I stand alone?

[Makalakumu]

Just to interject here, I have witnessed this phenomenon, it happens all the time here. The fact is, it depends on how these programs are structured, and what kind of checks and balances there are.

The brutal truth in my home town is that a welfare recipient recieves incrementally more money as they have more children. I *know* that there are people that live in my city that drive brand new vehicles, and are abusing alcohol and drugs consantly (as in every waking possible moment) that are able to live this "high life" by not providing for their own children.

I don't think their life is as "high" as people want to make it sound. From my experience, they aren't living so good. Of course, Canada may be different.

 

[Tgace]

My TSD instructor is a LEO. We share stories because we deal with different segments of the same population. LEOs deal with a small portion of the people in poverty. The things you might see are not the norm. The norm is that these people truly have nothing and are desperately poor.

The bottom line is that I give all of my old clothes away in the winter time and I still have to treat my students for frostbite. One of my students has a crippled leg. She was raped, couldn't afford an abortion, and had the baby. She isn't 18 and can't work. Her wellfare checks amount to $642.00 a month. That ain't "high on the hog" by any means.

Abuse of the system is not the norm it only looks like it because people have gotten so good at turning their backs on the poor...that is unless they break the law.

While that may be true, and probably is, the "what you see every day isnt the truth" argument wears thin after a while. While it isnt the whole truth, it is definately part of it. Seems like a cheap way to discount somebody's point. Have I at any point said "scrap the social programs due to abuse"? I dont believe I have.

 

[Flatlander]

I don't think their life is as "high" as people want to make it sound. From my experience, they aren't living so good. Of course, Canada may be different.

Perhaps that is so. Also, to clarify, this is not a representative picture of welfare recipients in Canada. It is an extreme example of the types of abuses that can and do occur when a welfare culture develops.

I am proud of the fact that we have a socially progressive society here, but am disappointed in the way that things are run. However, I also recognise the difference between the ideal and the application of the ideal. I believe in the ideal, I think the application needs to be fixed.

I see a few arguments in this thread along the lines of "the application is difficult to perfect" or "I would rather choose how to help". The fact is, if everyone only gets to choose how to help, and that's the only help available, there's not enough help to go around. Would you not sacrifice that "freedom" that others may survive starvation and freezing? I would, and do, and will never stop. Yes, my taxes are high, but so what? If I get laid off of my job, I will get paid my employment insurance. If my baby gets sick, we can go to the hospital and not worry about money. If someone is physically challenged and unable to work, they can still live a decent life, and be taken care of.

Without me giving you all a brief history of my growing up, I'd be middle class as well, upnorth.

I think that the one subtle characteristic of living in this type of system that often gets overlooked is that the social agenda begins to take root in one's mind and belief structure over the course of time. Because of this, the idea of "sharing with society" becomes a natural thing. It's not something I "must" do. It's just something I do. It's how things are. It's what Grandma and Grandpa did, it's what everyone does. Our Conservatives are left of your Democrats.

 

[Melissa426]

But, when Reagan cut government support for the mentally ill, and those people were dumped on the street, you didn't see them being taken into homes. Those people are *still* on the street... the ones that are still alive.

This is not sarcastic. It is a real question.
If those people are *still* on the street, why did Bill Clinton do nothing about them during the 8 years he was in office.

Peace,
Melissas

 

[Melissa426]

I think that the Left has got to start jumping in and talking about moral values if they want to have a chance on winning.

What you say is absolutely true.
According to election polls, that was one of the main reasons Bush won.
I am not saying I agree with that position.
I think the "right" has usurped the so-called moral high-grounds. If the "left" wants to start winning elections, can they find a message that supports "liberal" values and morality and still appeals to Middle America?

Peace,
Melissa

 

[shesulsa]

Indeed!

Where is the morality of denying services to veterans and underpriveledged? Doesn't the sermon on the mount talk about this?

Where is the morality in throwing Martha Stewart in jail because she told a lie, then lost millions, but letting Ken Lay walk free when he lied, and made many people lose millions?

Where is the morality in having our leaders being involved hip-deep in the energy business and conducting wars to protect the interests of their energy businesses?

Where is the morality in squashing women's rights to conduct their bodily functions in such a manner to ensure their pursuit of happiness?

Where is the morality in cutting social security, which originally saved a great deal of elderly people from abject poverty?

Where is the morality in denying life-saving condoms to hormonally charged children? Where is the morality in handing them what could be their death sentence?

Where is the morality in protecting the unborn, yet killing convicted murderers who have had nothing near a fair trial?

Until Democrats are willing to hammer these and other points HARD and just as vociferously and as PASSIONATELY as the Republican right has hammered their points, we cannot gain ground.

A wise woman once told me, "If you want to change the rules of the game, you must first win the game by playing according to the existing rules."

It's time to play hardball, folks.

 

[The Kai]

Allthough I am not a Ploitical Science guy- I think the democratics biggest downfall has been thier motto

"We're Democrats and we promise not to upset the Republicans"
Todd

 

[Tgace]

An Interesting article trying to explain why the Democratic Party is experiencing a period of decline.

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20041107/1029709.asp

Some Interesting quotes.

"The party has to recognize that it just can't count on its urban base," said Herbert B. Asher, a political scientist at Ohio State University. "The Democrats did a spectacular job turning out their urban base - and it wasn't enough."
Moreover, the party's urban focus leaves it marginally competitive elsewhere. In fact, you could drive from Miami to Phoenix to Boise, Idaho, to Arlington, Va. and cross only one state - Illinois - that Kerry won.

The party's lack of appeal in Middle America and its new struggles in parts of its base have one thing in common, political pros said.

Class is no longer the dividing line between the parties.

"The country is now divided on the basis of culture," Mark Mellman, Kerry's pollster, told Newhouse News Service last week.

That divide is complex, even on the signature issues of abortion and gay rights.

Oddly, exit polling indicates that the nation is more in tune with the Democrats on those issues than it is with the Republicans. Some 55 percent of voters surveyed said they favored abortion rights. And 60 percent said they favored either gay marriage or civil unions for homosexual couples.

Yet a plurality of voters named "moral values" as the top issue in the race. A plurality of voters also favored some restrictions on abortion, and far more voters favored civil unions than favor gay marriage.

To those moderate voters, Kerry probably seemed too extreme, analysts said, perhaps because he opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions as well as the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

"You can be pro-choice and still address the number of abortions," said Asher of Ohio State.

Similarly, Kerry said he was against gay marriage but never made a strong case against it or explained why civil unions might be an acceptable compromise.

The last part here kind of echoes my stance in the abortion thread that ran so long here. The article also states that the heavy celebrity and Hollywood personality turnout also turned off a segment of middle America whic I agree with too.

Democrats noted that Bush still faces mammoth problems in Iraq, which could benefit their party in the long run.

I have a problem with this last part. Iraq is an "American problem" not a "Bush problem". American men and women are sacrificing their lives over there. If were going to turn this into "we arent going to work together to try to salvage something good out of this so Bush can go down in flames" affair insted of doing our damnedest to work together than shame on all of us! The whole concept of Iraq as disaster is good for the Democrats is sickening.

 

[DoxN4cer]

... If the "left" wants to start winning elections, can they find a message that supports "liberal" values and morality and still appeals to Middle America?

Peace,
Melissa

They have to decide just what their "liberal values" (is there such a thing?) are before before they can make it a platform for politics. Then they have to hold fast to those values so they don't seem so fickle and weak.

 

[Makalakumu]

This is not sarcastic. It is a real question.
If those people are *still* on the street, why did Bill Clinton do nothing about them during the 8 years he was in office.

Peace,
Melissas

He did, until 1994 when Republicans took over the House.

 

[Makalakumu]

They have to decide just what their "liberal values" (is there such a thing?) are before before they can make it a platform for politics. Then they have to hold fast to those values so they don't seem so fickle and weak.

I would agree with this. The democratic party has waffled and wavered and worked to play both ends for too long. The dems need people with strong convictions to hold strong to those convictions. For instance, if you believe peace is a better way then war, then there is no way you can support the war in Iraq. Sure there are grey areas, but the RNC has mastered the black and white with or against us image to a point where its so simple that anyone can understand it.

Next, the Dems have got to start embracing morals...moreso, they need to start using the language that americans use to talk about morals. Liberal morals are straightforward and good for america. The bible talks at length about things that liberals believe in. So does the Torah. So does the the Koran. So many religions provide a tapestry of language to talk about morality...and I think the dems are going wrong by trying to talk about morals in a secular way.

 

[Makalakumu]

I have a problem with this last part. Iraq is an "American problem" not a "Bush problem". American men and women are sacrificing their lives over there. If were going to turn this into "we arent going to work together to try to salvage something good out of this so Bush can go down in flames" affair insted of doing our damnedest to work together than shame on all of us! The whole concept of Iraq as disaster is good for the Democrats is sickening.

You don't give me much room to disagree, Tom. The bottom line is that I cannot morally support this war. I cannot make myself put one ouce of effort to support the PNAC policy. I believe that the direction of this policy is going to eventually bankrupt America and I believe that the world will see us as villians before we're through. President Bush is pushing a policy of military industrial expansionism. This is the way I feel about Iraq. If I were in charge, I would pull our troops out and let them live the way they want to live. This war is BAD for America not just for the Republicans and the PLAN is only to continue "reforming Islam by force." We will pay for this. You and I and all of our friends and OUR children as taxes are slashed on the rich and buck gets passed to us.

I can support the families of those who come home wounded. I can support the families who lost their loved ones. I can support the people who wait anxiously for their loved ones to come home. But I cannot support this war. I am an American. I do not support this Bush Policy. PNAC is not an American policy...49% are not on board.

upnorthkyosa

 

[shesulsa]

They have to decide just what their "liberal values" (is there such a thing?) are before before they can make it a platform for politics. Then they have to hold fast to those values so they don't seem so fickle and weak.

Well, you all have sparked me anew. I am going to research liberalism back to England, but for now, let's look at the MacMillan Student's Edition of the Concise Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language for the definition of:

liberal:

adj. 1. originally, suitable for a freeman; not restricted: ... 2. giving freely; generous. 3. ample; abundant; as, a liberal reward. 4. not restricted to the literal meaning: as, a liberal interpretation of the law. 5. broad-minded. 6. favoring political reforms; not conservative: as, the Liberal Party in England. ....

Now, I also need to research the Freeman more, but here is the def. of:

freeman: n. 1. A person not in slavery or bondage. 2. a citizen; person who has all civil and political rights.

Here is the definition of:

Conservative: adj. 1. conserving or tending to conserve; preservative. 2. tending to preserve established institutions and methods and to resist or oppose any changes in these. 3. designating or of the major right-wing political party of Great Britain or of Canada. 4. moderate; prudent; safe. ...

... and ...

conserve: v.t. 1. to keep from being damaged, lost or wasted. ...

I find these labels curious in their semantics, which one could argue until the sun goes down.

For instance - one can conclude from the definitions above that liberals are charged with the protection of freedom and rights and are guilty of broad-mindedness. Then one could argue that the idea of broad-mindedness is what led us here in the first place.

One can also conclude from these same definitions that conservatives are about preserving. Does this mean natural resources? Older ways of living? Policital stances?

Let's face it. Our entire system is corrupt. I think it's all a big front and something much, much bigger is going on here. I suspect Kerry was hand-picked as the opposition candidate for Dubya. They're both Skull and Bones, after all. And what's up with conceding before all the votes are counted and without challenging the vote? GRRRRRRR.

Kinda makes a person wish they'd voted for Nader after all.

I think there already is a New World Order and has been for some time and we are all but pawns in a greater system than we can have knowledge of at this point.

Rant done. Going to go boil my eggs now.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Interesting how this has become a Dems v. Repubs, rather than the original intent - about each person - and ideally, the society - taking care of one another.

This is one of the dearest moral values to be, as a liberal. Taking care of our country, and other Americans, and other people around the world. As upnorth has mentioned, allowing a system to be in place that lets citizens freeze to death is abhorrent.

Increasing funding for social programs, which is desperately needed, need not increase the taxes of the vast majority of the populace. If we closed the taxation loopholes and freebie giveaways to the wealthiest 1-5% of this country, our coffers would be flooded. We are giving away the largess of our country to a few individuals, and multinationals with no allegiance to this country, as witnessed by "outsourcing" jobs overseas.

Why do I find so much fault with the current Administration? Among other things, how little value it seems to place on human life, despite all of the jabber.

 

[heretic888]

Well, you all have sparked me anew. I am going to research liberalism back to England

Technically speaking, "liberalism" has its fundamental growth originating in 17th and 18th century France. Most notably with individuals such as Rousseau.

What defines all forms of "liberalism" is that they hold the causes and solutions of human suffering to be external in origin (i.e., things are bad because 'society' did nasty stuff to you). Their general solution is to create an utopian form of society that provides liberty and equal opportunity to all (i.e., social programs a la social security, healthcare, welfare, anti-hate laws, affirmative action, humanistic-existential therapies, etc.)

What defines all forms of "conservatism" (which only truly came into existence as a reaction against rationalist "liberalism") is that they hold the causes and solutions of human suffering to be internal in origin (i.e., things are bad because you've been too immature, or too lazy, or don't have a strong work ethic, etc.). Their general solution is to create a moralist form of society where the development of values and morals are encouraged, but not necessarily forced or legislated (i.e., "character counts" programs, alchoholics anonymous, SADD and MADD, pseudo-Freudian psychoanalyses, etc.)

Obviously, there are extreme forms of both liberalism (ecoterrorism and Stalinist communism) and conservatism (fascism and religious theocracy). Just as obviously, there is value in both positions.

Laterz.

 

[shesulsa]

(SS peers over top of library book and listens to Robert's lecture)

Uhh ... thanks.

(SS ducks back down and continues reading ... )

 

[shesulsa]

Interesting how this has become a Dems v. Repubs, rather than the original intent - about each person - and ideally, the society - taking care of one another.

This is one of the dearest moral values to be, as a liberal. Taking care of our country, and other Americans, and other people around the world. As upnorth has mentioned, allowing a system to be in place that lets citizens freeze to death is abhorrent.

Increasing funding for social programs, which is desperately needed, need not increase the taxes of the vast majority of the populace. If we closed the taxation loopholes and freebie giveaways to the wealthiest 1-5% of this country, our coffers would be flooded. We are giving away the largess of our country to a few individuals, and multinationals with no allegiance to this country, as witnessed by "outsourcing" jobs overseas.

Why do I find so much fault with the current Administration? Among other things, how little value it seems to place on human life, despite all of the jabber.

Thank you for posting what I could never have so eloquently stated, but wanted to.

Here is the problem, yes? We are so enthralled by our two-party, us v. them system and semantics we have made the topic of making the world a better place into a political argument - and I am guilty of engaging in it.

I have a renegade idea - Let's get back on topic.

Sound off: What do you do to make the world a better place? How do you think you can help motivate others to take a small action every day to make the world a better place? How can you magnify your efforts and enlist the help of others to do so?

 

[shesulsa]

I have a renegade idea - Let's get back on topic.

Sound off: What do you do to make the world a better place? How do you think you can help motivate others to take a small action every day to make the world a better place? How can you magnify your efforts and enlist the help of others to do so?

Anyone?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

lol - maybe without the parties getting involved, it's less fun to think of the actual work we need to do.

Honestly, I think that groups of people - organizations - can accomplish more with pooling time and energy, but obviously groups start with each person getting involved.

I think the first important thing is for kids to see their parents and other adults volunteering. When I was younger, even when I couldn't get a job at one point, my parents were very supportive and told me, keep looking for a job, that's OK, something will come along - but in the meantime, go volunteer someplace, do something with your time.

Sometimes reaching out to your neighbors - the very local community - may be the first step.

 

[Nightingale]

I never really thought about it this way, but...

what I do to make the world a better place:

I'm a member of Amnesty International and the ACLU to help insure that other people in the world enjoy the same freedoms I do, and to preserve the freedoms I enjoy here in the US. (for the record, I do not agree with the ACLU on gun control, and have been working within the organization to change their stance)

Last year I made $42K. $9K was donated to charities that help people that are out of reach to me as an individual, mainly to St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital (www.stjude.org), which is a research hospital that focuses on children's cancer. I feel that through investing in the hospital, I'm not only helping today's children, but investing in the health of the children of tomorrow. Sometimes, the kids write thank you cards. I've still got a few stuck to my refrigerator. They make me smile.

When I take the toll road here, and I've got a bit of extra cash, I pay the toll for the person behind me too. It always makes them smile when the attendant tells them that someone else has taken care of their fee. I've had cars pull past me and wave, but most of the time, I just see their smile in my rear view mirror.

I try to remember the important things in life, and balance my time accordingly. Twenty years from now, I'll probably not remember whether my apartment was spotless, or what kind of car I drove. I will remember the time I've spent with friends and family. I know I won't look back and think "gosh, I wish I'd done more housework or spent more time studying or working!" I'll look back and think "I wish I'd spent more time with my grandparents while we still had time...I wish I'd taken my cousins to the zoo more often when they were still little...I wish I'd sat down and had a few more heart to heart talks with my parents." I try to spend my time doing things that matter, so I'll have fewer regrets later on.

I will admit to a bit of selfishness...when I do something nice for someone else, I do it because seeing them smile makes me feel good. Helping someone else helps me. It puts my life into perspective, and makes me grateful for everything I've got. I have a wonderful family, awesome friends, and enough cash to keep myself fed and pay my rent, and I'm healthy. There are so many people in the world that don't have that.

Life isn't about money. What I think the world needs is to stop counting money and start counting blessings, because if you don't have people to love, all the money in the world doesn't amount to much.