clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

POLITICIANS' LABELS MEANINGLESS

There is a slight difference in the way conservative and "liberal" politicians think, but each way leads to the same end.

A liberal politician thinks this way: The "poor" (a relative term) need help; the government can help them by taking money (taxes) away from the "rich" (another relative term); if I am elected, I will see to it that this is done; there are more "poor" people than "rich" people; therefore, they will elect me if I promise them that I will use the government to redistribute the wealth so that the "poor" have more and the "rich" have less; it is good and commendable to help the poor; therefore, I am a good person and a good politician.A conservative politician thinks this way: Government social welfare programs have gone too far and are bankrupting the nation; business is the source of all wealth; if it were not for business, there would be nothing for the "poor" or the "rich"; I must run for office so that I can turn back or slow down the costly and immoral welfare state before it reaches economic meltdown; the "liberals" have a distinct advantage at the polls because the "poor" want more, not less, help from the government; therefore I cannot be elected to office unless I deceive the public about my true beliefs and real intent; I will tell whatever lies I have to to get elected because the country needs me so badly. The end justifies the means. And, if I'm not elected, we face certain disaster.

The liberal politicians, in many cases, really believe in the system they advocate - that is, they really believe in socialism. Maybe they are just dumb. Socialism has failed wherever it has been tried.

None of the conservative politicians are honest. They all know they are living and loving a lie by pretending they can give us the best of two entirely different worlds.

Glenn L. Pearson

Murray