Why do you hate helping people?

This is part 35 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


35. why do you hate helping people?

Define helping.

There’s the old saying, “Give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he’ll eat for a lifetime.”

Liberals want to give the man a fish. Every day. No questions asked. Forever. But, where do they get the fish to give the man? From the man that conservatives are teaching to fish.

Conservatives want to teach the man to fish. We also don’t want to oppress him with needless and overbearing regulations while he tries to fish. We don’t want to make it harder for him to get his fish. We also don’t want to take his fish to give to others who don’t want to earn their own fish; he should enjoy the fruits of his labor.

It’s a common theme among liberals to complain about conservatives “not helping” people, but it is a verifiable fact that conservatives do more to help people than liberals do.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Why do you think a lot of conservatives are so receptive to stern father types on cable news and talk radio?

This is part 34 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


34. Why do you think a lot of conservatives are so receptive to stern father types on cable news and talk radio?

I’m not even going to try. John Hawkin’s answer is classic. Scroll down to number 14.

Okay, it’s better than being receptive to bleeding heart mommy types.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

How do conservatives square 8 yrs of calling Obama a tyrant while supporting an actual tyrant?

This is part 33 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


33. How do conservatives square 8 yrs of calling Obama a “tyrant” while supporting an actual tyrant?

Obama was not a tyrant, but I understand why many people considered him one; he did tend to rule by executive order. Actually, he abused them. If he couldn’t get something done through Congress, the way he was supposed to, he got it done through the bureaucracies (EPA regulations), executive orders, or abuse of governmental powers (Tea Party targeting by IRS). He did have a reputation for being a bit dictatorial.

Trump has not exhibited anything different that Obama. He’s simply using the same executive order process, but he’s undoing the damage done by his predecessor. He’s also working to get the bureaucracies, such as the EPA, back under control. Congress is supposed to make law, not bureaucracies. And he’s also working to get politics out of certain governmental organizations.

I don’t see tyrant when I see Trump. Not any more than I saw tyrant in Obama.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Do you think Christian refugees are more deserving of American assistance than non-Christian refugees?

This is part 32 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


32. Do you think Christian refugees are more deserving of American assistance than non-Christian refugees?

Unlike, Hawkins, I don’t put a higher priority on Christians over non-Christians, but with that being said, Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world,. Most of the refugees are not being persecuted, but are simply being bombed out of their homes and have no place to go. That doesn’t mean they all are, but it also doesn’t mean we should just be letting people in without being vetted.

I also think that Christians are going to assimilate more to surroundings in the United States, or any country for that matter, more than non-Christians, i.e., Muslims. Why? There’s nothing in the Christian religion that says not to assimilate. Certainly, there are worldly things that we need to stay away from, or partake in moderation, but that doesn’t mean we can’t fit in with our neighbors. Islam is more opposed assimilation, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. I have coworkers that are Islamic, and we get along just fine. That doesn’t mean all Muslims think that way, and one simply has to watch the news to see that there are a large number that absolutely will not assimilate. In fact, they believe we need to assimilate to them.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Why is the religious freedom of an anti-LGBT baker more important than that of a Muslim soldier or physician?

This is part 31 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


31. why is the religious freedom of an anti-LGBT baker important to you, but not a Muslim soldier or physician?

There must be a story to go with this somewhere, but I’m not sure what it is. In a nutshell, though, the religious freedoms of all Americans should be respected, but there are some limitations, just like the Freedom Speech restriction of “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.” So, let’s talk about this for a moment to correct some misconceptions.

First, most Christian bakers, florists, photographer, etc. do not discriminate against gay people. They discriminate against events. If a gay person comes into a bakery, the Christian baker will sell the gay person bread, cookies, cake, whatever. It’s when asked to provide a wedding cake for a wedding event that creates the problem. I would be surprised if you didn’t get the same reaction from an Islamic baker, but I wonder if activists would flip out over that. Most Christians are not “against gay people.” They’re against homosexuality, and they separate the two. One is an action, a sin, and that is what they won’t condone. Quite frankly, Christians are supposed to discriminate against sin!

Muslim soldiers and physicians also have a right to practice their religion, and I haven’t heard of any instances where they have not been afforded that right. That doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, but it’s certainly not on the scale that Christian rights have been attacked.

I wonder if a Muslim baker would be attacked in the media for not baking a wedding cake for a gay wedding the same way Christians have. Would Muslim bakers have to be “reeducated?”

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

At what point do you cease advocating tax cuts?

This is part 30 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


30. At what point will taxes be so low that you would cease advocating for them to be cut further?

This is simple. I would stop advocating for lower taxes when the government isn’t spending money on programs and projects it shouldn’t be in the business of, which is just about all of them.

I’ll put it another way. I’ll stop advocating for lower taxes when liberals stop advocating for unconstitutional programs, and more free stuff.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Why doesn’t character matter to you anymore?

This is part 29 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


29. why doesn’t character matter to you anymore?

Character does matter. And when faced with the character of Hillary Clinton versus the character of Donald Trump, Trump won. Hillary lost because character does matter.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Do you believe Trump will significantly revive the manufacturing industry?

This is part 28 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


28. Do you believe Trump will significantly revive the manufacturing industry thru higher tariffs and alienating trade partners?

I have mixed feelings about the trade agreements we hold with different countries. Perhaps he can work out better trade deals than what we have in place, but whether it helps or hurts manufacturing will be seen.

Part of the problem I have, is that you could certainly create a deal that makes it more viable for American businesses to hire American workers here at home, but what will that do to the cost of those goods? We enjoy low prices on a lot of imported goods, so while we may be put more people back to work with more manufacturing, we may simultaneously be hurting the poor.

The goal needs to be to not only put people back to work, but keep the cost of living down, and that’s going to be a fine line to walk.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Can we make grand compromises?

This is part 27 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


27. Can we make grand compromises? Voter ID, but Early Voting/Nat. Holiday. Abortion restrictions but free birth control/welfare

No.

There is nothing unreasonable about requiring someone to prove who they are in order to vote. I’m not a big fan of early voting or absentee voting, but I understand the requirement for absentee, especially in the case of our military service men and women. I have considered a national holiday for voting, but I think that simply requiring businesses to allow time for voting should be sufficient. I don’t think we need to shut the country down.

Abortion is murder (the premeditated killing of an unarmed, defenseless human being) and should be treated as such. Abortion doctors are akin to a hired hit man.

Free birth control isn’t necessary to curb pregnancy. It’s simply another program/service that someone is paying for. If you’re going to fool around, be responsible, and buy your own damn condoms. They’re not that expensive. If you fool around, take responsibility for your actions. In other words, if you’re not ready for the kids, you not ready for the sex.

Unless you’re married, stop having sex.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay

Will GOP Congress or Trump admin consider a basic universal income?

This is part 26 in a series of 35 questions. It is based on a series of questions answered by John Hawkins for Townhall.com: here, and here.


26. Will GOP Congress or Trump admin consider a basic universal income, whether as a replacement or supplement to entitlements?

I doubt it, but if they do, I hope it’s only to thoroughly squash the idea.

The goal should be to reduce entitlements, if not eliminate them. The goal should be to create an economy where businesses thrive and need workers. The goal should be putting Americans to work, not providing more ways to get money/goods/services without earning them.

Entitlements are ultimately paid for by hard working Americans who pay taxes, and the only way to provide that much money is to raise taxes, and every time you raise taxes, you raise the cost of living which hurts the poor. It’ll be a vicious cycle of raising the basic income to keep up with the rising cost of living. College tuition costs are a perfect example of how this works: schools raise tuition, guaranteed loans cover the rising cost, schools raise tuition, etc. What keeps it in check? Nothing. You’ll have runaway basic income and cost of living. Squash the idea like an ugly beetle.

Cover Photo Credit: Arek Socha at Pixabay