Liberal Bridge Building

The truth of the matter is that liberals SUCK at bridge building. WSJ:

In other words, a typical experiment in liberal bridge building. Start with an enterprise—an Islamic Center near Ground Zero—bound to upset some people. Lecture those with opposing views about tolerance and respect for the Constitution. Have the man at the center suggest on CNN that if he doesn’t get his way, innocent Americans will find themselves “under attack.” Finally, declare yourself shocked, shocked, to discover your plans have provoked large-scale public opposition and not a few crude rejoinders.

It’s ironic, no? Liberals, and their talk of understanding and tolerance, really suck at getting people to come together.

How different their approach (not to mention their results) is from that of George W. Bush, who could visit a mosque while the ruins of the Twin Towers were still smoldering, remind us that Muslim-Americans are free and equal citizens, and talk about how ordinary Muslim moms and dads wanted for their children what we want for ours. Maybe it had something to do with his being clear about the fight. Whatever the reason, when this “cowboy” was in the Oval Office, we didn’t have prominent politicians campaigning against mosques, Qurans being desecrated, or Gen. David Petraeus having to issue warnings about the consequences of such actions.

I miss that cowboy.
*****

Rewarding politically correct capitalism. Tarp 2:

[T]he Small Business Lending Fund would allow the Treasury Department to make up to $30 billion in credit available to small community banks at varying rates of interest: The more politically conforming loans the banks make, the less in interest they pay. Banks that “plan to provide linguistically and culturally appropriate outreach” would receive special consideration, of course, as would banks that are “minority-, veteran-, and women-owned and that also serve low- and moderate-income, minority, and other underserved or rural communities.”

So, why do some “community” banks need money?

In most cases, it is because they made a big batch of imprudent real-estate loans that went sour when the housing bubble burst, and now nobody but the government is willing to invest in their sinking ships. In many additional cases, these banks put profitability on an equal footing with the pursuit of some social mission, be it the expansion of credit to low-income communities or the creation of green jobs, and this “double bottom line” business model proved unsustainable. These banks have shown themselves to be remarkably poor stewards of capital; the Democrats nevertheless wish to reward them for their politically correct capitalism.

They choose poorly. But, let’s give them some more money so they can continue-on with their good works.

All this reminds me of the history reading I did with my youngest children regarding the history of Georgia. James Edward Oglethorpe was a “social reformer.” An early advocate, I imagine, of today’s social justice. He looked around the streets of London, and didn’t like what he saw. The poor, the drunken. The underserved in today’s lingo. He wanted to turn these folks into productive folk.

A “planned society”, the idea was to get these folks to Georgia, where they would plant mulberry trees and build a silk industry. But, the mulberry trees that grew in America were the wrong type (oopsie) and the silk worms didn’t do well.

One great reason why the colony did not at first prosper was that the colonists were not enterprising men. Many of them had fallen into trouble in England and had become debtors because they had not the knack of getting on in the world; and moving to Georgia had not changed their characters.

The trustees, after twenty years’ trial, gave up their charter to the king, and Georgia became a royal colony, in its laws and form of government resembling the other colonies. More emigrants came, and gradually Georgia entered on a prosperous career.

AFTER the social justice plan was basically abandoned.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

One Comment on “Liberal Bridge Building”

  1. Steve B Says:

    Why don’t more people see this? It’s basically protection money. Tax and fee businesses to the point where they almost can’t remain solvent, then promise them grants and tax breaks (from the very taxes you imposed on them in the first place), in exchange for their compliant obedience to your social agenda.

    I’d hate to have to see Luigi here have to forget to protect this place, and for something untoward to happen, if you are catchin my drift. Yeah, be a crying shame. So you won’t be late on a payment again, capice?

    Serfs, bought and paid for.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: