Friday, 22 April 2011

Setting The Record Straight

Each party thinks their means of carrying out policy best serves people. All too often we hear from the left: "This conservative party has different means of loving people and I think their view is wrong and harmful to others: therefore they are intolerant and judgmental".

A double standard often (by no means always) exist with left leaning people.  Mr. Layton and many left leaning policy makers often champion their positions on the following key words: 'inclusiveness', 'fairness', 'tolerence' and being non-judgmental.  They use these words to advocate creating laws that reflects their means of best serving others.

If someone on the right has equal love for people, but does not share the same means of getting there, conservatives are immediately called out as (make long list here) intolerant, judgmental, pig-headed, paranoid and a derivative of some phobia.  The very 'tolerence' a left leaning person demands for their means of affecting policy is the very intolerance they aggressively attack others with.  We see this as soon as disagreement to their agenda is in the air: foul play indeed.

Here's the logic in general terms

1. Canadians desire to serve and love other people  (I accept this as true for the vast, vast majority of Canadians).
2. Canadians typically have different means to express their service and love towards others.
3. Generally Canadians are viewed on 2 political spectrum's: right vs. left (and everything in between). This is viewed as a contrast of more government vs. less government
3. More government vs. less has ways of expressing itself: 'means'
4. the means are typically expressed through laws, policy, studies and programs
5. The right AND left both love people! We just have different ways of expressing it.

A conclusion: we ought not to debate against people's desire to love others.  We should all accept as genuine our love for others regardless of political stripe. 

Please follow this logic; I am no expert in logic so this is quite simple:
Where A is a  person (who is either left or right)
Where B is a policy
Where C is an alternate policy to B
Where D is the generally accepted belief that Canadians en mass love others and want to best serve them

A thinks B should be done to affect D
A thinks C should be done to affect D

Simple example:
A (Person-Socialist) thinks B (creating multi billion dollar child care program) should be done to affect D  (loving and serving others).
A (Person-Conservative) thinks C (tax relief, not government programs) should be done to affect D (loving and serving others).

Since A  is a class of both left/right people AND both left and right want to affect D equally,
what remains is B vs C (i.e two competing policy ideas both aimed at serving and loving others...just B is different then C)
All too often, when the left 'brand's' the right as extremists, bigots, intolerant, haters etc, they are really saying, "B is better then C and unless you stop pursuing C and accept B, you are a "phobia-ism-ist". (By God I swear I just made up a word: phobia-ism-ist).

Neither the Conservative or the Socialist have rights to brand the other person just for thinking differently!
Left leaning policy being different then right leaning policy is no ticket for the left to brand those on the right anymore then the right can brand equally those on the left...i.e we disagree on policy then call the other party intolerant and bigoted.  By left logic, we have equal access to call the other a phobia-ism-ist. I challenge any person to come up with a logical and reasonable argument to defeat what I underlined.  I disagree with, "You think differently then me therefore you are intolerant and a hater".  Please, left learners, make an argument!

Until that happens, I propose a difference in policy is what ought to be debated and discussed!
Small 'c' conservatives, lighten up! We are too uptight! The cat's out of the bag.  Many on the Left want to brand you a phobia-ism-ist, which means "you are all things opposite of good because your policy disagrees with mine.  We both love others, but your way of loving others differs from mine.  I do not have reason and logic to defeat your point...so you are intolerant, phobic-everything, unfair, hater of equality, caveman etc. You are a Phobia-ism-ist."  So lighten up. And here is how we ought to respond when we are attacked for thinking differently then someone on the left:

Response:
-Socialists run to tolerance, acceptance and inclusiveness when creating policy, yet viciously attack in the opposite manner those who disagree with their policy.  Don't make their doublespeak your problem. Don't react emotionally or defensively. 
-Ask the socialist, "how are you demanding I am tolerant to your policy, yet you are intolerant towards mine? Who made you God?"  Would fairness not suggest you be equally open minded about my policy as you insist I am to yours?  Why does your definition of inclusiveness demand I accept your means to our end of loving others, but you reject my means as phobia-ism-ist?"  What inherently makes your means superior to my means? These are fair and honest questions that most people struggle to answer.
-Your confidence should come from alignment of personal values lived out in family work and politics.  Do this through other people partnering with you on this journey.  Let's focus more on caring for others, personal responsibility and acting in compassion then baseless doublespeak.
-When we see left leaning people struggle to extend their core principles (tolerance, inclusiveness etc) to the right, we are watching socialists demand something of others (tolerance towards their ideas) that they are not extending to conservatives (in calling those who disagree with them above mentioned names).  When socialists want something of others they are unable to provide, it is not because they are bad people.  They are trying the best with the tools they have; so don't get flustered or mad. Be an agent of help.  Try to serve the person as best you can.

Happy Easter and may you be inspired to think of ways to continually serve and grow!

Thursday, 21 April 2011

What The NDP Party Is Scared To Admit

 +    =



The NDP party of Canada is a member of the Socialist International organization!

In their 'about us' section, we see "The Socialist International works intensely throughout the year to strengthen and develop social democratic policies in the world".

Uh, how?
According to their header: Progressive Politics for a fairer world
(gasp...)


Pretty well any definition of socialism is daunting for the New Democrats.

See Link -
Socialism

Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.

How do we see this political theory acted out?
Government controlling the means of production and distribution.

Taxes/Programs/Spending/Debt is not a mere byproduct of the Socialist NDP party's policy.  It is at their very core!  They want fairness and they believe it is their role to manufacture this fairness by leveling the playing field: passing laws to take from one and give to the other.

The Socialist International organization wants fairness and hands it's mandate out to its members.  The NDP party, a faithful member then regurgitates the socialist agenda and masks it with code words (see: Watch Out For Code Words).

Their means of achieving this fairness is taxing, creating programs and spending like crazy to control the means of production and advance their utopian fairness doctrine.

Don't take my word for it, see for yourself:
The NDP wants to introduce what they're calling the fair tax scheme. The current system, they say, isn't fair and puts too much of a burden on individuals, making corporations less accountable, financially. Corporate tax breaks, says Clark, aren't transformed into jobs.
"We have the lowest corporate taxes in the G7," she said.
The NDP is also pushing for a national child care program. Child care was a serious discussion item five years ago, but it fell off the table. The NDP want to re-introduce it, not just as a discussion item but as policy.
Just like Socialist Internationals mandate: create a fair society through socialism.
Makes sense that a socialist organization wants to create it's policy through socialist philosophy.

On just about every issue, we listen to Jack talk about the government creating fairness, righting the wrongs of the free market.
20% of Canadians are voting to further this agenda?
If you are an open socialist, God bless you and for sure you are getting what you vote for when you give the nod to the NDP party.  If you are not a socialist, but thinking of voting for them, I hope this blog entry caught you like a deer in the headlights and you continue your thought process on this critical subject.
Jack Layton's hypocrisy and lack of courage is highlighted through hushing up his party's constitution (where his hidden socialist agenda would be exposed), refusing to openly admit and talk about his socialist membership affiliation, his attendance at a Socialist International event ARF Attends Socialist International Council at the United Nations and the use of the same language as renowned socialists: creating a government planned economy through fairness.

Socialism devalues people (See: Socialism Devalues Low Income People) and creates the opposite results to which it advocates.

Action Items:
  1. Don’t be fooled by the NDP party, they are socialists as the Bloc' are separatists
  2. Admit their agenda for them!  Their hidden agenda of hushing about their socialism is because if they admit it, their support will plunge.
  3. Vote for a party that upholds a free market. A free market is good because it gives choice and with choice comes freedom, but also responsibility.  
Have courage my friends and make sure people know just what dangers they are experimenting with when they tamper with an NDP vote.




The Poll

What is your view of the NDP Party of Canada?

Participate in my Poll at Compassion In Action

The NDP taketh and giveth away. You do have a choice.

So I saw this facebook add below:

Leadership You Can Trust

This NDPer is saying what?!?
You have a choice to elect NDP and literally tax those with money, to pay for your 'want'.
Socialism.
And their support is rising.
Wow, what ever happened to 'work ethic' and taking responsibility for your choices?

NDP's Rise Is Canada's Fall

And here's why.
For those parties you would consider voting for federally, could you please rank your top two current local preferences? (Committed voters only - First Preference)
The NDP Platform: It's not your fault. It's the people with money who oppress you (big corporations, big banks).  Fairness says, be taxed oh yee with money! Hand it over to us and we will give families a break. After-all, it's our job to simulate the economy, build families and create program after program.

If we lived our lives consistent with NDP policy, we would be train-wrecks.

Vote in the manner you live:

  • personal responsibility/family responsibility
  • coveting other's property is wrong; work hard and meet your own needs
  • stop looking to the government to fill every need
  • hard work produces good results, which we can own and enjoy
  • love and compassion towards others, with our money, is our choice: it makes a big impact and is incredibly efficient.

The rise of socialist support (see link) ought to stir serious discussion and call out serious concerns!
 NDP Edges Up As Liberals Slide For 2nd Day

Peace and Love.

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

What Path Do You Choose?



It's easier for humans to spend money to get what we want, then to live within their means and be content.
Furthermore, it's easier to spend money on 'something' to fill a need/void in our lives then it is to repair the heart that is crying out for a void to be filled.
Examples of attempting to fill a void are endless (expensive toys, sex, drugs, booze and food etc.).

We as humans always think that a damaged heart crying out can be repaired by the possible vices above, so we often run to these types of pacifiers: only to have a short term fix to a real problem.

On a larger scale, today's status-quo politicians often think that a damaged heart can be repaired by their programs and spending… that needs can be properly met by their programs and spending.  By taxing the population, creating laws/programs and hiring people to 'meet a need' all too often it is simply 'patching up' the situation at hand, rather than meeting the real need. All too often the broad population runs to the government programs for 'help'.

Friends of compassion, we should be perturbed (at least) that we don't know better. We allow our tax dollars to be recklessly spent and all the while we are either ignorant or apathetic as to what is going on.

Please determine what you think on the subject of government spending outside its jurisdiction. Do you believe the government programs truly meet needs, repair hearts and help people better than the private sector?
People attending various churches, I ask you: Who's more proficient at repairing damaged hearts, government via programs or you guys?
Friends of compassion, I ask you the same question: can you not do a better job keeping your money (which was otherwise taxed and designated for programs) and make a bigger impact in people’s lives than government programs?

I say, "YES we can!!!”
But then I ask Churches, private charities and friends: Why do we lie down like sheep and let the governments tax and spend billions of our dollars presuming passively, 'ah, they'll do just fine...give the money over to them!'?

Friends, let's wake up and realize what we are opting to do...we are conceding that government will choose something on our behalf (compassion to others). That is our responsibility, not theirs.

Action Item:
Invest $50 directly into meeting a need where you can make an impact.  Find other person who is trying their best but struggling.  Do this by spending time sharing and using your talents to help build that individual. Follow up with a $50 investment to help meet their need.  Then assess how you feel afterwards. Do you feel a sense of pride? Do you feel that you made an impact in someone’s life? Does the other person feel blessed?

After the above case study, mail the same amount to the government designated: "program spending".  After the cheque is in the mail, now tell me how you feel.

Which 'seems' like the more effective use of money?

In the absence of our actions, we will get a pathetic 2nd rate solution to real needs: massive, expensive and inefficient programs.  We have the option of stepping up and acting, or watching the government do it for us.

Decide with your actions, followed up with your vote.  Let's work together to bring alignment!


Monday, 18 April 2011

Liberals In Defense Mode

Please consider:




and


Duceppe said people are worried Tories with a majority might use bills introduced by individual Members of Parliament to try to criminalize abortion, bring back the death penalty or "Americanize" Canadian politics without the government having to officially introduce such controversial legislation.     

What's going on here?

·         At 40% popular support (Polltracker) it's becoming obvious a conservative majority is possible
·         Left leaning parties are looking to hold up a principle of 'conservativism' (limited government) and dramatize an extreme of that principle. Regardless that the ‘$11 billion with families dying’ is not part of any conservative government plan.  An equivalent example would be citing a liberal principle of 'government spending to help with social problems' and doing a commercial that says, "the liberal party of Canada said they believe in social spending... they plan to increase personal and corporate tax rate to 97% and massively redistribute your money because Canadian families (unsung actual liberal quote...)  ‘need our help’".   

It is just plain foolish to take a principle of the conservatives and conjure up a far-fetched, ludicrous example of that principle in action. But that is what is going on here. It would look equally foolish if the conservatives did that with any other party!

Action Points:
·         Know how to intellectually debunk these 'drama accusations' of people dying due to reckless 'right wing agenda'!
·         Know this will not slow down, but there are going to be more and more accusations against Conservatives. Be ready. Don't cry or whine.  Just reply calmly and in a friendly manner.
·         Communicate there is no evidence to tie a 'limited government' spending to a reckless destruction of people’s lives through destroying a well established (sacred) program. 
·         Communicate you are fed up with intolerant, bigoted attacks on our values, ones of limited government and accusing these values of destroying Canada and health care. 
·         Call out left leaning hypocrisy. When it's about them, they are all about tolerance, equality, sharing of ideas, accepting others regardless of their belief system.  UNLESS you are 'c' conservative, then they are the opposite of what they embody. They become vile in speech, intolerant, accusatory in attitude/words and irrationally unkind.  This is called HYPOCRISY.  It is not with all left leaning people, but a significant amount in politics and the media.  It is unacceptable and un-Canadian. 
·         The fear strategy coming out is designed to make an intellectual public debate become emotional.  They are insulting their voter base. Encouraging them to be stupid and lose themselves in the emotion of what they are saying, versus thinking through the issues.  Liberals ought to apologize to their voter base and say, "Sorry for showing a flat line picture with Harper behind it saying he will destroy lives through $11 billion in cuts. You should be making decisions based on intellect, confirmed by your emotions… not just emotion". 

Liberals, are you so desperate that you cannot make an intellectual argument anymore?  If this is about 11 billion in cuts with the conservatives, then it is equally about you taxing 97% of our money and running our lives and destroying the free market to spend it all on social programs. Is it really about that?  Come on...

Harper's belief in limited government scares left leaning politicians because it gives choice, responsibility and freedom back to families.  It limits spending, debt and programs. Something left leaning policy is terribly afraid of. So rather than making a case for their government roles, they are trying to bring the house down with Harper destroying all things sacred.

Left leaning policy does not make an intellectual argument for their role for one of a few reasons:

  1. They don't know how
  2. If they came out and said, "We believe in a quasi socialist state and we feel entitled to your money to create programs" they know people would revolt. So they mask it with, "Families are hurting and we want to invest".
  3. They feel entitled to power and your money. So really no explanation is required. On this point...consider: Daycare Abuses Still Not Made Public … complete contempt for parents responsibilities!!!!  How else is this acceptable, oh liberal? What other explanation is there but that you feel entitled to take parent’s responsibility away and make it yours?  Mothers this should chill you!  They don't need to let you know about the abuses within state childcare because it's their responsibility and therefore, why tell people who are not responsible?????  Just as I called out/predicted some time ago: Liberalism / Socialism Is Based On)


What a sad state our political system is in.

Be encouraged... the smell of desperation is our opportunity to communicate compassion and love to others without massive government intrusion.  Carpe diem, my friends: seize the day!

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain