Everyone is talking about the laughs heard ’round the world. Vice President Biden smirked and scoffed so much that the issue consumed most of the post-debate cable news coverage. However, what wasn’t mentioned was how Mr. Biden inadvertently made a strong case for Barry Goldwater’s conservatism when it comes to the nature of the welfare state.
Regarding the Obama administration’s hard and fast deadline to remove all forces from Afghanistan, Mr. Biden said: “Unless you set a timeline, Baghdad in the case of Iraq and — and Kabul in the case of Afghanistan will not step up. They’re happy to let us continue to do the job —- international security forces to do the job. The only way they step up is say, ‘Fellas, we’re leaving; we’ve trained you; step up.’ Step up. … That’s the only way it works.”
In a strange way, Mr. Biden seeks to apply Barry Goldwater’s conservatism to the people of Afghanistan, while simultaneously shunning it for freedom-loving Americans here at home:
A man may not immediately, or ever, comprehend the harm thus done to his character [by the welfare state]. Indeed, this is one of the great evils of Welfarism — that it transforms the individual from a dignified, industrious, self-reliant spiritual being into a dependent animal creature without his knowing it.”
In America, cutting off welfare recipients who have turned a safety net into a safety hammock still leaves those people with the greatest opportunity for social mobility the world has ever known. In Afghanistan, cutting off our allies at the wrong time leaves them susceptible to populations prone to chopping off heads and planning terrorist attacks like 9/11. (Take your pick: 2001 in New York or 2012 in Benghazi.)
Mr. Biden believes cutting off the government spigot is “the only way that works” for pro-Western Afghans surrounded by the Taliban and al Qaeda, but not for Obamaphone ladies attending anti-Romney union rallies, or the millionaires behind the success of “Sesame Street.” If Paul Ryan made one error during his debate Thursday night, it was by not calling out Mr. Biden on his perverse application of conservative principles. …
I went out to dinner with a Hispanic friend of mine two weeks ago and we were discussing the upcoming election. He’s well on his way to starting his first small business, and has had a conversion-of-sorts since voting for President Obama four years ago. As I dug into my steak, he spoke about the Republican Party’s inability to make significant inroads with certain minority groups. My response: “On some level it doesn’t matter, because if we fast forward 300 years it’s obvious that the future of the United States is not white. At some point in time these groups will be forced to embrace or shun the principles that maximize individual freedom.”
My children will not be white. My sister’s children will not be white. The U.S. demographics as they stand indicate that at some point there will simply be, for all intents and purposes, Americans. We are a nation of mutts, and in time terms like “white” and “black” will generally be rendered silly. And so, intelligent conservatives only care about a few basic questions: What will the Americans of the future believe? What will they stand for? Will Americans hold fast to the principles of our founders, or will they be citizens of a United States in name only?
‘Obama Phone’ lady is the latest example of a human gerbil, who is promised a shiny government pellet every four years in exchange for a trick (i.e., voting for the hand that feeds her). She is the end result of a failed ideology. Liberal blogs have of course tried to slime anyone who shows the video as racist, when the truth is that conservatives do not care about race. In fact, political correctness has reached a point where not caring about someone’s race is considered racist.
I care about a federal government that saps the will of its people. I care about a federal government that robs people of ambition and desire and the belief that they can do great things with their life. I care about the consequences of instilling in individuals a learned dependence that changes them from beings with limitless potential into hollowed-out husks that bump into each other for a few decades until death comes calling.
As Barry Goldwater so eloquently put it in The Conscious of a Conservative:
Consider the consequences to the recipient of welfarism. For one thing, he mortgages himself to the federal government. In return for benefits — which, in the majority of cases, he pays for — he concedes to the government the ultimate in political power — the power to grant or withhold from him the necessities of life as the government sees fit. Even more important, however, is the effect on him — the elimination of any feeling of responsibility for his own welfare and that of his family and neighbors. A man may not immediately, or ever, comprehend the harm thus done to his character. Indeed, this is one of the great evils of Welfarism — that it transforms the individual from a dignified, industrious, self-reliant spiritual being into a dependent animal creature without his knowing it. …
[We] can shatter the collectivists’ designs on individual freedom if we will impress upon the men who conduct our affairs this one truth: that the material and spiritual sides of man are intertwined; that it is impossible for the State to assume responsibility for one without intruding on the essential nature of the other; that if we take from a man the personal responsibility for caring for his material needs, we take from him also the will and the opportunity to be free.
Conservatives should work hard to articulate the principles of free markets, limited government, and individual freedom, but they should never comprise those principles by offering ethnic groups “goodies” for a vote. MSNBC hosts who feed on racial swill like to say that Republicans live in an “alternate reality,” when nothing could be further from the truth. Tyranny is colorblind, whether it’s in Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China. Only myopic little nitwits with names like Toure or Chris Matthews see serious public policy differences as a battle between “black” and “white”. The issue is Liberty vs. Tyranny, and conservatives are not the ones who are shilling for the tyrants.
My good friend, who has come to reject Obama’s ideology since 2008, is not alone. There are many like him. As election day nears, it’s up to you to find those friends and family members who fall into that category, and make a strong case for conservatism. If you’re pressed for time, I highly suggest reading Goldwater’s The Conscious of a Conservative. It’s a quick read, and essential knowledge for anyone who wants to better articulate their love for freedom and liberty.
I was going to do a post on Joy Behar’s perpetual “gas face” and what it means, but then I read this story and I lost my appetite for Behar ruminations. Instead, I’d like to talk about the conservative “Rock Problem.” Congressman McCotter seems to get it. And it seems as though there are a few others who understand. But, by and large, conservatives have a hard time using all the wonderful tools in the pop-culture toolbox that can dismantle liberalism and build a lasting conservative majority.
There is no legitimate reason why legions of left wing seminar callers should come across as cooler than their conservative counterparts.
And speaking of Counterparts, I better cut to the chase before I lose you. In short, if you thought I was a loser for having random intimate knowledge of Canadian rockers Rush, then perhaps you should also ask yourself why the kiddies watch Colbert while no one watched The 1/2 Hour News Hour.