I think Bill O'Reilly hits one thing right on the head that demonstrates why I have difficulty understanding much of the liberal mindset even though I was once one myself.
Liberals want social justice but for them fiscal responsibility is not a factor at all.
But how can anyone operate on that basis as if the budget has no say in our priorities? As Margaret Thatcher has stated and as is evident from Europe today "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Even the concept of social justice is fuzzy. What is it? Is it another way of saying "fairness" as if that can be defined. Fairness is subjective. It is in the eye of the beholder. Since we all don't define fairness alike how can government enforce someone's idea of fairness without stripping us of our individual freedoms? The only way government can enforce its idea of fairness is by forcing us to follow its definition and that is not in keeping with our form of government. That is a dictatorship.
Here is Bill O'Reilly's take on the issue.
"Now, there’s no use in debating President Obama’s opinion. He believes it, and so do his followers. All the charts in the world are not going to change their minds. So it is up to you, the voter, to decide whether Mitt Romney and the Republicans should get a chance to improve things, and therein lies the question mark. Talking Points has said from the beginning of this campaign that the vote will be a referendum on Barack Obama. It will be an up or down vote on him.
The Republican Party knows that, and therefore Governor Romney is going to play it very safe. He’s not going to be drawn into any policy controversy. He’s not going to make any bold and fresh statements. He’s simply going to say that President Obama has failed to bring prosperity to America, and that he, Mitt Romney, will be able to do that.
As for the President, he will say that Romney’s vision will not succeed. But, of course, the President doesn’t know that. It’s a hypothetical. I believe that if America continues its record spending, continues to borrow billions of dollars every day, the economy is going to get much worse, but I can’t prove that. It’s just what I believe. Many liberals don’t seem to care much about looming bankruptcy. They just want to provide social justice, and they don’t really care about the unintended consequences. For them fiscal responsibility is not a factor at all. (emphasis added)
So throughout this Democratic Convention this week, you’re going to hear that the Republicans want to hurt the folks by taking away their rightful stuff, and you’ll also hear about how the president wants to help the poor and middle class. And he will tax the wealthy and business owners in order to give the folks more stuff. It’s really useless to debate those points over and over. The Republicans want competition and an open marketplace capitalism. The Democrats want government control of the economy and social justice. You’re going to have to make the call.
Both Obama and Romney want power, and the way to get power is to tell voters that you’ll look out for them. So the rhetoric goes around and around and around and it doesn’t get us anywhere. Talking Points is a big performance guy. The President surely knows his administration has not been economically effective. In fact, he gave himself an “Incomplete” when asked to grade his overall performance. That may be generous, with every economic category down big. With the folks paying $2 per gallon more to gas up. With the nation owing $16 Trillion, “incomplete” seems to be a soft word.
America’s in trouble, and politicians in both parties better recognize it, and they’d better do something about it, or all of us will suffer big time in the years to come. We need unselfish leadership. Abraham Lincoln leadership. And we, we the people, need to recognize the truth: The B. S. has to walk."
O'Reilly: "No Question The Country Is Worse Off Today" | RealClearPolitics
