Sometimes you can tell you are on the right track by who disagrees with you

Sometimes you can tell you are on the right track by who disagrees with you.

I received a newsletter from Brian McCabe, President - Progress for America.  In that letter, he points out some interesting quotes regarding the nomination of Samuel Alito to the supreme court...

"His confirmation would radically transform the Supreme Court and create a direct threat to the health and safety of American women."
Planned Parenthood

"Alito's record suggests an activist judicial philosophy bent on rolling back the rights and freedoms that all Americans value."
Howard Dean

For that, I have a one-word response.  "YES!!!"

If I were President Bush, I would see this as confirmation that I am doing the right thing.

Also, today I checked out my Google custom RSS feed from Fox News and found the article titled, Chirac calls for calm in Paris suburbs – You can find it here... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174254,00.html

This is an example of what modern liberalism can bring to civilized society.  Gangs rampaging through the streets because they believe that they aren't being treated fairly.

I believe this stems from a desire for us to be taken care of.  We all have this desire, which begins when we are born, but many of us realize at some point that we can't wait on others to take care of us - we have to step up and take responsibility for our life and our family, and do the right thing.

In order to contribute to the society around us, we have to conform to whatever the workplace requires of us, so that we can be an acceptable employee.  That means we have to take on a servant spirit and be willing to do what is necessary to ensure someone else's success.  It is through our employer's success that we too can succeed.  Unless you are the type of person that can create jobs for other people, you will be working for someone else, or you will be living on whatever handouts you can get from the government.  Is there another choice here?

One of these options breeds contempt, the other creates a sense of satisfaction of a job well done.

The reason given for the riots in Paris, is the following (try to imagine a whiny teenager voice here)...

"It was really mean that police would be chasing those two boys and that the boys, in an effort to get away from those mean police, would be electrocuted while hiding in a power station."

The police deny that the minors were chased.  It doesn't matter though.  If the boys were being chased by the police they were EVADING the police, which is illegal.  They entered a government facility, illegally, and killed themselves.  So the response of the law abiding citizens is to riot, burn cars, and try to destroy as much property as possible.  Whether or not innocent people are harmed or killed in the wake of this action is irrelevant to them.

What is the moral here?  No matter how much you give, there are people who will want more.  The best way to get people to take responsibility for themselves, is to let them take responsibility for themselves.

How is the government of France dealing with this?  What can they do?  Nothing really.  They are in a position, created by decades of kowtowing to the many different whiny groups of liberals trying to make everyone happy.  By setting the standard so low that everyone can achieve it, they have reduced their nation to the lowest common denominator.  They have created an atmosphere of mediocrity.  I'm not speaking from a point of superiority here, but at least in the United States, there is still (barely) some semblance of reaching for excellence.  If the libs had their way here, we would be no better off, and they could take us down the road of many European countries within a few years.  For now though, Capitalism still sets the standard we live by, and we pay the cost of that precious ideal daily, keeping the wolves at bay so that those who will be excellent, still have an opportunity to benefit from that desire.

Copyright ©2005 - Tom Roe – http://tomroe.com/cpov