Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MicroBalrog on May 26, 2009, 09:49:00 PM

Title: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 26, 2009, 09:49:00 PM: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'

Monday, May 25, 2009 1:46 PM

Article Font Size

If the Republican Party has any chance of regaining its leading position, it must put to "death" George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism," says top talker Glenn Beck.

Beck, a rising ratings star at Fox News and one the nation's leading talk hosts, has earned his popularity taking on some of the most cherished shibboleths of the Republican establishment.

During a Fox News interview with top radio talker Rush Limbaugh this past Thursday, Beck used the occasion to slam Bush's policies as inherently detrimental to core Republican principles.

Beck asked Limbaugh: "Rush, will you — help me out on this, because you always get thrown under the bus, that — well, you know, where were you when George Bush was spending, et cetera, et cetera. Address — because I — I have to tell you, the Republican Party doesn't get it. You just said, echoed again what I was saying about the progressive Republicans. George Bush, this compassionate conservative movement has got to die a violent death."

Limbaugh agreed with Beck's assessment that Bush had gone off the GOP reservation.

Limbaugh responded: "Yes, Glenn, let me tell you something. I don't — personally, I don't mind people asking me that question, 'Where were you with all the spending?' I remember — I don't want to mention any names — I was getting phone calls from people in the White House angry because I was opposed to every attempt they made to amnesty. I was opposed to the Medicare expansion. . . And they have found a way and called me mad as he can be. 'What do you mean this is good — good in the private sector?' I said, 'No, it's an entitlement and Republicans don't do that.' . . . but the elected Republicans — here's the problem with it — when you're a Republican and your president is a Republican, you have to go along with it. If you break from him, then you got party disunity and so forth."

President George W. Bush was the largest social spender in history, according to a recent report by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. In his first term Bush increased discretionary spending 19 percent. During Bush's second term federal spending increased 49 percent.

The Mercatus Center said Bush's spending made President Bill Clinton's administration look conservative.

The Center noted: "Adjusted for inflation, in eight years, President Clinton increased the federal budget by 11 percent. In eight years, President Bush increased it by a whopping 104 percent."

Beck suggested the stakes are high unless the GOP gets back to its roots.

He told Limbaugh: "And I'll tell you, they keep making the argument that if you vote for a conservative — oh, well, we're going to round up, you know, all of the unwed mothers and throw them in furnaces or whatever it is. That's not what this movement is about, at all. You're right on the social aspect. What this movement is about is they are destroying our children's future. Look, I don't care what you do in your own bedroom. You — we won't have a bedroom left anymore. We're all going to be living in Hooverville or Obamaville if we don't stop the spending."

Â© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/beck_limbaugh_bush/2009/05/25/217943.html?s=al&promo_code=806B-1

Micro Sez: So now they get it.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: longeyes on May 26, 2009, 09:51:45 PM: The conservative movement is built on reason. Compassion means putting aside reason. The two are unfriendly bedfellows but occasionally they produce warped offspring, nonetheless.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 26, 2009, 09:58:12 PM: Quote
Micro Sez: So now they get it.

Who gets it? All I see is two conservatives talking about the problems they had with Bush for the past few years. No new revelations there. No changes of heart.

Quote from: longeyes on May 26, 2009, 09:51:45 PM
The conservative movement is built on reason. Compassion means putting aside reason.

[scratches head] ???
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Standing Wolf on May 26, 2009, 10:10:33 PM: Government gives churches a free tax ride, then takes over charity and taxes the workers and peasants.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Sergeant Bob on May 26, 2009, 10:59:58 PM: Quote from: MicroBalrog on May 26, 2009, 09:49:00 PM
Micro Sez: So now they get it.

Quote from: fistful on May 26, 2009, 09:58:12 PM
Who gets it? All I see is two conservatives talking about the problems they had with Bush for the past few years. No new revelations there. No changes of heart.

Indeed. If you think they are just now getting it, you haven't listened to either Rush or Glenn very much. You are only parrotting what you've "heard" about them. Like my high school metal shop teacher used to say, "Don't listen to the heard"
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 27, 2009, 04:03:26 AM: I have been listening to Glenn and Rush during the primary season. I have gotten the impression that their conservatism one of attitude more than of ideology.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 27, 2009, 07:05:49 AM: I would actually like to know who you think finally gets what.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: longeyes on May 27, 2009, 10:57:12 AM: Kompassion means bending the rules to favor politically favored or protected classes. There is always an ulterior motive that requires trashing Constitutional principles, and it almost always masquerades as a warmer heart but is better described as "noblesse oblige." Noblesse is what has driven the affluent liberal lunacy for decades now. It will end with absence of both honor and affluence.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Seenterman on May 28, 2009, 10:59:45 AM: Quote
The conservative movement is built on reason. Compassion means putting aside reason.

What are you a vulcan? There can be both.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: longeyes on May 28, 2009, 11:46:01 AM: Yes, I'm a Vulcan. Clever of you to notice.

Notice I spelled it "Kompassion," by which I meant the politicizing of the concept of compassion and creating "exemptions" to reasoned argument that rely on feeling.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Jamisjockey on May 28, 2009, 11:55:59 AM: Compassion and Reason can coexist. Reasonable people use their money to facilitate Compassion as their individual morals dictate. Some people just can not help their station in life.
The problem exists when government decides to regulate and issue compassion. To me, dictating compassion is just the same as state sponsored religion.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: longeyes on May 28, 2009, 12:24:02 PM: A lot of things can co-exist. The question is how long and how well--and at what price. "Compassion," as it is currently being defined and applied in this society, will lead inevitably to an abrogation of individual rights.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: seeker_two on May 28, 2009, 12:59:29 PM: What is more compassionate?....providing opportunities for someone to be independent or forcing someone to be dependent on a all-controlling power?

It comes down to a choice b/t Jeremiah Johnson or 1984....which would you choose?....
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Werewolf on May 28, 2009, 02:34:33 PM: Quote from: JamisJockey on May 28, 2009, 11:55:59 AM
...Some people just can not help their station in life...

Wow what a neat way to say some folks are born just too stupid/slow/small/ugly/weak etc. to change the life station they inevitably assume due to the aforementioned geniticaly controlled characteristics.

NOTE: Not being sarcastic at all. That's really a neat way to say that regardless of what Jefferson wanted the common folk to believe:

WE ARE NOT ALL CREATED EQUAL!

In the genetic lottery some folk really are more fortunate than others (but then I don't think that's what the dems have in mind when they say that).
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Jamisjockey on May 28, 2009, 02:43:07 PM: I think you mistake Jefferson's intentions. In the eyes of the law and the government, we are all created equal (or should be treated so).
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Werewolf on May 28, 2009, 04:06:02 PM: Quote from: JamisJockey on May 28, 2009, 02:43:07 PM
I think you mistake Jefferson's intentions. In the eyes of the law and the government, we are all created equal (or should be treated so).
Without doubt you are correct sir:

Unfortunately the current crop and most preceding generations since Lincoln labor under the mistaken view that Jefferson literally meant created EQUAL.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: richyoung on May 28, 2009, 05:08:00 PM: Quote from: Standing Wolf on May 26, 2009, 10:10:33 PM
Government gives churches a free tax ride, then takes over charity and taxes the workers and peasants.

The power to tax is the power to destroy. Can't actually HAVE "freedom of religion" without that pesky "free ride" the churches are getting.....
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 28, 2009, 06:28:52 PM: Quote
The power to tax is the power to destroy. Can't actually HAVE "freedom of religion" without that pesky "free ride" the churches are getting.....

Why would paying tax "destroy" churches? It didn't seem to have destroyed... all the other types of business that pay taxes?
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Balog on May 28, 2009, 07:17:27 PM: Quote from: MicroBalrog on May 28, 2009, 06:28:52 PM
Why would paying tax "destroy" churches? It didn't seem to have destroyed... all the other types of business that pay taxes?

Because churches aren't businesses?
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 28, 2009, 07:19:07 PM: Why would paying taxes destroy churches?
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Balog on May 28, 2009, 07:31:19 PM: Quote from: MicroBalrog on May 28, 2009, 07:19:07 PM
Why would paying taxes destroy churches?

They are not profit making entities (not most of 'em, anyway). If you can't see the difference between a member funded non-profit organization and a business I'm not sure I can help you; the difference seems obvious to me.

And regardless of whether or not treating them as a business would insta-gib all of them, it's still a pretty clear violation of the whole freedom of religion thing.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 28, 2009, 07:44:16 PM: You see, here's what bothers me about the whole enterprise:

1. Governments (especially the US one) manipulating churches by threatening to withdraw their tax-exempt status.
2. What does it matter what I use the money for? A for-profit private school benefits society quite as much as a non-profit institution.
3. THe whole notion of tax exemptions encourages people to file detailed reports of every financial activity to the state. "Look, I did this and this, so I qualify for this and this exemption!"

In my view, all tax exemptions should be scrapped, to be replaced by a single (and simple ) sales tax, so as to minimise the tracking etc. etc. of activities that are necessary for income tax extraction.

P.S. In no way does taxing churches constrict the freedom of religion, any more than taxing newspaper companies restrains the freedom of speech.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Balog on May 28, 2009, 09:17:15 PM: Your persistent refusal to address the fundamental difference between a for profit enterprise and a religious institute is puzzling, as is your random foray into the private tax scheme.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Scout26 on May 29, 2009, 12:09:54 AM: [sarcasm]

Jewish synagoges pay 70% tax (Cause everyone knows that they got the money)
Roman Catholics - 50% (They can afford it, I mean have you seen the Vatican)
Southern Baptists - 25% for those predominatly white, 10% if mostly black.
Evangelicals - 45% (They got almost as much money as the Jooz, just watch 'em on TV.)
Other Christian Churches - 30%
Muslims - 5% (Don't want 'em mad at us.)
Hindus, Buddists, and other Eastern/Asian religions -30%
For all - Every thousand members add an additional 1-3%.

Adjust rates as to who's in power/how the wind blows......

[/sarcasm]
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 29, 2009, 06:11:18 AM: Quote from: Balog on May 28, 2009, 09:17:15 PM
Your persistent refusal to address the fundamental difference between a for profit enterprise and a religious institute is puzzling, as is your random foray into the private tax scheme.

Because my whole argument is that the government should ignore the difference. It's not any of the government business to determine "why" I am doing things, whether it is for profit or for another reason.

Scout 26: Such a thing would of course be a violation of religious liberty, d'oh. However, I fail to see how all religious institutions paying an EQUAL tax rate would be a violation of freedom of religion.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: roo_ster on May 29, 2009, 11:17:31 AM: Quote from: MicroBalrog on May 29, 2009, 06:11:18 AM
Scout 26: Such a thing would of course be a violation of religious liberty, d'oh. However, I fail to see how all religious institutions paying an EQUAL tax rate would be a violation of freedom of religion.

Tax on what? They are not a ~~prophet~~ profit making institution.

Anyways, there are both practical and traditional reasons for religious orgs' tax exemption:

Practical:
1. Power to tax is power to destroy and, given the 1st Amendment, gov't ought not be in the religion-destruction business.
2. Not profit-making enterprises*.
3. Religious orgs are a net benefit to society, providing manifold benefits that outweigh any societal benefit that might accrue from taxing them.
4. Religious power is still power. Power only respects power. Therefore, we ought to nurture power centers outside of / in opposition to gov't

Traditional:
1. Religious institutions have been tax exempt in the West for centuries.
2. Even this was not enough for the English & others who settled America, who wanted even less gov't meddling in religion.

* Religious org tax exemption predates non-profit org tax exemption. Non-profit tax exemption is likely an outgrowth of religious org tax exemption.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Balog on May 29, 2009, 11:24:41 AM: Just curious: do you support taxing charities of a non-religious nature? If I donate to CATO or the NRA is the fed.gov entitled to a % of that?
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Racehorse on May 29, 2009, 12:42:21 PM: My question to MicroBalrog is this: would you rather give a tax exemption to charities and religions given the charitable work they do (food banks, homeless shelters, job programs, etc.) or have the government tax those entities, thereby reducing their ability to do charitable work, which must then be performed by government or not performed at all?

Personally, I'd rather have private entities fully enabled to do charitable work than leave it to the government.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: Sergeant Bob on May 29, 2009, 01:14:56 PM: I once asked Micro on which side of the political spectrum in Israel he considered himself to be. He replied (IIRC) that he would be in the far right.

I think that might explain some of his views.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 29, 2009, 02:07:50 PM: Quote
Just curious: do you support taxing charities of a non-religious nature? If I donate to CATO or the NRA is the fed.gov entitled to a % of that?

This is correct.

It's really beyond me why donations to the NRA-ILA are not tax exempt, because the NRA-ILA is 'political', but donations to JPFO (which goes around promoting political causes) are 'charity'. Donations to the Violence Policy Center are also tax-exempt, IIRC.

Quote
Tax on what? They are not a prophet profit making institution.

If your expenditures are smaller than your income, isn't the difference your 'profit'?

Quote
Personally, I'd rather have private entities fully enabled to do charitable work than leave it to the government.

And you are fully correct on this.

However, what concerns me here is the giant manipulative power that being able to exempt stuff from the income tax gives the state. It creates an impetus for a giant amount of legislative wrangling, social tracking, lobbying (and therefore corruption). For example, the WaPo is arguing – even as I type – that newspapers should be considered non-profits and benefit accordingly. Some people want tax breaks for people who buy domestic cars. Other people want to take away the religious tax breaks from churches that speak out on political issues.

Do you think that the early Puritans would have stood for that?

Now, obviously, this sort of thing is not going to be viable unless you FIRST reduce the role of government and the role of taxes in society anyway.
Title: Re: Glenn Beck: Bush's Compassionate Conservatism Must 'Die Violent Death'
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 29, 2009, 02:09:38 PM: Quote
I once asked Micro on which side of the political spectrum in Israel he considered himself to be. He replied (IIRC) that he would be in the far right.

In terms of economics and society, my views are on the far political right. I support the abolition of the graduated income tax and the welfare state, heavy penalties for violent crime, real gun rights for the citizenry (at least as good as in the United States or better), and limits on the power of the judicial branch. These are unacceptably radical ideas here.