THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX
By: Dr. Charles Ormsby – December, 2010
While most of the country woke up and rejected the Democrat-led mad dash to collectivism, approximately 55% of Massachusetts voters (along with a plurality of voters in several other loony states, notably California) clung to their government’s apron strings. The 55%, those who voted to continue looting their fellow citizens, should be ashamed both because their thieving ways are immoral and because their vote paints them as either knowingly immoral, or uninformed, or imbeciles.
But I’m being too kind.
The proposition that stealing from others is despicable used to be a perspective shared by the vast majority of the citizens of Massachusetts. Not any more. Now, the majority of our fellow citizens can sleep well after sanctioning a public policy of systematic thievery as long as they concur with — or they benefit from — the spoils. The inescapable conclusion is that they are not worthy of even the declining liberty we still enjoy.
Unfortunately, what they do deserve is what we may all be destined to inherit: a steadily declining economy, high unemployment rates, high inflation, steadily increasing taxes, ever more burdensome regulations, a dramatically lower standard of living, and the loss of freedoms that they never cherished.
Besides the immorality of their political persuasion, the 55% who consistently undermine our liberties by voting to increase the weight of the government’s steel boot also display an embarrassing lack of intellect. They either have the mental capacity of their party’s mascot or, if they have a near-human mental capacity, they rarely bother to put it to any use.
A donkey can see a pile of hay in front of itself and understand that it has an opportunity to eat. It has no concept of the future implications of its decision to eat the hay, with the exception of the immediate satiety that results.
Democrats react to any opportunity to tax or regulate their fellow citizens with a similar lack of analysis and foresight. They can’t fathom that policies have future consequences. They only care that they want or need more of other people’s money and they want or need it now. Consequences be damned.
To be candid, they appear to be dumber than a brick when it comes to understanding that human beings (their fellow citizens) will modify their behavior when the government is permitted to confiscate a greater share of profits, or raise the marginal tax rates on income, or impose a greater regulatory burden or tax on economic transactions.
If they had a brain, they would realize that the reaction of the citizenry to these policy changes is very predictable. People will invest less, hire less, work less, and buy less. More precisely, they will do less of these things here and more of them elsewhere. Meanwhile, the dim-witted Democrats wonder why our population is declining and why businesses move to states like New Hampshire that are more respectful of our private property rights.
How hard is it to figure out or predict these consequences? It is not hard if your IQ is greater than your shoe size and you expend some mental effort.
There are multiple barriers to Democrat voters trying to figure this out. They all suffer from some combination of the following: * Inadequate mental capacity
* Lack of mental content (education, knowledge, experience)
* Unwillingness to re-direct whatever limited mental capacity they have away from Lady Gaga or Lindsey Lohan
* Fear of the conclusion they would inevitably reach if they bothered to think about political philosophy and economics (heaven forbid they might conclude that they shouldn’t loot their neighbors)
* And, finally, for those in positions of political power, they fear losing that power.
Evidence, on a national scale, for the first three was provided in the most recent election when a Zogby post-election poll indicated that voters who decided how to vote during the week before the election voted Democrat by a margin of 57-to-31. In contrast, those deciding much earlier voted Republican by a substantial margin.
They didn’t decide until the last week?! Where were their brains before that? Have they ever watched a news program? Read a newspaper? Read a book about anything of substance? Can they even read? Did they sleep through American or world history? Does economics ring a bell? Can they add fractions or solve the simple equation ? Did they learn anything in their three years in fourth grade?
It is hard to imagine the depths of their ignorance and/or avarice.
Thank goodness Massachusetts will lose one congressional seat due to an anemic population growth (between 2000 and 2010, the Massachusetts population grew at less than 22% of the rate of the U.S. as a whole — 2.1% vs. 9.8%). With the policies of the current Democrat establishment on Beacon Hill, we are likely to lose another one or two seats after the next census. I suggest they play musical chairs to decide who gets booted out.
Question 3 (lowering the sales tax to 3%) lost by 57% to 43%. Some say it should have targeted a 5% sales tax instead of 3%. They are wrong.
Political choices should be clear and unambiguous. When the voters make a stupid decision, the consequences will be felt and we will have a chance to learn from it. When the pro-freedom position wins, we need to win, not tread water.
Could we ever have a better example of this than the election of President Obama and the disastrous consequences that ensued from the Obama/Pelosi/Reid regime? If McCain had been elected in 2008, we would never have received the political lessons of the past two years. The national consciousness would never have reached its current state.
Let’s be clear. The current national state of mind is not a pro-Republican state of mind, but one that has a new-found appreciation for smaller government, individual liberty, and the merits of the Constitution.
But don’t become over-confident. This lesson will remain in our national consciousness only so long as concerned citizens (right now that means Tea Party activists) remain focused and hold politicians accountable to our founding principles.
We also need to hold our fellow citizens accountable when they exhibit signs of idiocy or immorality.
Start with reason and logic. Try to convince them to become informed, to start thinking clearly and logically, and to reject the apparent short-term benefits of thievery and power.
If that doesn’t work, they are either idiots or immoral, and possibly both. Don’t hide your conclusion from them.
We used to put people in the stocks on the public common for acting badly. I understand it was common for those who passed by to throw rotten fruit at them to show that such behavior was socially unacceptable. As a consequence, people behaved much better in those days.
We probably can’t bring back the stocks (can somebody look into that?), but a little well deserved ridicule might do wonders.
If the choice is permanent residence in the Massachusetts Gulag or honest incivility, I’ll always choose the latter.