California — The Backwater State (warning: maddening)

[wildflower]

I took a close look at this in the hope of understanding the reasoning of the other side, which I think is always a good idea ('know your opponent'). So many of us wonder, how can anyone be a Republican?

But when I was done reading (and had calmed down), I had two questions for the author: how does this 'great' conservative philosophy reconcile with 'spreading democracy' and running up the deficit?

IN MY OPINION (Column)

California — The Backwater State

By RAYMOND N. HAYNES

(The writer represents the 66th Assembly District, which includes portions of western Riverside County and northern San Diego County.)

I know a lot of people who are stuck in the 1960’s. They look back at that time of free love, Jimi Hendrix, and the socialist utopia. They long for the socialist utopia they thought was possible then, not thinking that their view of this socialist utopia was somewhat colored by the chemicals that altered their thought patterns in those days. The only problem with these people, who see the long-haired, peacenik of 1968 as the ideal citizen, is that they are now the Democrat majority in the state legislature.

Most people don’t know this, but I actually used to think like them. While the drugs of the 60’s were not a part of my experience, I used to think that the ideal social order was based on the principle “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” Indeed, in those idyllic years, I conceived of an end to hunger and poverty in the coming United States socialist paradise. Boy was I stupid.

snip

Take, for instance, the concept of a faith-based social service system. A government-run welfare system relies on the unwilling giver (who contributes to the bureaucracy through taxes), and the ungrateful recipient (we even call welfare payments “entitlements”), whereas the church relies on willing givers and grateful recipients. In the volunteer system, people actually like each other. In the government system, people are always competing for the politician’s attention. Which do you think is better for society?

The conservative-movement thinkers emphasize a parent-based education system, an entrepreneurial-based tax system, a freedom-based social system, and a community-based government. The liberty-based system is win/win, with the individual choosing whether he or she wins or loses.

The leftists (or liberals) rely on a top/down, government-enforced social system. The end result: big government, high taxes, less individual liberty, and ultimately failure. It is a system that is based on a win/lose philosophy, with the politicians picking the winners and losers. Of course, the winners are usually those who help the politicians stay in power.

more at

http://www.metnews.com/articles/2004/haynes110904.htm

[SoCalDem]

1. Riverside county.. no need to read further.. We're in Repubeland

:puke:

[AndyTiedye]

10. At Least They Don't Have the Votes To Do That in California

Though since those are the new talking points, I fear people
who live in the red states. We can also expect initiatives
like that at the Federal level.

> Take, for instance, the concept of a faith-based social service system.

Please, take it far away from us!

> A government-run welfare system relies on the unwilling giver (who
> contributes to the bureaucracy through taxes), and the ungrateful
> recipient (we even call welfare payments “entitlements”),

That is because civilized societies believe that people are entitled
to some minimum standard of living, even if they are unable to provide
for themselves.

> whereas the church relies on willing givers and grateful recipients.

The recipients had better pretend to be grateful. They better
hosanna along with everyone else too. Or else.

> In the volunteer system, people actually like each other.

Because the ones they don't like, they allow to starve.

[democratreformed]

2. Here's another question. Since the government has initiated "faith-based

programs" - thereby giving our tax dollars to religious organizations - aren't they now relying on unwilling givers as well?

[wildflower]

4. Good question. I had trouble with this whole idea:

<<A government-run welfare system relies on the unwilling giver (who contributes to the bureaucracy through taxes), and the ungrateful recipient (we even call welfare payments “entitlements”), whereas the church relies on willing givers and grateful recipients.>>

That's a big assumption there, about who's grateful and who's willing. How does he know?

And now that I look at it, the sentence reminds me a lot of the claim that in this election, Republican activists were voluntary (through the church) and Democratic ones were paid.

-wildflower

[democratreformed]

5. Yeah, I have problems with that whole idea as well.

If I saw a majority of religious leaders leading the fight for the poor and disadvantaged, that one be one thing. Unfortunately, my experience has mostly been to see them lining their pockets.

I am in the middle of a very sad and upsetting situation now where a preacher has taken over the "monetary" responsibility for my developmentally disabled siter-in-law and her five children (meaning he gets her check and controls her finances). Last week, he ran off to Ohio (sick sister) and left her with no money and no groceries. My daughter bought her groceries. Too long of a horror story to tell it all. But, this type of thing does not help me to buy that theory at all.

[Maat]

3. Hey, don't you imply or say anything derogatory about...

my beloved representative!

(Really, really - just kidding).

Quite a little conservative utopia I live in here. We live in the Inland Empire (the Riverside and San Bernardino Counties), just north of San Diego County.

The ironic part is that we were raised in the Conservative Stronghold of Orange County, and my sis still lives there, and she says that it is getting more Democratic by the minute.

I'd move, but you go where you're job is. Fortunately, I believe my next job is in San Bernardino, a Democratic place. Maybe I can move away from the Nutjobs.

Thanks for the link. It gave me a good laugh.

[Zinfandel]

6. Yes, we in CA want to spend our tax dollars on subsidizing big oil and

we want to waste our tax dollars on wars all over the world for U.S. corporations to steal resources with our tax dollars...

But who's children are dying every single day and maimed for life in these imperialistic wars not the asshole's children from San Diego.

No, we backwater people here in CA believe in subsidizing and helping people, not corporations!!!!

This guy Ray Haynes was a selfish, stupid, ugly asshole in the sixties (and complete misunderstand everything) and he's even a bigger greedy, selfish, stupid, ugly asshole now!!!

[wildflower]

9. Does he consider himself a "true conservative" or Bush Republican?

Or maybe I should say a paleocon or neocon.

Because it seems to me that most true conservatives, who basically espouse the philosophy outlined above, are at best weak Bush supporters, many not supporting him at all.

Maybe there are some that are both types somehow...but that leads me back to my questions about spreading democracy and running up deficits. Sigh, the mind boggles!

-wildflower

[seabeyond]

7. calif that has better social program

less divorce and high academics than the south, and someone is really gonna lecture california

just keep running thru my brain about mass being the lowest in divorce the conn, the south on the bottom. and we all know who uses the most of the fiscal resources of the country adn then there is education. and anyone is gonna say something about calif is just funny

[idiosyncratic]

8. He's been breathing that good Riverside County air too long

I drove through there a while ago and couldn't believe the pollution.

I live in San Diego County and although it gets bad down here sometimes, I haven't seen it as bad as Riverside County since the devastating wild fires.

And that was temporary . . .