Saturday, July 2, 2011

Obama Gets It: It's the Morality, Stupid

One reason Obama, like most shrewd Democrats, usually wipes the floors with Republicans is that he unashamedly defends his positions from a moral point of view.

In another biased editorial masquerading as a news report, the LA Times lays out this gem:
"This is not just a numbers debate," Obama said Thursday in Philadelphia. "This is a values debate."
Would that the Republican leadership understood that – and had the courage to fight back the right way.

Instead of endlessly talking about jobs, haggling over deficit reduction numbers and the like, Republicans should be talking about what the Federal government should and should not be doing.

They'll only make substantial progress when they're willing to declare, as even the generally head-and-shoulders above Rep. Ryan does not, an important moral truth: Social Security and Medicare aren't just absurdly expensive, they're morally wrong.

No rational moral argument could justify taking from some citizens to support others, particularly at the Federal level. No taxpayer in Illinois has the moral obligation to support another in Idaho, no matter how much I might need it.

While they sometimes lose debates over economics, Progressives have been winning the culture war for a long time, and will continue to because of this. Only if — and it's a very big if — Republicans will confidently come out in favor of self-reliance as a moral imperative and charity as a marginal and personal matter, will the welfare state get significantly shrunk.

No, I'm not holding my breath, either.


Anonymous said...

Ha, Republicans only pretend to care about things like small government, their track record shows otherwise. That's what we have the Tea Party for, not the Republicans.

Jeff Perren said...

Often that's true. But how will the Tea Party participants get their ideas implemented without the Republicans?

DeMint, Rand, Bachmann, Ryan... all imperfect, for sure, but the best hope we have for getting Tea Party ideals put into practice.

Anonymous said...

Of course I agree with that; for the sake of what is essentially political expediency it makes sense for the Tea Party to try gain control and influence within the Republican party, both as a vehicle for implementation and garnering of support, as well as 'pulling' the Republican Party in a more Tea-Party-like direction. But the apparent ideological similarities, where they exist, are only superficial, since the "true" Republican Party of today doesn't "mean it". Myself, I would prefer to see the Tea Party go mainstream on its own, but such is probably the reality of politics if you want to actually effect change.