deposit (I assume you go direct deposit rather than messing with paper).

This is not a new idea, but it is forgotten as we isolate ourselves (oh, I'm guilty here). It would be truly amazing if we banded together at the local level to support each other rather than sitting around in our houses looking to far-off governments to plunk their magic twanger and bring relief and prosperity through the most inefficiency method.

So grab up them bootstraps and start a'pullin'.


Gayle said...

Welcome, Patrick! You do have a way with words. "plunk their magic twanger." LOL! Reminds me of a song, but I'm getting away from the subject.

First of all, I was going to crosspost the post I just wrote on abortion, but I'll wait a couple of days to do that because I want this post to stand a bit. It's excellent, and kudos to you for writing it. The only problem that I can see is that I believe most conservatives already help those in need. I do know that conservatives spend more money helping others than do liberals. My husband and I (retired) have raised our children and one grandchild without government help, sent them to college without government assistance, and had them come back home to perch while looking for work - again without government assistance. We have helped other members of our extended families, while they were still among the land of the living to the tune of thousands of dollars literally, and I think most conservatives will go to the ends of the earth to help their own before relying on government handouts, although I do understand I could be wrong about that. Well, what about people not related? We do quite a bit of that around here too but I'm not going to go into details because that's too much slapping myself on the back and I've always felt that bragging about charitable works is wrong. I will go so far as to say we aren't wealthy. We both retired from the working world and are now really working because we run a farm!

What I'm getting to is that we can't get everyone to grab up their bootstraps and start pulling, because the fact is there are liberals and apathetic citizens who simply don't want to. What do we do about them? I believe it is they who are the problem and not those of us with conservative values.

Neither am I trying to be contrary. You know me better than that because we've been visiting one another for awhile now. I'm just wondering.

Anonymous said...

I think this all goes back to having personal responsibility and for the most part that is what is missing in today's society. If the government is going to give out free money, who is honestly going to say, "no thanks, I don't need that"? Not many people. The government has to be very careful not to cross the line between need and want. There are people who need assistance and to deny it would be wrong, but I couldn't agree with you more that we have to stop depending on the government for bailouts. Maybe if the government was a little smarter with their money the people that truly need it will have more access to it.

CB said...

Good post Jen. To me, your reminder that we are responsible for ourselves and our families is where the rubber hits the road and where the government hinders that effort not only with taxes but also with unrelenting, ineffective regulation.

How do we recover from this morass and where do conservatives find their voice and not simply whine? On principle, it's my opinion that we should object to every make work project that pulls money out of the productive economy to pick winners and losers. On principle, we should object to every Keynesian/ FDR style "shovel ready" project that even the Congressional Budget Office says won't produce jobs now or later. On principle, we should oppose every attempt to punish capital investment (because capital investment is truly stimulative). Rather than doing what Obama's suggesting, doubling the capital gains rate, he should be cutting if not eliminating the capital gains, corporate and dividends tax rates.

On principle, we should oppose every new bailout proposed and hold our elected representatives accountable. That goes for corporations or even state governments who now have their hand out. On principle, we should object to every attempt to rob Peter to pay Paul i.e., Obama's proposed welfare payments that he calls tax cuts. Unless you pay taxes, what you receive can't be called a tax cut! On principle, we should oppose every attempt to nationalize health insurance.

Of course, there are non economic issues where we might get consensus but that is more problematic. We will have open borders, federally funded abortion on demand and islamo fascists will take advantage of the open borders and naivety in closing Gitmo and announcing direct talks with rogue regimes. The electorate will punish them for any lapse in vigilance.

I don't want to get to far afield from your post so I'll bring it home. While we're taking care to do as you rightly suggest, I think we can collectively push back on government so that we're not so burdened by it, not only for our sake but for the sake of future generations, our children, who will stagger under this burden being crafted by Obama.

Anonymous said...

Craig.....although I'd love to take credit for it, I can't. Patrick wrote this gem.......

He is a new author here and I for one couldn't be happier!

Pasadena Closet Conservative said...

Careful there, buddy.

Al Sharpton might put you on his list of racist enemies for such statements as "So grab up them bootstraps and start a'pullin'."

Only entitlements will suffice.

Joe said...

"We need to get responsible for ourselves..."

True...but we must also hold our representatives in Washinton responsible, to us and to the Constitution.

We can do that by keeping in constant contact with them by snail-mail, email and phone calls.

Anonymous said...

"So grab up them bootstraps and start a'pullin'"

How cute.. Is this supposed to be cute? Am I taking this too seriously? Or should I be playing along with this childish charade?
If i am to be serious at all let me start by saying that I am personally ashamed of the 52% of the voters that elected this president, Thanks for destroying capitalism . You people here may not think so, but I do. Some of you get it. It really is pretty simple. Those of you who don't get this are naive and need to pull your heads out of the sand and get a real education, not one shoved down your throat by some liberal college professor who spent their life drinking the koolaide.
The joke is on us though. Even traditionally liberal France thinks Obama is naive while here in America the media treat him as the second coming.
Let Big Daddy take care of you. More government power and less citizen rights. Big Daddy owns everything. Manufacturing/ Banking/Insurance/Energy/Medical care/news media (and yes that is coming). There is your change folks. Sweet stuff huh? I just want all the free stuff Obama promised me.
Let’s look at this in the daylight, not in the dark.. Obama wants $1 trillion to bailout the economy, wants to add 600,000 government jobs and give a $310 billion tax break to the middle and lower class, right? Where is all this money coming from? If we are spending $1 trillion to stimulate the economy then why does the government need to give 600,000 jobs to people? If taxpayers are spending $1 trillion plus the $310 billion tax break plus the salaries of 600,000 new gov't workers (which equals around $20 billion to $50,000 billion) should puts the total at around $1 trillion, 400 billion we (taxpayers) are in the hole for. Now, can someone please explain where we're getting this money and how is this going to stimulate the economy? And you folks support this?
Obama has promised to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine which would obviously be used to target, cripple and emasculate alternative talk radio shows. The aim of the Fairness Doctrine is to ensure that coverage of controversial issues by broadcast stations be ‘balanced and fair’ & and politically correct. As you have already seen with his attack on Rush Limbaugh. The puppet king, Obama, whose soul is owned by Socialist George Soros of move on dot org Obama has repeatedly called for a Civilian National Security Force which will require students to perform 50 hours per year of civilian service. Do you not see the comparison to Communism there? And this is what you guys are asking us to support?
Support this pipsqueak Commie? No me folks, If you want to compromise your convictions, go right ahead, tell ya what. Why don’t you go take a nice, long bubble bath, followed by a long, refreshing rest, spend a few days away from the media and your politically-minded friends. take a few deep breaths. then, maybe, you’ll be able to think more clearly.

TAO said...

"Walts World" that is an interesting name....it obviously defines a place that does not have much in common with reality.

Capitalism died a long time ago....it actually died well before Obama was born.

Capitalism actually committed suicide because they cozied right up to government and took it over with their contributions, their lobbyists, and all of that. Goldman Sachs has loaned us three of our last four Treasury Secretaries and who is more "capitalistic" than Goldman Sachs?

Obama's stimulus bill PALES in cost to bailout and guarantees passed out over the last three months by the Bush Administration.

Capitalism as you romantize about it stacked the deck against its self years ago...it sought the government out to achieve a competitive advantage and now it seeks out the government for a bailout.

The true COMMIES are actually the CEO's of our major corporations...

Anonymous said...

TAO said...
"Walts World" that is an interesting name....it obviously defines a place that does not have much in common with reality"

Thank you and I guess that Yours (TAO)sounds more like a Chinese Communist name
It kind of rhymes with MAO. Coincidence? Hmm.

Gayle said...

Regarding the last comment above mine, did I miss something? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe everyone who writes for Conservative Convictions has said they will hold Obama accountable. I certainly will. I don't like Obama or his politics and I believe this is one of the worst things that could have happened to this country, but that doesn't mean that we should sound like the liberals did. They called President Bush all sorts of vile names, names I can't even repeat here! If we act as they do we are no better than they are.

As I posted on my blog today, Obama is going to make a televised speech on Arab tv to inform the Arabian world that we aren't their enemies. If that isn't the stupidest thing I've ever heard then I've never heard anything stupid! Apathy, greed and stupidity got us this president and now we have to deal with it and it isn't going to be easy, so, Walt's World, how about putting your writing skills to work by attacking liberals and nutjobs who gave us this president and quit picking on fellow conservatives? You are wasting your time doing this. No one here is swallowing the liberal's lies or believing liberal college professors and no one here deserves your tirade. I checked out your blog to see if you really are a conservative because liberals do things like pretending they are conservative, but it appears you definitely are conservative and that you do good work on your blog, which really makes me wonder what your motivation is for attacking the good conservatives here may be? It's truly bewildering.

Anonymous said...

Gayle, first may I say think your for what you have said about the work on MY blog. Since your wrote this I also checked out YOUR blog and may I say I really thought VERY highly of it. Hence your support of this subject also is bewildering to me.
You ask, what is my motivation is for attacking the good conservatives here? I didn’t realize that I was attacking anyone but rather the idea of supporting this Man. As for my reply to TAO, that was a stab in return for the stab he took at the name of MY blog, and I feel that my stab in return was justified.
However… what our first African-American President is what he is and YOU know it. I noticed my sentiments expressed in your blog . So maybe I should be asking you why you are here in support of this (ridicules) subject.
Just because one of your authors wrote that “Follow the Yellow brick Road” story, does everybody have to get on his train? Maybe you do, I guess you do. But I don’t There isn’t one day that goes by that he does not do something that makes me cringe. As he did today in his Arabic TV network interview. The anti-America Muslim who now occupies our White House couldn't wait a week to tell his raghead brothers how much he detests our America! Did you support that? So tell me Gayle, exactly what do you support? And don’t give me that gibberish about supporting the office. You can respect the office, but if you support the man then you support his policies and everything that goes with him. Did his slamming of America to the Arabs remind you of Carter? Did you support him as well? The majority of the Americans that voted for him are ignorant about the threat Obama’s Marxist political policies are to America. They voted for him because they wanted to throw out Bush and this guy was #1 Black, #2 had a nice smile and #3 he was a Liberal And most of all the Media was for him.
So, calling Barak Obama a Marxist is a great way to define him as applies to his policy beliefs. The same policies that I will not support Just plain criticism, doesn’t work. So in ending my “tirade” as you have put it, just let me make myself clear.
I have NO motive as you have asked. And I did not intend to “attack the good conservatives here”. I only wish to express my distaste for anyone that calls for “Supporting” this man.

Alvin "Angel" West said...

I'm sorry for crashing the party, and I'm sure I'll be labeled as a "troll," but I really have to say this:

While I'd LOVE to see how the media would react to this phony President, I realize that it will never happen. Never. No. Freaking. Way. Conservatives will NEVER go bugshit crazy on Obama like Liberals did against Bush, because Conservatives have too much respect for the office and it's representatives. And I feel that it's not right. The Conservatives ALWAYS take the High Road and they always get smacked down while doing so.
You only have to look at pres. Bush to prove my point. The man was to darn good. And he got stepped on by the media daily for it.

TAO said...

Here you go Walt a defintion of TAO:

Tao is a concept found in Taoism, Confucianism, and more generally in ancient Chinese philosophy. While the character itself translates as "way," "path," or "route," or sometimes more loosely as "doctrine" or "principle," it is used philosophically to signify the fundamental or true nature of the world. The concept of Tao differs from conventional (western) ontology, however; it is an active and holistic conception of the world, rather than a static, atomistic one.

In Taoism, Tao both precedes and encompasses the universe. As with other nondualistic philosophies, all the observable objects in the world - referred to in the Tao Te Ching as 'the named' or 'the ten thousand things' - are considered to be manifestations of Tao, and can only operate within the boundaries of Tao. Tao is, by contrast, often referred to as 'the nameless', because neither it nor its principles can ever be adequately expressed in words. It is conceived, for example, with neither shape nor form, as simultaneously perfectly still and constantly moving, as both larger than the largest thing and smaller than the smallest, because the words that describe shape, movement, size, or other qualities always create dichotomies, and Tao is always a unity.

While the Tao cannot be expressed, Taoism holds that it can be known, and its principles can be followed. Much of Taoist writing focusses on the value of following the Tao - called Te (virtue) - and of the ultimate uselessness of trying to understand or control Tao outright. This is often expressed through yin and yang arguments, where every action creates a counter-action as a natural, unavoidable movement within manifestations of the Tao.

Tao is often compared to water: clear, colorless, unremarkable, yet all beings depend on it for life, and even the hardest stone cannot stand in its way forever.

By the way, the commie nation you hate so much is probably the most capitalistic on the face of the earth right now and they own more of our debt than anyone else in the world....

Gayle said...

Check out my blog again, Walt. I posted about Obama's speech this morning. It will tell you what I think of it. I also appreciate your comment regarding my blog.

I honestly believe it would be better for conservatives to not waste their energy arguing among themselves, but to spend it on fighting the liberal agenda wherever it is found. We are all conservatives but we are all still individuals and deal with our problems in different ways. I personally cannot bring myself to sink to the level of the far-left, but I can hold Obama accountable and I can inform people of what he does that I find objectionable and/or downright dangerous. I can, I will and I have, and I believe everyone else who writes for this blog does too, but I will let them speak for themselves. I have too much work to do to be angry with other conservatives, Walt, and so I will not argue with you anymore regarding this subject. I waste far too much time debating with liberals as it is.

Have a blessed and productive day, and that goes for everyone here! :)

CB said...

I'm splitting hairs here, but I'd say Obama is more of a Maoist than he is a Marxist, the former being more threatening than the latter. His mastery of Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals is worrisome. What has he done since taking office? He's reached out to normalize relations with Iran, closed Gitmo, signed abortion legislation that will fund abortions world wide (what Nancy Pelosi calls an economic stimulus), nominated a Labor Secretary that will impose card check (the elimination of the secret ballot) and promised the largest pork filled, make work program in world history. He's moved to allow states determine their own EPA standards which would make a state like California the de facto federal arbiter for emissions, clean water and air, etc. and he's just getting started!

I'll be the 6'5" 270 lb black guy at the reeducation camp or rice field carrying the sign that reads "slow learner."

dmarks said...

"far too many in the black community still cling to the idea that the deck is stacked against them, and therefor government is required to "balance" things for them."

It especially rings hollow when a multi-millionaire preacher says that the deck is stacked against them.

Arthustone said...

CB typed:

'I'm splitting hairs here, but I'd say Obama is more of a Maoist than he is a Marxist, the former being more threatening than the latter..'

Having been raised in Hawaii he's a good swimmer?


He added:

'Obama has promised to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine which would obviously be used to target, cripple and emasculate alternative talk radio shows.'

Obama has promised no such thing. the President opposes the Fairness Doctrine.


You have a vivid imagination CB. Always a treat to see what you'll make up next.

Anonymous said...

Actually Arthur, CB did not say that last quote. It was done by Walt's World and he was most definitely wrong with that quote.

You are correct when you said that Obama has been opposed to the Fairness Doctrine. I researched and wasn't able to come up with anything that said that he approved of it.

Patrick M said...

Walt: Tao said you were calling me wussy. I did notice you referred to my idea as "cute."

Tell you what, repost your comment on my blog instead of here and I'll explain it to you in terms I won't utter here. I'd suggest a ruler afterward to reassure yourself of... yourself.

Beyond that, the others have answered the logical points I made and the illogical rants you have responded with successfully, so all I have left are the happy gutturals for the bitter.

Anonymous said...

Patrick M said...
Walt: Tao said you were calling me wussy. I did notice you referred to my idea as "cute."

I would be happy to if I had said that, but MAO, I mean TAO is in his own little "DREAM WORLD" I didn't day that at all. What I did say was that I thought the name of your blog was "Cute"

Any more questions?
Oh yes one more thing:
Obama delivering a message to the Muslim world that "Americans are not your enemy." But Rush is!
Hmm and you guys support him as your leader and Chief. How sad..

(Oh right, you support the office not him) I forgot... What a joke!

Patrick M said...

Walt: We'll be there when Obama figures out that he has to kill terrorists. And hopefully, he will.

The point is to respect the office and the person holding that office, especially when the disagreements are primarily on ideology. Then your arguments can have merit. Otherwise you're just a tinfoil-hat wingnut in a bunker lined with asbestos polishing his rifle for hours on end naked.

You're not a tinfoil-hat wingnut in a bunker lined with asbestos polishing his rifle for hours on end naked, are you?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.