Mitt Romney --- A Jello Conservative
Mitt Romney's comment that he was "not concerned about the very poor" because they have a safety net, unfortunately, showed that he is not a true constitutional conservative. His 'conservative' core seems like jello.
His statement about the poor showed that he accepts big government handouts and subsidies. In doing so, we know that he accepts the liberal/socialist/marxist premise that "man is his brother's keeper." That is, he accepts the notion that government's role is to take money from those who earn it, and "redistribute" that money to special-interest groups who vote politicians back into office (under the guise of "helping" the poor).
I wish Mr. Romney had clearly stated that we are NOT our brothers' keeper, unless we individually make that decision to help our fellow-man with personal, uncoerced charity. I wish he had clearly stated that no government has the right to force us to be our brother's keeper by putting a tax and regulation gun to the heads of Americans who work hard, earn money honestly, and should have the right to keep what they earn.
So-called government 'entitlement' subsidies turn compassion into compulsion. Charity does not mean being forced to send a check to the IRS to pay for a stranger's unearned benefit, no matter how "poor" that recipient is. One person's alleged "need" for support does not justify theft of someone else's hard-earned money. "Need" does not justify theft of your neighbor, with government acting as the fence for stolen property.
For example, what do we mean by an economic "right" such as the alleged right to an education? A "right" means that a person makes a claim on the rest of society (other Americans) to give him some product or service he wants, regardless of whether he can pay for it or not. For example, if we claimed that everyone has a right to a car, that would mean if someone couldn’t afford a car, government would give that person the money to buy it (the payment might be called a car voucher).Continued on the next page