Jimmy Carter versus reality
Neal Boortz explains the difference between Jimmy Carter and rational human beings...
Yesterday James Taranto's Wall Street Journal Online column carried an item about an article that appeared in Atlanta's Creative Loafing tabloid newspaper. The article detailed an interview with former (thank God) president Jimmy Carter. Read for yourself --- and stand back in amazement at the absurdity of this man who has never seen a dictator he didn't like; a man who once occupied our The Oval Office; a man whom the voters overwhelmingly rejected after just four years --- Jimmy Carter, our biggest national mistake:
"I was teaching a Sunday school class two weeks ago," he recalls. "A girl, she was about 16 years old from Panama City [Fla.], asked me about the differences between Democrats and Republicans.
"I asked her, 'Are you for peace, or do you want more war?' Then I asked her, 'Do you favor government helping the rich, or should it seek to help the poorest members of society? Do you want to preserve the environment, or do you want to destroy it? Do you believe this nation should engage in torture, or should we condemn it? Do you think each child today should start life responsible for $28,000 in [federal government] debt, or do you think we should be fiscally responsible?'
"I told her that if she answered all of those questions, that she believed in peace, aiding the poor and weak, saving the environment, opposing torture ... then I told her, 'You should be a Democrat.' "
Now come on, folks. Does this sound like the type of reasoning you would expect out of someone who was once the President of the United States? These are the ravings of a person incapable of rational thought. Actually, this little story about Carter talking to a 16-year-old makes us shudder at the thought of how much more damage this man could have done while he was in the White House. Now he seems to be quite blissful just spending his time running around the world looking for despots and dictators, like Hugo Chaves, to stroke. Oh how we long for the Carter era of malaise and 21% interest rates, right?
Ok .. now let's turn Neal Boortz into a Sunday school teacher.
A young lady, she was about 16, approaches me in Sunday School and asks me about the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. I asked her how much time she had. "Not much." she said. "Keep it simple."
I asked her if she believed in the concept of individualism, and the right of an individual to live with personal and economic freedom. Then I asked her if she would fight to defend those freedoms, or if she thought it would be better to live as a slave rather than fight. I told her that if she would fight for her freedom and the freedom of her family, then she should be a Republican. If she would rather live as a slave, then she should be a Democrat.
I asked her if she believed that government should treat all citizens alike, or if she believed that government should take take stuff away from those who prosper because they work hard and make good decisions, and give that stuff to people who aren't willing to work hard and who put no thought into the consequences of the decisions they make. I told her that if she believes in punishing behavior that improves our society and our economy, then she should be a Democrat. But if she believes in rewarding the behavior that builds our economy and enhances freedom and economic liberty, then she should be a Republican. In fact, she should be a Libertarian.
Then I asked her if she believed that saving a life by force-feeding a person who is trying to kill themselves with a hunger strike is torture, then she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that keeping that person alive is the right thing to do, even if it means making them eat, she ought to be a Republican.
I asked her if she believes that when the sun gets hotter the earth's atmosphere will get hotter also. If so, she ought to be a Republican. If she believes that the sun getting hotter can't possibly be responsible for the temperature of the earth rising a degree or two, then she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that humans should be wiped off the face of the earth in order to save it, she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that mankind has a place on this earth she ought to laugh at Democrats.
Then I asked her if she thought that her child should start life owing about $28,000 to cover the debt of her government, then either the Democratic or the Republican party would work pretty well for her. If she thinks that government ought to be limited and should cost a lot less, then it's time to look into being a Libertarian.
Yesterday James Taranto's Wall Street Journal Online column carried an item about an article that appeared in Atlanta's Creative Loafing tabloid newspaper. The article detailed an interview with former (thank God) president Jimmy Carter. Read for yourself --- and stand back in amazement at the absurdity of this man who has never seen a dictator he didn't like; a man who once occupied our The Oval Office; a man whom the voters overwhelmingly rejected after just four years --- Jimmy Carter, our biggest national mistake:
"I was teaching a Sunday school class two weeks ago," he recalls. "A girl, she was about 16 years old from Panama City [Fla.], asked me about the differences between Democrats and Republicans.
"I asked her, 'Are you for peace, or do you want more war?' Then I asked her, 'Do you favor government helping the rich, or should it seek to help the poorest members of society? Do you want to preserve the environment, or do you want to destroy it? Do you believe this nation should engage in torture, or should we condemn it? Do you think each child today should start life responsible for $28,000 in [federal government] debt, or do you think we should be fiscally responsible?'
"I told her that if she answered all of those questions, that she believed in peace, aiding the poor and weak, saving the environment, opposing torture ... then I told her, 'You should be a Democrat.' "
Now come on, folks. Does this sound like the type of reasoning you would expect out of someone who was once the President of the United States? These are the ravings of a person incapable of rational thought. Actually, this little story about Carter talking to a 16-year-old makes us shudder at the thought of how much more damage this man could have done while he was in the White House. Now he seems to be quite blissful just spending his time running around the world looking for despots and dictators, like Hugo Chaves, to stroke. Oh how we long for the Carter era of malaise and 21% interest rates, right?
Ok .. now let's turn Neal Boortz into a Sunday school teacher.
A young lady, she was about 16, approaches me in Sunday School and asks me about the difference between a Democrat and a Republican. I asked her how much time she had. "Not much." she said. "Keep it simple."
I asked her if she believed in the concept of individualism, and the right of an individual to live with personal and economic freedom. Then I asked her if she would fight to defend those freedoms, or if she thought it would be better to live as a slave rather than fight. I told her that if she would fight for her freedom and the freedom of her family, then she should be a Republican. If she would rather live as a slave, then she should be a Democrat.
I asked her if she believed that government should treat all citizens alike, or if she believed that government should take take stuff away from those who prosper because they work hard and make good decisions, and give that stuff to people who aren't willing to work hard and who put no thought into the consequences of the decisions they make. I told her that if she believes in punishing behavior that improves our society and our economy, then she should be a Democrat. But if she believes in rewarding the behavior that builds our economy and enhances freedom and economic liberty, then she should be a Republican. In fact, she should be a Libertarian.
Then I asked her if she believed that saving a life by force-feeding a person who is trying to kill themselves with a hunger strike is torture, then she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that keeping that person alive is the right thing to do, even if it means making them eat, she ought to be a Republican.
I asked her if she believes that when the sun gets hotter the earth's atmosphere will get hotter also. If so, she ought to be a Republican. If she believes that the sun getting hotter can't possibly be responsible for the temperature of the earth rising a degree or two, then she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that humans should be wiped off the face of the earth in order to save it, she ought to be a Democrat. If she believes that mankind has a place on this earth she ought to laugh at Democrats.
Then I asked her if she thought that her child should start life owing about $28,000 to cover the debt of her government, then either the Democratic or the Republican party would work pretty well for her. If she thinks that government ought to be limited and should cost a lot less, then it's time to look into being a Libertarian.
posted by JoeFriday at 6:55 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home