A friend on the other side of my opinions alerted me recently that she believes the “far right (wherever that is) ... is on its last legs.” They’re “extremely out of touch.” She told me, “They cling to 1950’s views and standards, and the world has moved on from that.” She delivered that news with a delicate touch.
The topic at the time was over free birth control for women, no matter who is forced to pay for it. Again, the real issue is not whether women should have birth control, but who foots the bill. Don’t get sidetracked.
Clearly, beyond the sight of liberals is our ongoing loss of self-determination (freedom) and the importance of keeping personal responsibility on the legislative table. Yes, those are 50’s ideas, alright, stretching back to our visionary Founding Fathers, who produced a proven paradigm for civil contentment and success.
My friend is right on one issue. Americans are quickly losing sight of that picture. No longer do they register how human nature works, that dignity fades with each freebie, each welfare check, and each free meal in which nothing is given back. Where food stamps are doled out like confetti and fathers abandon families so moms get checks and “free” stuff for each new baby. And, “progressive,” self-consumed college kids demand entitlement. Gimme, gimme.
Alarms are no longer heard as Big Brother uproots state’s rights and barges into our homes and schools. It’s an unbelievable American movement. All will be lost via the ignorance of so many who casually throw away centuries-old lessons on what makes man tick and what makes him sick.
Going back to the 17th century, in which socialism was first practiced in the colonies, it was painfully learned that when everyone is treated equally no matter what they produce, not only does dignity disappear, so does motivation. Hundreds died from starvation and its complications. Eventually, the practice was deemed a catastrophic failure. The system was changed to what we’d call today the “free market” — hard work and competition. Each pilgrim earned his way and thrived. (www.independent.org). America became, America.
Then political games identified the humanity within humanity: compassion. That precious, even sacred, trait is now consistently manipulated for evil intent. And those drawn in look back at old mores, which built the greatest nation, and call them passé.
They pride themselves as more compassionate, so much so, they’ll lobby to use their neighbors ingenuity, sweat and labor, to hand out freebies. It’s a new religion of sorts.
But it is a blind worship. Instead of aiding the very souls they wish to help, they handicap them and create “hand-fed seagulls,” which starve to death when required to feed themselves.
Compound that into a discouraged workforce, whose job it is to support the growing demands of those lined up at the trough.
Ladies and gentlemen, the new religion cannot sustain itself financially, morally or emotionally.
Never, ever think this conversation is about eliminating important safety nets for those unable to fend for themselves. America is compassion. Note: Conservative thinkers rank up-front in regards to charitable giving (see Arthur Brooks writings). Compassion certainly is claimed by genuine, caring humans. What we debate is the execution of that care: theft from the populace, which suffocates generosity, the very trait that fills up food banks and supports charities without mandate.
By the way, here comes “free” abortion. Check out our secretary of health care’s one-dollar move on that count. Who’s surprised? And, we learn Obamacare will be twice as expensive as first reported (Congressional Budget Office). You want free? Guess who’ll pay for it?
Good thing we’ve dumped the idealisms of the 50’s.
Folks are so enthralled with enforced compassion that they fail to see a workforce quickly losing motivation. Plus, there’s no thought to what it’ll take to heal the growing number of once capable, but soon crippled citizens, who will feed off the public teet.
East Valley resident Linda Turley-Hansen (turleyhansen@gmail.com) is a syndicated columnist and former Phoenix veteran TV anchor.
tsmith3139 posted at 10:46 am on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Very well said, Linda! The socialist movement in this country is not only impractical, but is dangerous as well. These folks want to promote free handouts from everyone from "career" welfare recipients to illegal aliens. Why work for anything when the good ol government will hand it to you anyway? The founding fathers are surely "rolling in their graves" with this current crop of freeloaders.
I may be from the "50s" but at least I sleep I night knowing the difference between "earning" and "taking"! God help us!
mnjcpa posted at 11:35 am on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
It's not about Democrat or Republican folks - it's cultural decline and we better pay attention and debate these things as adults. It's painfully obvious that what Linda describes is happening right before our eyes.
Entitlements have destroyed people's desire to do things for themselves and saw this firsthand doing volunteer work for low income taxpayers. Last year a fight ensued in the crowd amongst "taxpayers" (none of them pay any tax) who were arguing over who was going to take whose children so they could get "free money" from the earned income credit. Another liberal boondoggle that costs the taxpayers over $50 billion a year.
When you have every major media outlet debasing our values - and a President that's complicit in that strategy - it won't stop conservatives who believe this country is still worth fighting for.
Thanks for a well written understanding of the problem.
Mike McClellan posted at 12:52 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Ah, the '50's, when the top marginal tax rates were what, 90%? When there was no such thing as corporate welfare? Where CEO's on average made only 40 times their average employees did, unlike today, when they make 300 times? Where the middle class actually grew and the income disparity between the top 1% and the rest was markedly smaller? When big companies didn't demand welfare from cities in exchange for locating in those cities?
Ah, yes, the '50's, those good old days . . .
Rich posted at 12:56 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
What you're missing is not 'free', but 'freedom'. Take abortion, one side wants to outlaw it, the other wants it on demand. The government really doesn't need to be involved, it's a personal decision, freedom answers it. 'Health' care? Buy insurance or don't, freedom answers it. It's not the 'free' we need to fear, when enough produce 'enough' that goes away. However, when the government 'tells' you and gets away with it? That's when you get the shaft and they get the mine. And the major problem with that is that under such a slave/master scenario, it is rare that enough people produce enough to afford it for very long.
bobazusa posted at 1:44 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
sloppy journalism is the new religon. The Pilgrims held land in a stock corporation. The socialism myth is just bunk. Do your homework.
Grant Hubbard posted at 3:24 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Linda Turley-Hansen’s column “Forced Compassion the New Religion” is entirely about the greed and selfishness of many Americans - notwithstanding her disingenuous disclaimer - many of whom harbor a generous dose of hypocrisy.
A genuine issue of religious freedom is involved, but it is an aside here and far too complicated to discuss in this reply.
Certainly it is true that many abuse programs designed, some poorly, to aid those in need for whom there is no help other than federal and a few state programs.
But the diatribe about “each freebie, each welfare check, and each free meal in which nothing is given back” arises from a selfish mean spirited person and is intended to arouse passion rather than reason.
Why not include Medicare? Many who cheer Ms.Turley-Hansen on engage in infinite hypocrisy on this subject. They condemn Obama for a trivial increase in modest fees for this freebie which they enjoy in which nothing is given back and for the reform built into “Obamacare” intended to make this program more financially sound All this while being overjoyed at the plans to let children of dead beat parents starve and to cut education loans and scholarships for low and modest income students.
Turley-Hansen reviles 17 century socialism as if it were relevant. Socialist experiments from the Oneida Community to the Mormon United Firm in Ohio and United Order in Utah failed – so what?
Social Security programs have relieved suffering and prevented starvation in Europe for well over a century and in the United States for nearly a century. None are perfect, but they work.
Medicare, which needs serious overhauling to make it financially sound, has benefitted millions and resulted in the building of countless first class hospitals.
Turley-Hansen lauds, as do I, charitable giving. But only a fool would honestly suggest that this nation can care for it poor, its hungry, its sick and aged through charitable giving. She, as are many, especially long time East Mesa residents, call their delusion “principle.”
All should rely more on reason and less on delusion, whether in the form of misguided pseudo religion or greed driven ultra- conservative hypocrites.
Yes, there are abuses, but do we really want to repeal the twentieth century?
Rich posted at 3:28 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Linda does play fast and lose a bit. The colonies were proprietary, stock companies, one a trust and combinations thereof. The failed Socialist organization was New Harmony in Indiana in the early nineteenth century. The same system also failed concurrently in Scotland. However this does not totally condemn the idea in the New World as the Amana Society acted rather successfully as a commune from about the middle of the nineteenth century until the depression. The columnists here rarely do their homework, and Linda isn't the only one guilty of that. Mike seems to dash things off as well. But then Dr. Tom has a whole think tank and probably doesn't write it himself. The basis of oped journalism is pretty much that. It is just that we aren't getting the best of it, the traditions of people like Heywood Broun and H. L. Mencken.
bobunf posted at 4:27 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Turley-Hansen, in rather typical fashion, wrote: "we learn Obamacare will be twice as expensive as first reported (Congressional Budget Office)."
To quote from Forbes magazine (hardly a bastion of socialism) of March 15, 2012:
"Wow. That’s some scary stuff.
"Good thing it is a complete and utter falsehood...
"How can this be? How could anyone take a $50 billion improvement in the projections over last year and turn it into an alleged doubling of costs?
"Here’s how. You pick a big number and then use it to either tell the world you do not possess the most basic understanding of the actual math or you just out-and-out lie...
"How do you know I’m telling you the truth? Read the report..."
Which you can do at
www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf
The Forbes article is at
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/03/15/anti-obamacare-forces-introduce-their-latest-effort-to-mislead-the-public/2/
onerebel posted at 4:51 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Why do Liberal Environmentalists tell us not to give wild animals handouts because they become dependent and can no longer feed themselves, yet the same Liberals say that we need to give people handouts making them dependent. What's the difference? Oh that's right, animals can't vote Democrat!
Accuracy posted at 5:00 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Linda Turley-Hansen wrote: “And, we learn Obamacare will be twice as expensive as first reported (Congressional Budget Office). You want free? Guess who’ll pay for it?
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a government agency under President Obama, now projects the ObamaCare will cost $1.76 trillion dollars over the next ten years . . . instead of the $940 billion dollars.
Yes, nearly double what the Liberal Democrats (Senator Harry Reid and Representative Nancy Pelosi) told us what President Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”) would cost taxpayers.
CBO also tells us that by 2022, three million fewer people will have private employer provided health insurance and a startling 17 million more will be on the Medicaid and 22 million more will be forced onto sub-standard government health insurance plans.
Report also states; that when the Democrats said unemployment was 8.3%, CBO reported it really is 15%. A new burst of honesty from any government agency.
Who will profit posted at 5:22 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
The concern for me is, should hospitals, schools, retirement homes or even agri-businesses owned by religious organizations that already catch tax breaks on their private industry enterprises be exempt from regulations and taxes placed on private industries – their competitors? These protected religious organizations hire from the general employment pool because of Equal Opportunity Employment Laws. Under the guise of being a religious institution they profit without taxation, unlike any private business that operates under the law these religious affiliates are free to pursue for profit side-shows.
For now set aside traditional Catholic, Baptist or Methodist religions, consider California’s Rick Warrens super-churches that panders religion to any groups liking, be it traditional gospel quartets or heavy metal rock band enthusiast, who can only be guided in spirit by their comforted lifestyle of the current day. At Warrens California church one can sit and sip on a Latte on Sunday mornings, shaded beneath a covered patio on the church’s grounds, purchasing food and drinks from the affiliated businesses incorporated with the religious doctrine of Warren’s “we have it all for you” layout. You can sit in a super sized auditorium or at a sprinkling fountain and be entertained by the sermon of the day listening to the latest of God’s word over a loud speaker. You can catch up on the latest news by paying a Wi-Fi connect fee the church charges, and enjoy brunch during the sermon. The charges for each entitlement these worshipers enjoy paying to Warren’s church is not taxed by local, county, state or Federal guidelines because it is after all protected through current day Freedom of Religion exemptions allowing proceeds to go non-taxed. There is also the spiritual guidance seminar, tapes, DVD’s and clothing sold through the church that profits the organization without having to fall under any description of a business.
I do not mean to single out Warren’s church but instead utilize it as a reference that Catholic, Baptist, Methodist or any recognized religion that owns and operates Hospitals, Schools, Child Daycare Centers and off the cuff businesses that spring up through their under the table cash producing profits and which are protected from the same constraints of a privately owned small business or mega-incorporated superstore of our day. I am not referring to being protected by one’s tithes that are paid through the dropping in of an offering plate during a solo of “I Surrender All.” I am referring to a business that is claiming freedom of responsibility through it attachment of being owned by a religion. While Jimmy Swaggart’s collected proceeds from his Bible College (free of tax) he passed on the savings to persons of the world’s oldest profession. Business people whom I seriously doubt paid taxes owed for personal income from their night to night business operations. All this being said consider that the issue with a religions side business and ask where does this fall under the realm of Freedom of Religion?
If a religious entity wishes not to provide insurance that includes preventing a person from losing medical benefits because of pre-existing conditions, a lifetime expiration as a result from having cancer or other long term illness, preventive medical practices and addendums to concerns that reflect the needs of an individual; the option is simple get out of the side-businesses they are in and return to preaching the word of God and taking what the best speech of the day can divvy up from a collection plate. Where they will clearly be protected as some suggest they always have been.
You can outlaw abortions, medical practices and the pill; but you won’t keep it from being available to those serious on partaking in someone else’s definition of sin. Most likely you’ll improve the back alley doctor’s business in some darkened alley clinic south of the border or push teenagers lost in this debacle to force miscarriages or even worse see them steal their way to financing their own access to medications that are not legal, safely researched and produced through standards required from prescription drug makers.
One’s salvation I believe cannot be legislated and one’s peace with God comes through their own finding, despite their choices or man’s law. No one is forcing contraceptive measures on any person who does not wish to utilize it (unless you live in China). The law despite the misinformed and those wishing to create havoc for a political presidential election leaves the choice up to the individual person to use or not to use. If a healthy Christian whose spiritual life is in order I do not believe, will opt to take advantage of the provisions laid out in the law. The mother who can’t afford to feed the children she already has; and who is damned for trying to do so by supplementing their diet with resources made available through public assistance programs, might find it necessary. Especially if the deadbeat father is protected in a sanctuary, drying out after a bout with liquor or his desire for illegal drugs or who may be locked away in prison unable to make those monthly child support payments.
Any religion is free to reach out to those in their community and encourage them to hear whatever the message of the day for redemption might be to prevent anyone from making choices in life. However strong the message, the practicality of stopping teen abortions, a family wishing to retain the right to maintain a family that can be supported through their own earnings, or whatever reason an individual or couple may surrender to for seeking measures that others condemn, will find a way to do so. In the process those so determined or so desperate will make the trip south of the border or around the corner of a sleazy part of your hometown to get the job done. So be it God or not; when desperate they will do so.
Sure we can keep the process of one’s own medical preferences from being legal, but we will not be able to keep those seeking such measures from doing so. That effort must come from the pulpits and the examples we truly provide to the troubled lives that walk among us.
Since religion has been evolving in different beliefs and varying measures long before Jesus walked the earth…What if in our current day of new or adjusted religions if under a new belief system meeting the requirements of being a Religious doctrine it was perceived by them their belief in God, that practicing birth control, having an abortion or God Forbid using a condom, and their followers listed these beliefs among their Rights to Freedom of Religion; to not only allow but encourage their fellow followers to take part in and utilize what they believe to be an answer that has been God Given. Would the Freedom of Religion covering such organizations still apply? Or would there become a necessity to rewrite what constitutes a religion? This issue may not solely be about Freedom of Religion, it could also be construed as about being superior and all ruling over those one consider lesser than…and rewriting the rules in order to make it fit the holiest of those in the name of God!
samkat posted at 8:58 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Linda: Your friend is correct. The new breed of right wing religious zealot is rapidly causing the party to implode. They scream about a loss of religious freedoms and rights as they are attempting to force their brand of Taliban like rules on everyone else. I suspect the more moderate conservatives and independents will turn against them in the upcoming elections. The upset is coming and it is because of their own undoing. They deserve to lose big time since they no longer represent the majority.
Rich posted at 9:43 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
God says. What is iost is what you say. We gang up on people who have different ideas. We need to get a handle on that. Our children are doing that halfway across the world. And they die, and that becomes a reason to continue do it? It needs re-examination.
bobunf posted at 10:22 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Accuracy, didn't you notice the part of the CBO report that states: "CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period—about $50 billion less than the agencies’ March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period."
And, "Over the 10-year period from 2012 through 2021, enactment of the coverage provisions of the ACA was projected last March to increase federal deficits by $1,131 billion, whereas the March 2012 estimate indicates that those provisions will increase deficits by $1,083 billion. "
Read the report:
www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf
ralpho posted at 10:43 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Nothing can be worse than the old one.
Rational Human posted at 8:17 am on Sun, Mar 18, 2012.
One of the best written articles on the demise of American values I've read in some time. Rally the bottom feeders to arms against those who feed them is a ploy that the socialists have used countless times to destroy nations and create havoc for their own personal gain. It's all a power struggle, but the bottom feeders will never see any of that. They fight so others can get.
k33j88 posted at 10:09 am on Sun, Mar 18, 2012.
Thank you Linda for exposing the liberal agenda for what it is. Does tyranny raise its ugly head once the govn't feeding trough runs out of other peoples money? If the illegal marxist-in-chief gets re-elected, we'll find out the hard way.
CooperG posted at 11:15 am on Sun, Mar 18, 2012.
Linda: please tell us exactly what freedoms we have lost in the last three years.
Go ahead.
I'll wait.
Trans posted at 3:44 pm on Sun, Mar 18, 2012.
CooperG, the freedoms we are losing include the right to privacy - thank you Republicans!
I suppose we are gaining something, though. The right to die in poverty and ignorance. Thanks again!
Accuracy posted at 11:32 am on Mon, Mar 19, 2012.
Obama administration's top health care official is not able to defend the president's promises in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act –“ObamaCare” – and why a new report by the Congressional Budget Office shows the national health care law is actually going to add billions of dollars to the deficit.
According to the new report, the CBO estimates the cost of “ObamaCare” will actually double and will cost taxpayers up to $2 trillion from within the decade starting in 2014, when the law begins to really kick in.
Americans DO NOT have the option to stick with their health care plans.
President Obama said it would cut the cost of the typical family's health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year. But the new CBO report says those health insurance premiums are actually expected to increase by up to 10 to 13 percent.
At least 15 new tax provisions in the law. And up to 20 million people could actually lose their employer-provided health insurance.
President Obama will have the authority to restrict our liberty by forcing all Americans to purchase a particular service – health insurance.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments challenging the constitutionality of the “ObanaCare” law next week. Justices will hear a full six hours of arguments, the most time allotted for any case in recent history.
Rational Human posted at 8:29 am on Tue, Mar 20, 2012.
The Obamanation continues to sidestep congress at every turn. I wonder if The Obamanation will even obey a US Supreme Court ruling. Don't be surprised if we face a false flag event that allows The Obamanation to declare martial law and completely toss the constitution out the window for good.
VofReason posted at 1:54 pm on Tue, Mar 20, 2012.
CooperG- I will bite. Businesses can no longer choose what kind of insurance they will provide to employees. Here is a thought, why not decouple health insurance from the workplace? There was a time in the US where employers did not provide insurance coverage. How about leaving Health Insurance to the free market, across state lines and allow people and insurers to work it out between them. Probably a little to freemarket for most people. requires people to have to take some responsibility and allows private industry to set the market. Nah, would never work. We need a big bloated government beauracracy to make it go.
davidflucier posted at 8:14 am on Thu, Mar 22, 2012.
And playing the part of June Ward is Linda Hanson, the far right wing religious fundamentalist who continues to dwell on the past and dream of the good ol days (if you are white and mostly male, suburban, and own a home over on Elm Street in Mayberry).