Friday, January 4, 2008

Change just for the sake of change - or something more?

Pundits, and the winners, say the outcome of the Iowa primaries show that people want ‘change’. Is that true? Do people want change? I wonder what changes people might want.

Is it the ‘poor’ that want change?

Well, according to surveys reported by The Heritage Foundation, 43% of all ‘poor’ actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio. Only 6% of poor households are overcrowded. Two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
  • 80% have air conditioning; compared to 36% of the entire population in 1970.
  • 97% have color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
  • 78% have a VCR or DVD player; 62% have cable or satellite TV reception.
  • 89% own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.
  • Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31% own two or more cars.
  • 92.5% of the poor report their families have “enough food to eat,” while less than 2% say they “often” do not have enough to eat.

Could it be that the ‘non poor’ want change? I don’t see how since they must be living better than the ‘poor’.

Then who is it that wants change?

It’s the Democrats and liberals that want change. They have been out of power too long to suit them; after all, until the Gingrich political revolution they were in power for forty years and most assume power is their birthright.

Finally Republicans came to control the legislature and the presidency. In exercising their right to govern according to conservative principles they were thwarted by many in the majority overcome by the desire to be liked by liberals. The Republican leadership fell into cowardice after Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay were removed by a relentless liberal press. In this they were also aided by a president who wanted to ‘get along’ with an intractable Democrat foe; an enemy of good sense and of the Constitution - an enemy who resides in Congress and the judiciary.

A weak senate leadership refused to fight against the Democrat filibuster tool which too often led to ‘compromise’; meaning, acceptance of the Democrat version of legislation. How could conservatives have predicted a Republican president would accept the McCain-Feingold bill and a Republican president and Republican Senate leaders would seek open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants?

Yes it’s time for a change; not the kind that talking heads on television say; it’s time to elect real Republicans that stand for conservative principles, not so-called Republicans just a bit to the right of the extreme liberals seeking the presidency.

No comments: