Share This Article with a Friend!

Why Ideologues Are So Dangerous

My big problem with Obama is he’s an ideologue — a leftist ideologue.
And he doesn’t let facts get in the way of his ideology.

Average annual GDP growth under Obama has been 1.53% — the worst of any President since Herbert Hoover.

Only Hoover is worse.

A rational person would look at this and begin to conclude that perhaps his theories are wrong and proceed to make adjustments. But not Obama.

He proceeds with his socialistic schemes (most notably the implementation of ObamaCare) regardless of actual results. Facts never alter the thinking of an ideologue.

Obama rammed ObamaCare into law without a single Republican vote — not one.  Not even Olympia Snowe.

That’s what ideologues do.

They don’t care what anyone else thinks or wants.  They just do what they want.

No massive piece of legislation, such as ObamaCare, can succeed without a single vote from the opposition party.

But Obama doesn’t care.  He just wants what he wants — which is why I believe ObamaCare will soon become like the Iraq War for the Democratic Party.

Iraq was a mistake. There were no weapons of mass destruction — not that we could find.  That was the premise behind that war.

Yes, Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator.  He was also a counter to the even-worse Iran and a bulwark against al Qaeda, which he hated.  We supported Saddam in his war with Iran.   So the Iraq war was a huge error — a very costly error in terms of blood and treasure.  America is worse off today because of the Iraq War.

Those are the facts.

The GOP paid dearly at the polls in 2006 and 2008 for that error.

I believe Democrats will pay dearly at the polls in 2014 and 2016 for the ObamaCare mistake — as this mistake becomes more apparent to voters.

Obama believes in using government power to redistribute wealth. He has said over and over again that this is his goal.  He promised to “fundamentally transform” America.

This suggests that he’s no fan of America — at least not a fan of America as it was founded.  He attacks capitalism.  He attacks producers.  He loves to point out all that’s wrong with capitalism.

Rarely does he praise our free-enterprise system that has produced so much prosperity.

If I were to tell my wife that my goal is to “fundamentally transform” her, I doubt she would take that as a compliment.  I doubt she would interpret that statement as any indication that I love her. Can you really love something that you want to “fundamentally transform“?

One tenet of conservatism is to be very careful to try to fix something that’s not broken.  We believe in, first, doing no harm.

Conservatives tend to respect tradition more than liberals do because conservatives respect the accumulated wisdom of the ages.

We have learned a lot over the thousands of years of Western Civilization about what works and what doesn’t work.  So conservatives are reluctant, for example, to change the definition of marriage.

We think marriage can only be between a man and a woman, that there are good reasons for that, and that this institution has worked well for thousands of years.  But Obama and the Left want to throw all that out the window for what they think is right — to expand marriage to include gay marriage.

Now, perhaps not much harm will come from that.  Who knows?  But why throw thousands of years of tradition out the window on a whim?

The reason the state has an interest in marriage is because of children.  If children were not the natural result of marriage, the state would not have much of an interest in the institution.

Conservatives are conservatives because we know we don’t have all the answers. We’re not ideologues.  We look at what has worked up until now and we favor that, until another idea comes along that proves to work better.

But Obama is not that way.  He says he wants to “fundamentally transform” the most successful nation in human history.  Why?

Why not just tweak a few things here and there to make America work perhaps a little better — like what the NFL does every year. Why “fundamentally transform“?

That’s the language of an ideologue.

The NFL owners don’t want to “fundamentally transform” football into a new game.  They love the game. They try to fine-tune the rules here and there to make the game better, to preserve the game.  Sometimes they succeed.  Sometimes they fail and find they have to change the rules back to the way they were.

That’s the conservative approach to public policy.

Click here for Part I of the series, Why I’m a Conservative, Not a Libertarian

Click here for Part II of the series, We Do Need a Social Safety Net

Click here for Part III of the series, What a Conservative Social Safety Net Would Look Like

Click here for Part IV of the series, The Guiding Theme of American Conservatism

Click here for Part V of the series, True Conservatism Must Be Grounded in Reality

Share this

Conservative objectives

Conservatives, in all countries of the western world, have stod for and support traditional values. By traditional I mean values prevalent in western civilization until the second world war, and the values for which the first and second world war were fought. Unfortunately, in America, the majority is about to lose its hold on society. I think the left has found a way to hack into voting machines, so they can hold on to power for ever and defeat traditional values. Please investigate this point of view.

Mano Govindaraj