Having recently received this email I thought it best to share it with my friends on the other side of the (political) aisle. Your comments are always encouraged. Larry G.
Father-Daughter Talk A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth. She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn’t even have time for a boyfriend, and didn’t really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying. Her father listened and then asked, “How is your friend Audrey doing ?” She replied, “Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus. College for her is a blast. She’s always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn’t even show up for classes because she’s too hung over.” Her wise father asked his daughter, “Why don’t you go to the Dean’s office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.” The daughter, visibly shocked by her father’s suggestion, angrily fired back, “That wouldn’t be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I’ve invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!” The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, ” Welcome to the Republican Party.”
LOL..good job Larry. It’s a great example of what Republican’s were like a long time ago. I wish they would go back to those days, and quit trying to out Dem the Dem’s.
In order for this little story to make sense, one would have to believe that poor people are all lazy and don’t work hard, and all wealthy people work twice as hard as they do. I truly don’t believe that Paris Hilton works twice as hard as a factory worker who lives in the projects. And I suppose that somebody who grew up with nothing, didn’t have a good family, and had to struggle for everything is just much lazier than the kid with a silver spoon in his mouth that got into the family business through nepotism. Come on, people!
Larry, I thought you were recruited to provide “local political coverage”. Why are you throwing out these junior hi debate topics – and providing no views/opinions?
Come on folks! This story has nothing to do with “poor people” or Paris Hilton. It’s all about being forced to share the results of your hard work and success with those who sit on their behinds and expect the “State” to equalize things.
You have nothing to worry about. The Rep’s are now committed to bigger and better “social programs” than the Dem’s. The only thing you have to fear is the effects of those programs on you, and what you’ve worked so hard to accumulate. Wait until socialized medicine becomes a reality, then you’ll understand.
Anonymous #3.
A long time ago I learned that you cannot please all of the people all of the time.
Art Pedroza does not direct my choice of topics nor how I am to respond to people like yourself.
I would argue that the bulk of my posts have been about the local political scene. Although I endorsed Janet Nguyen in that high profile race I stayed on the sidelines as there was more coverage than needed from other blogpen writers living in the impacted area.
As stated before. You are not obligated to read or comment on my reports. That’s your choice.
Have a great day!
The analogy breaks down because it assumes everyone starts from the same place. The girl in question getting worse grades has the same opportunity as better achieving counterpart. The lower achiever chooses to spend her time on activities other than her studies.
If this is supposed to be a sociological example if fails miserably. As has been already pointed, not everyone starts from the same place. In some if not all cases a better analogy would be that most from our lower stratas of society are playing a game of Monopoly where their opponent already owns half the board.
Why is it that the hard worker is expected to come from the wealthy family and the social butterfly with low grades come from a low income family?
Class and income was not mentioned in the story.
Poster 7,
Good point! The ladies in the “Girls Gone Wild” commercials look like well-maintained blonds to me…
Poster 3,
Larry does fine work here at the OJ and we are quite proud he is part of our blog team. Now that I am not a Reep, we need his perspective more than ever!
That’s an “F” of an analogy. It wouldn’t get past a highschool class, much less a college one. What this sillines demonstrates better than anything else is the bankruptcy of so-called conservatism. The Rush Limbaugh, Mike savage, Ann Coulter crowd are not conservatives, they are right-wingers, authoritarian in their attitude toward public debate and expression–except when it comes to themselves. This “analogy” is fit for their radio scripts: it’s simplistic and distorted and prejudical. If the assignment had been to write a self-congratulatory and shallow analogy for an authoritarian right-wing radio broadcast, you’d get an “A”. I don’t see a shred of the local and political in this, except that we might, by way of your analogy, conclude that you regard the poor of Orange County as drunks and stupid, while the wealthy in the county are our industrious and sober lot. And that, as they say, is as big a hunk of BS as anyone will offer on this blog. You ought to listen to your daughter. If she is carrying that kind of GPA among tough professors, then she has alot to teach you. Man! What a depressing post to read on a perfectly good Sunday. You’d think we’d be beyond grade-school analogies already. The Republicans have been pushing this kind of tripe for two decades at least. You’ve run it to it’s logical extreme and run it aground. You lost the US Congress, lost a bunch of governorships, lost ground in the statehouses. It’s over. Get some ideas instead of vapid declarations of your greater wisdom expressed in biggoted analogies…
Anonymous #3 & #10 (which may or may not be the same person who choses not to use his name or an alias to distinguish himself or herself.)
The analogy, not authored by me, provides a simplistic example of today’s “entitlement” generation.
If this type of illustration helps the next generation of voters understand where we differ than it surely has value for debate.
With regard to not meeting your criteria where you “don’t see a shred of local or political” in the post let me respond by saying that there are currently 93 posts on the story about outspoken Catholic League President Bill Donohue. I don’t believe he is an Orange County resident nor is presidential candidate John Edwards.
My point is that Juice bloggers have flexibility to broaden our posts as verified by the large number of comments on that report.
Larry,
If you are going to use this as an entitlement analogy you should have said just that. You imply that democrats believe in entitlements and republicans are not. Recent events by the republican majority in congress over the last 12 years has proven otherwise. That group of fiscal conservatives entitled themselves to more than a few of other people’s dollars.
So don’t be surprised at the reaction you get when you claim republicans are this high and mighty, moralistic group.
Larry,
The piece is simplistic and misses a couple of key points.
1. The grade analogy works well in the classroom when students are assigned a group project. No one wants to carry water for the lazy student. I can also say is that that one undeserved ‘A’ will not lift that failing or ‘D’ student’s overall body of work or lack thereof that could transfer into an overall ‘A’, ‘B’, or even a ‘C’.
2. What do you call hard work? Why are some CEO’s entitled to million dollar salaries with platinum retirement packages at the expense of the other hard working employees? I guess that those working 3 jobs are lazy.
3. You may have worked hard for your money. Did you recieve your education through public education, including the university? Were you able to take advantage of publically funded grants or loans for your education? Chances are your business got some help from the government – you certainly make use of the public roads that transport you, your services, your goods to other parts of the country. Thru luck and pluck, you are Horatio Algir’s poster child… Don’t you think giving something back is in order? What is wrong with helping the next guy up the ladder of success?
Progressive Income Taxes (that conservatives hate so much) is a form of wealth redistribution. If you benefited more from the system, why not put a little more back? It can preserve social order.
Rhackett
As a fiscal conservative who believes in less government I am not happy with several alleged (elected) Republicans who serve inside the beltway during the past six years.
There is one entitlement that I do support that is found in the Amendments to our Constitution. Our fifth Amendment property rights protection that the US Supreme Court chose to overlook last summer in their 5-4 ruling in Kelo.
Larry,
You may be a fiscal conservative. But I bet you rarely if ever opposed any of those whose actions make you unhappy. Did you?
I find your opposition to the Kelo decision to be interesting. You opposed the extension of Measure M because you are opposed to mass transit via light rail. Instead you want more asphalt laid down to expand the current roadways. How do you believe the agencies tasked with expanding roadways is going to acquire the easements necessary to expand those roads?
I’m not a fan of emminent domain either. But I wouldn’t completely dismiss it. Sadly it is sometimes the only recourse.
And like I pointed out. Your analogy breaks down since it paints entire groups as being either hard working or lazy. And given the actions of the last five congress’s, your analogy has no basis in reality.
Denmother.
I will respond to some of your text.
Denmother. What do you call hard work? Many years ago I worked three jobs in order to save up to buy our first home so I know what hard work is all about. That effort included my day job an evening job and another on Sundays when others had a day off. As such I would not label myself as being lazy.
Your question #3
You bet your bippy that I worked hard for my money. And yes, I attended public schools and attended Newark College of Engineering at night during the riots when NJ National Guardsman were shooting outside the classrooms. I did not seek or accept any Grant funding for my education.
And our CA corporation did not get any government assistance.
As to using the roads. I lived in New Jersey where we paid fuel taxes along with tolls on the NJ Turnpike, PA Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.
And finally giving back. We support Teen Challenge Intl out of Santa Ana. Do you? If not you should because it is a very worthy and much needed outreach.
And lastly. I have mentored many individuals in my industry at no charge. Most recently I have supported those entering the political arena.
Just passing it forward.
Hope that addresses your concerns as to who exactly is LG who never will be found at the public troth.
Last point. Your comment about CEO compensation. It’s called risk-reward. Although I donot agree with the vast variances between those at the top from the employees on the lower rung of the corporate ladder you can do as I did and form your own corporation, work 80 plus hours a week to get it off the ground and hopefully survive the first two years when most companies fail Let the shareholders challenge the compensation if they feel it is unwarranted.
Rhackett
We had several reasons for opposing Measure M, not just light rail.
As to eminent domain. Expansion of roads for public use is permitted by the Fifth Amendment. Those of us involved in the protection of property rights will fight to make sure that “just compensation” is provided whenever ” takings” are being challenged as occurred in Riverside.
As to your first question let me respond by stating that my representatives in DC are Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.
I voiced my opposition by not voting for either of them.
Oh, let me not overlook Congressman Gary Miller. So, two out of three are from the other side of the aisle. As such, the increase in the size of our government for me is controlled by a Democratic majority.
Larry. Now you have totally let it be known to this board you have grasp on reality.
The group expanding government is the same group you claim in your story that wants to protect the achievement of the individual.
Quit while you’re ahead.
And now you’re rationalizing the use of emminent domain. I hope your ideological compadres don’t read this.
RHackett.
Perhaps you have not followed last year’s Orange County Measure A or our statewide Prop 90. Let me share where you are off the track:
Orange County Measure A. An Ordinance Prohibiting the Exercise of Eminent Domain for Private Purposes — County of Orange
294191 / 75.9% Yes votes …… 93594 / 24.1% No votes
“Shall the ordinance prohibiting the County of Orange from exercising the power of eminent domain to acquire property from a private owner, without that owner’s consent, when the purpose of the acquisition is to convey the property to another private party, be adopted?”
Simply stated we oppose “private-to-private” transfers. We do not, and cannot, oppose private-to-public for valid public purposes such as widening a road.
Mr. Gilbert –
What a totally appropriate story to demonstrate the wacko Socialist Democrats desire to steal from those who have & give to those who do not have. Personal responsiblity be damned!!
Hackett & Denmother are just angry socialists, please ignore them & keep up the good work.
They kind of remind me of my old college bumpersticker: “Want to annoy a liberal? Work hard & be happy!”