By Susan Stamper Brown
One of the greatest gifts my hardworking, blue-collar father gave me when I was young was the belief that no one owes me anything. His wisdom carried me through some difficult times growing up and helped shape me into the person I am today. It seems that self-reliant attitude my dad instilled in me is all but lost in this country.
As the presidential election draws near, with Hillary possibly being fitted for an orange jumpsuit with complementary ankle chains and the self-avowed socialist, Bernie Sanders, rising in the polls, it might be time to consider my dad’s ideals and the freedoms we once knew will soon be a thing of the past, should a liberal take office.
Typically, what one president does in moderation, the next like-minded president usually does in excess, so going from a closet socialist to a full-blown socialist is not a big leap for Democrats. But, for those of us who still believe in our beloved constitution and cling to the freedoms within, a socialist president represents the greatest threat to our constitution in modern times and would take us about as far from what our founders intended as we could go.
Not that long ago, my father’s can-do attitude was common place, until snakes from both sides of the political aisle began to understand immense power could be gained by peddling handouts in exchange for votes. If they know anything at all, these self-serving political serpents understand human nature. If you give people what they didn’t earn from sources to which they didn’t contribute, they quickly become dependent. Add a bit of Machiavellian wordsmithing by redefining those handouts as “rights†and voila! You create a permanent voting base.
Our founders spoke of “unalienable rights.†Like modern day snake oil salesmen, politicians market tangible handouts, a never ending list of miscellaneous freebies, instead of the intangibles of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.†They have succeeded in transforming the Declaration of Independence into a “Declaration of Dependence.â€
The Democrat Party is predominately the trustee of that “Declaration of Dependence†but they are not alone. Under Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s leadership, likeminded Republicans just assisted President Obama in engineering the largest expansion of the federal government’s safety net in fifty years, despite large GOP majorities in both houses of Congress.
The $1.8 trillion deal approved in December made permanent certain tax breaks and credits which were originally considered temporary relief during Obama’s first year to help people through the recession. Despite the fact that we cannot afford this expansion, it is now permanent — and our children and their children will foot the bill. The Seattle Times reports this expansion is “the government’s largest cash-assistance program…with more than 40 million people receiving benefits each year.â€
All the Democrat Party presidential candidates say they want to expand far beyond this government overreach while a couple of sensible-minded conservatives propose policies intended to roll back unnecessary handouts to help get America back on the track to being the exceptional nation she once was. Allowing individuals to enjoy their God-endowed freedom to achieve their unique definition of “The American Dream†ensures that future generations will have the opportunity to stand on their own without government interference or the slavery of dependence.
Had America’s founders believed entitlements trumped ingenuity, the “New World†would be just like the old one, which is a case study in what happens when liberals are left to themselves. Long before he became president, Ronald Reagan said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.â€
Self anointed bootstrapper Stamper continues to offer a peek into what remains of her dark, selfish soul. Seemingly troubled by a ‘dependent class’ she turns her back on her classmates to try to get a quick buck or at least see her 3 names in print. Writing without substance she cloaks her screeching with the alleged virtue of her ‘blue-collar [purported] father’s can-do attitude’ and laments that ‘our children and their children’ will pay the bill for the lazy bums. It is good to see these tropes gathered together in one place every now and then, it underscores how effective the bumper sticker mentality can be in communicating complex problems to the simple minded.
“Let’s throw some red meat to the wolves!”
…articles like this are written for a dying breed; those people who have lost two elections in a row to Obama w/out a clue the majority of the country moved forward. Lost the war. Want to eat their own now cause they can’t go on w/out having a pound of somebody’s flesh. Who doesn’t SSB hate? Even Paul Ryan is a villain!
“Red meat boys, have at it down there in your bunker!”
I am more concerned about the RINOs crossbreeding with democrats.
(……I am really holding my tongue on the “crossbreeding” reference.)
LoL But seriously, we have two extremes with nothing in the middle.
They’re called your ears.
The concern you speak of is worldwide honey. For example – “$5.3 trillion – Amount of subsidies given to the fossil fuel companies by all the world’s governments. More than what is spent on health care each year.”
And since people of your persuasion are always quoting Reagan, why don’t you ever use this quote?
“I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here even though sometime back they may have entered illegally.”
-Ronald Reagan 10/28/1984
Just trying to keep the conversation honest honey.
Honest….
How many people did that represent in Reagan’s time? And just because one agrees with most of everything Reagan said, does it mean the same must agree with everything he said?
I-E:
…..i think the POINT is the Tea Party has warped what “conservative” means, and the Reagan amnesty quote is a PERFECT illustration of that.
Perfect.
Do you really see the republican party as conservative?
Reagan conservative?
Yes, I do. Asked and answered.
I think you’re asking are they….the created Tea Party’s version of conservative?
(Those guys are not Reagan conservatives…we both know that.)
It’s so good to see that not just my fellow liberals see through the piles of manure that Stamper-Brown spreads. Knowing that gives me hope for the country.
During and after any economic downturn, it is the policy of the right wing to scapegoat the poor and monorities. We’ve seen this time after time. Yes, never blame the rich white guys sucking on the public tit. This is why we MUST repeal citizens united.
I want articles on national politics in City-County Observer, but not from this woman. If you pay to print this, you’re wasting money. You can get a local teabagger to write you an article and fix the spelling and grammar for nothing.
I meant that you will have to correct the grammar and spelling, but you can do that for free.
The article left me with this thought.
“It concerns me that we have went from the “rags TO riches” oppertunity narrative embodied by people like President Lincoln which taught that anyone can excel in this nation no matter if one is born rich or poor, to the “rags OR riches privilege narrative of Bernie Sanders which teaches that because one is born rich another will be poor with no mobility apart from the government vehicle.”
Lincoln is a fine example of a person in a young, uncrowded society who did very well with his gift of unusual intellect. He died a century and a half ago. I know you do not believe in evolution, but the world has changed. There are always opportunities for those who are born with superior intellect, but the chances for those who are not so highly intelligent are less and less as time goes on. Even Ben Carson lived in public housing and had food stamps, so maybe you ought to consider the worth of giving a “hand up” to those who need it instead of just regurgitating the same trite “wisdom.”
The above was meant as a reply to Indiana Enoch’s “thought.”
Why is it that there is never a middle? When I say we should stop blaming rich people for making poor people, a liberal, you, runs to the other extreme claiming we want to help no one. At least be honest about how this great society experiment has failed more than it has helped. We have more poverty, more debt, and more dependent on the government than when these programs began. So they are not delivering what they promised. And as far as Carson, those programs did not make the man. One might dare to regurgitate that he excelled in spite of government aid. We need to return to the oppertunity narrative rather than the privilege narrative.
I-E….I smell a reply on Carson that you want it both ways. “he excelled in spite of government aid.”
Really?
Hmmmm, smells like snake oil.
“The car is too expensive for our family’s budget.”
“That’s why you should buy it! Raise your family’s standard of living!”
But it’s red, and I promised my Mom I would never buy a red car.”
“That’s why you should buy it! It shows her you have grown as a person and love her!”
When government aid takes away to work motivation, few break out of its clutches. Sanders is running on the rich are the problem and you should get X for free.
“Why is it that there is never a middle?”
Is there a middle with you when it comes to abortion bro?
I didn’t think so, but your first sentence sent a tingle up my leg anyway because it’s the only realistic solution to any serious problem.
When you get serious about what you try to portray, get back with me….
Comments are closed.