For the war and not for the people?

This post is taken from an online discussion I was involved in; regarding Pat Robertson’s annual Halloween warning. It is not about Robertson, or his view of Halloween. It is my response (with some editing for clarity) about a couple of comments made by a young lady during that discussion.

* * * * * *

> “ He asks for money too much”

Yes, sometimes he does, in much the same way that PBS, NPR, Greenpeace, PETA, etc, do.
But as long as people want to send them money, they have the right to do so.


>”I always felt he was for the war and not for the people. Sorry folks that's 2 examples of a typical republican.”

First, I am not a big supporter of Pat Robertson , but I do know that he and his organization (especially Operation Blessing ) have done more good, and helped far more people in need than B.O. and the entire socialist agenda of the democrats ever have.

Next, let me say that I am an Independent Conservative voter. I vote based on GOD guided principles, and not the party line. But your comments about “2 examples of typical republicans” require a response.

I think I will start with the “not for the people” part of your comment.

To be for the people, you must first protect and defend their right to keep that which is rightfully theirs. The property that they own and which they wish to use as they see fit, and the money that they have earned by taking risks, and putting forth the effort involved in presenting some new idea, producing some desired product and/or providing some needed service.

And please do not try to feed me the socialist line about how some people “have too much” or “no one needs or deserves to have as much as (insert your pet target here) has”.

If a person’s customers or clients did not think that what they were getting was worth the price they were paying, then they would not pay that price. They would instead take their money elsewhere to get the products or services that they need or want. That is how a free system works. That is why it is possible for a young upstart to come along with a better product at a better price, and in a matter of a few years be more successful than the original provider, and consequently be worth more than most people will ever see in a lifetime. And that is a blessing given by GOD to the American people.

How wealthy a person becomes, or what he or she does with his or her money is not the business of anyone else. It is especially not the business of the government. Liberals and other whiners really need to learn to leave it up to GOD to judge whether or not a person has enough, and is using his or her wealth wisely. GOD and GOD alone is all knowing and wise enough to make that determination.

But the basic point here is that if people do not think that what is being offered is worth the price being asked, then they do not have to buy it. That is what happened to the big three auto makers in this country. The people decided that what GM, Chrystler and Ford had to offer was not worth the price they were demanding for the product. So the American people stopped buying their cars, and took their money to the import car makers, who were offering the quality and price that the American people were looking for.

As a result, the big three found themselves floundering and on the verge of complete failure. But then the democrats realized that “OH NO! If the American automakers go under, we will loose all those UNION jobs.” And of course, that would mean that all that UNION money, that would have been given to support the socialist agenda, would dry up and be lost,

The democrats could not allow that to happen. So they launched a horrific propaganda campaign and managed to convince a lot of people that the big three were simply too big to be allowed to fail. Thus came the bailouts, which were strapped onto out backs, and the backs of our children and our grand children. As a result we and our posterity are condemned to bear the burden of saving democrat votes.

Thank GOD, Ford did not accept the bailout money, or the burden would have been even worse. It also looks like Ford might have gotten the message the America car buying public was sending. They seem to be making the changes their customers want to see them make. But only time will tell for sure.

And let’s not forget how the socialists, who have owned and controlled the democratic party, at least since the McGovern campaign, were even more diabolical and cruel in the way they destroyed and then moved in to take over our financial institutions. And then there are the socialist efforts to drag America’s medical care down to the level of a second, or if possible a third, world nation. Unfortunately, I do not have enough time to cover all that right now.

It should be obvious to any clear minded, right thinking individual that it is the socialist dominated democrats, and left leaning Rockefeller republicans that do not care about the people. Conservative republicans understand that the best thing that government can do for the people, is to remove the shackles from their wrists and ankles, and stop stealing what is rightfully theirs.


Now I will address your claim that the republicans are “for war”.

No one ever really wants to go to war, despite the deliberate lies told by left-wingers. But the republicans have learned from history something that apparently the democrats are, or at least have been, incapable of learning, that being the fact that the only way to avoid a war is to be prepared and committed to the complete and utter annihilation of any and all would-be enemies foolish enough to threaten or act against your nation, and/or way of life.

Only then will all sane opponents choose to live at peace with you. Only then can those insane enough to actually strike at you be quickly and completely eliminated as a future threat. Only strength, and the credible promise to use it can maintain peace.

As an analogy, I remember how when I was still in school; we were told to not confront or fight with a bully, or we would be given detention, or worse be suspended. We were told instead that we should report the bully to a teacher or an administrator. But if someone actually did report a bully, all that ever happened was that the bully would be called into the principal’s or dean’s office and given a warning about possible detention or some other empty threat. Empty because everyone, including the bully, knew all too well that unless an administrator or teacher actually witnessed the bully commit an assault, the school was powerless to do anything to the bully. And the bully was ususlly to smart to do anything in front of a teacher or administrator.

However, now the bully was angered by being dragged to the office, and reprimanded. He thus became even more vicious in his attacks upon his victims. The only kids that the bully would leave alone were those who had decided that it was worth facing a few cuts and bruises, and the possibility of suspension, to actually stand up too and fight the bully. Win, loose or draw, the bully would usually decide to look for easier prey, and thus leave the kid who stood up to him alone from that day forward.

History has proven that the same holds true for the nations of the world. If threatened a nation cannot back down. If attacked, it must respond with enough force to make the attacker pay more dearly that it has. And if the attacker does not then back down, the nation being attacked must utterly destroy its attacker. Only then can that nation return to a peaceful stance. Only then will other nations realize that it is not worth the price and loss that they would experience should they ever choose to attack that nation.


Related Links:

* Why Are Conservatives So Mean?
* Night of the Living Government ... DC Zombies Will Tax You To Death!!

* Swine Flu Swindle: Pols Aim to Lard It Over Us with State-Run Healthcare

* Warmongers or Peacemakers: Who Will Be Responsible for Scorching the Earth?
* Game Theory and a Losing Strategy: Obama's Bad Judgment With The Prisoner's Dilemma

* Halloween at the White House: Obama's Trick Is No Treat

* Pat Robertson's Web Site Warns Against Demonic Halloween Candy
* Open Book Newsletter: Concerning Halloween

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *