RSS

Why Do Some Bear the Burdens?

Listening to President Barack Hussein Obama talk on Memorial Day, I was moved.

"Why in an age when so many have acted only in pursuit of narrowest self-interest have the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines of this generation volunteered all that they have on behalf of others?" he said. "Why have they been willing to bear the heaviest burden?"

"Whatever it is, they felt some tug. They answered a call. They said, 'I'll go.' That is why they are the best of America," Obama said. "That is what separates them from those who have not served in uniform, their extraordinary willingness to risk their lives for people they never met."

Of course, some of the power of the message is lost because Obama never served in the military, fought his hardest to resist any call to bear heavy burdens, and (before becoming President and acting this part) he generally spoke ill of the military and those who serve. Oh, and not to quibble, but many in the military I know are not fighting for someone they never met, but are fighting to keep our country of American values free for their parents, friends, and other people they have met- frequently soldiers talk about how it's more of a family value thing than a lawyer-lobbyist thing. And I also wonder why is 'this age' so different than those in the past- maybe Obama is once again showing that he feels he is the Messiah, the ender of ages and the beginning of a new age for man?

Even so, I was moved. Why do some choose to bear burdens? Why do some people feel a call to serve, to hold fast to unpopular ideas, and to make the hard and tough decisions in life? Why do some continue to bear the burden of holding to morals and values, when this world and the Democratic Party push for a nihilistic approach of doing whatever you feel like is okay? Why do some feel the need to talk about our Founding values, to hold firm to life, liberty, and freedom, and to push for good responsible government?

It is a lot easier to just throw money at our problems, especially when that money is was earned by someone else. It is a lot easier to preach 'compassion' for criminals, especially when it isn't your son or daughter that was raped or murdered. It is a lot easier to 'relate' than it is to make a tough decision and say 'someone broke the law and needs to be punished.' It is a lot easier to say 'give up your values and agree with us and be a moderate' than it is to stick to your values or to say abortion is wrong and gay marriage is wrong and gun ownership is good. Is is easy to get on a soapbox and say 'don't label people all you mean conservatives and evil Republicans', but much harder to say 'don't label people.' It is a hard burden that some choose to bear, and I too wonder why some feel the calling to do so.

Case in point. When asked "Would Jennifer Granholm make a good Supreme Court justice?", according to a Detroit News/WXYZ poll most Michigan residents say "yes!". Why would they say that? She has zero qualifications, and compared with Supreme Court judges now (both liberal and conservative) and in the past, her qualifications to be judge are severely lacking. Why would anyone even think she would qualified for judge, much less 'make a good one'?

Poll participant Sue Barber, an unemployed non-taxpayer sucking down social security, gives us some insight into how easy it is to say 'sure, whoever wants to be Supreme Court judge can if they want.' "She's very bright, well-educated, and an attorney" she said- why not make her a judge- it's really tough to tell a child 'no', and a lot easier to just go with the flow. Sue went on to add that she is impressed by the fact that Granholm pretends to be an impartial decision-maker ("a genuine capacity to look at all sides of an issue") but likes the fact that after all this charade, she always goes with a pure liberal philosophy ("evaluate fairly"). "She's not just a doctrinaire like some of the other justices on the court"- as if having no moral and ethical base were something to admire- and it's not true anyways, because she is liberal to the core (although perhaps liberal is the same as no moral or ethical base).

Another case in point. Look at the lack of discipline in this newspaper editorial written by a Democratic hack pretending to be a news story:
The Grand Old Party is on wobbly legs these days in Michigan as voters drift away and those left behind are locked in an ideological debate about the path to reverse its sagging fortunes. Increasingly, the battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party is pitting social and religious conservatives who unflinchingly tout an anti-abortion, anti-gay, family platform at the expense of most everything else, against the traditional fiscal conservatives and moderates who would rather focus on a smaller, less intrusive government that takes less from taxpayer wallets and finds ways to create jobs.
This author likes the fact that 'voters drift away'- drifting in the currents of liberalism is a freeing experience- you can be a child again and indulge in your every want and desire. Sadly, those voters that 'drift away' and vote Democrat are now seeing the results of that- a country and society that is getting less and less every day. It is much harder to stand up in the water and say 'I am not going to drown, I am going to fight, I am going to bear whatever burden to make this nation better.'

It is really tough to be unflinching in the face of evil. History has shown this to be the case- most of times, when faced with difficult decisions and a hostile and aggressive foe, the natural impulse of man is to run. That is what the Democrats do- they run and hide and pretend that it is okay to poke a hole in a 8 month old baby's brain and call it 'choice.' They flinch back from making a tough decision and saying 'get a job and work.' Rather than saying 'you committed a crime and must go to jail,' they jerk back, fearful and afraid, and cower to the criminal and say 'compassion'.

This author tries to pretend the battle is within the Republican party- but reveals that what the battle really is is between the Republican party and the Democratic party- the author says moderates want a "less intrusive government that takes less from taxpayer wallets and finds ways to create jobs"- in other words, according to him moderate Republicans are willing to pay 40% in taxes, give up most of their freedoms, and support a government that spends taxpayer money on government boondoggles. Those aren't moderate Republicans- those are Democrats.

Don't give in to this garbage. Don't drift away. Be strong. Get a backbone. Stand up. Bear the burden. Our Founding Fathers were not the most popular bunch, especially with the established interests and the international community. Take heart in that. Others out there show us the way- show us that burdens can be born, that courage can fight down the impulse to flinch back from evil, and that if you truly want to change the world and have hope for the future, you need to unflinchingly vote conservative Republican in every election.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

0 komentar:

Posting Komentar