» News

Hot Seat with Bill Whittle: How do conservatives compete with liberal hand-outs?

Home - by - January 5, 2013 - 00:15 America/New_York - 11 Comments

Via The Right Scoop

This is a great answer by Bill Whittle that revolves around telling the truth about government hand-outs and explaining the message of conservatism:

 

h/t  MadJack

» 11 Comments

  1. joe6pak

    January 5th, 2013

    Bill Whittle is a good and decent man. I sure hope he keeps on presenting is message because he is as effective as anyone we have right now. Stay strong Bill! Don’t quit.

    Noteworthy Comment Thumb up +13

     
  2. KF

    January 5th, 2013

    Whittle is right as usual.
    Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney could not, or possibly would not publicly articulate conservative Republican values or principles. The same was true for both Bushes. That doesn’t necessicaraily make then horrible people just very “sub-optimal” candidates in times like thsese.

    What’s really sad is that key Repubs like Boner don’t seem to even believe in these principles to begin with, so forget about expressing them.

    If a candidate had the guts to do what Whittle described as a campaign stop in So. Philadelphia they would have had the guts to point out the blatant voter fraud too. So that’s another reason we need someone of character.

    The only person that comes to mind right now is Rand Paul. Not that I’m any expert, just my opinion.

    Thumb up +9

     
  3. Anonymous

    January 5th, 2013

    Mistake in Whittle’s thinking: He says pick the angriest person in a South Philly crowd and present arguments as though you can logically reason with him.

    Not gonna work.

    2. If Romney had said “We’re not gonna take your benefits” (3:18) no one would have believed him.

    3. Also, when a wealthy white man says the sentence: “I’m a Republican because it’s in my best interests”, it screams to the left “GREED!”.

    It doesn’t really articulate why one is a Republican.

    4. Finally, Whittle’s definition of “better life” revolves around materialism. That’s not everyone’s criteria for a better life, but it would be what the left would expect to come from a wealthy guy like Romney.

    Clearly Romney didn’t reach a lot of the people he could have, but there are other arguments he could have easily, successfully used. He just did not fight.

    Thumb up +6

     
  4. Mary Jane Anklestraps

    January 5th, 2013

    Why would anyone want this or any government holding the deed to their life?

    Thumb up +7

     
  5. AbigailAdams

    January 5th, 2013

    I heard this week’s interview between Greta Van Susteran and newly appointed senator Tim Scott in which Scott basically said the same things. The problem facing the GOP is that they don’t bother going into the urban areas that got obama elected. In fact, they treat blue states the same way Dems treat “flyover” country. They don’t spend the money, they don’t contribute to the campaigns of Dem opposition, they don’t even run ads in blue territory because they see it as a lost cause. This last election is a prime example; except for the ads that were run on the national FOX cable shows, there was not one Romney/Ryan ad run in Seattle. Even with a weak message, it would have had people talking about an alternative, in my view.

    When the GOP is entirely absent from the election scene in blue territory, it only serves to underline the apparent message that the GOP doesn’t understand that electorate and doesn’t care about them. Couple this with the hard-hitting spin that Axelfraud put on Romney’s “47%” comment and the Dems sealed the deal with their plantation voters. Tim Scott articulated this very well. It’s a shame that the GOP appears to be practicing skin color politics by thinking that it takes a Tim Scott to “go up in there”. To my recollection, all the Kennedys were lilly white.

    Noteworthy Comment Thumb up +10

     
  6. Cracker Baby

    January 5th, 2013

    Well, my Brother used to say “there’s not a dimes bit of difference between a Democrat and a Republican. If the Democrats voted to burn DC to the ground today, the Republicans would work to have the conflagration spread out over a week.” Once our beloved representatives get to Capital Hill and smell that easy money, it is no longer about us! I really think It’s time to get a million or so angry folks to march up to the Hill with railroad spikes and 3# hammers ala Vlad!

    Thumb up +7

     
  7. Woody

    January 5th, 2013

    I enjoy Bill Whittle’s commentary, but in this case I think he misses the point that we are dealing with not just one type of addict, but two addicts.

    In fact I think most conservative pundits today miss completely the other addict in the room or at least they just accept that addict and make statements like “well that’s just how people want things to be handled”.

    The other addict in addition to the entitlement addict that takes the hand-outs from the Democrats is the rest of the people who want government to handle the poor in their community, who want the government to handle the charitiable works they should be involved in within their community.

    People, including many conservatives, have bought into the notion that only government can take care of these problems and that it all should be left in the governments hands. The position seems to be that government’s handling needs to be reduced to some extent, but that government has to be involved for the poor and the truly needed to be taken care of in our towns.

    This is where the addiction comes in because it is so much easier and less intrusive to our lives to have some far off entity to charge with these task we should take on ourselves and when it doesn’t work as it will always fail we also can use that same far off entity to blame for the failure.

    This is truly a cycle of addiction and just as the entitlement leeches need to be kicked off the dole so to does the government need to be taken out of the equation entirely and all of this returned into the laps of ordinary folks to take care of their own towns and communities.

    I doubt I will live long enough to see this come to pass and until it does then the Democrats will have the “entitled voting group” at their disposal every election since government will have involvement and that is their vehicle to control them.

    Thumb up +4

     
  8. AbigailAdams

    January 5th, 2013

    @Woody — You make an excellent point. One way I could see to short circuit that group of entitlement would be to get involved with your church or school organizations, or just on your own, to develop programs for the needy.

    I think Whittle’s main point was that GOP candidates just figure it’s pointless to woo voters who always vote Democrat; that they don’t even think it’s worth the effort. And as long as the conservative messge is so poorly crafted, it is. However, if we can truly get behind our own rhetoric, we’ve got a fantastic story to tell all voters.

    Thumb up +2

     
  9. Woody

    January 5th, 2013

    @AbigailAdams – That may have been Whittle’s main point and I can agree with that, but I noticed that even in this answer from Whittle that is almost an automatic acceptance of leaving it to the government to handle the social problems. People in general seem quick to allow that to remain the “status quo” because it is easier.

    I worry that too many have adopted this insane idea of utopia being just around the corner if government is just given a little more power over people.

    I am not saying that local action by individuals with the government taken completely out of the charity business will solve social problems. There will be people who don’t deserve help who will deservedly not get it and then screaming like “stuck pigs” over not receiving what they feel they are entitled to, but due to having lower resources, private groups will be more careful in how the money is spent.

    But I am not sure how simply joining local Churches and groups who are helping the poor will short-circuit the governments heavy hand in both the money they take from us and in what they allow us to do to help the poor. I am not sure if you have been involved, but many agencies and even local and city governments are getting into the act of preventing ordinary folks from helping the poor and truly needy.

    Having seen this first hand and having seen where things are headed under socialism, I think we need folks like Whittle to come to the realization that both those who take under entitlements and those willing to give away their liberty for government to handle this for them are the problem. As such both are voters and both groups are voting for what they get from government, one direct and one indirect.

    Thumb up +2

     
  10. Mr.Gates

    January 5th, 2013

    He’s very reasonable and the people he imagines addressing this way are not. Their group mentality is what we need to somehow unlock. It’s all because they’re…. you know. Bigots.

    Thumb up +2

     
  11. Racist

    January 6th, 2013

    The Churches and Charities are BEGGING the govt to take over their responsibilities of taking care of the poor and “ministering” to the neglected. Except for the corrupt ones… They’re still willing to serve the needy. They’re just begging for the govt to subsidize them and give them access to the Treasury so they can take care of the needy, the needy administrators that is!!!

    Thumb up +1