One very sad aspect of human frailty is that people will believe something if they hear it repeated often enough. Studies have shown that some of the most outlandish statements, when repeated often enough, began to sound reasonable and even factual to some people. Thus, the proverb and effective propaganda tool, “a lie repeated often enough becomes truth.”
Personally, I am simply astounded by the constant refrain that “liberals are for the poor, and the conservatives are for the rich.” And, more astounding than the fact that this is repeated almost incessantly during an election year is the fact that people actually believe it’s true.
A politically liberal woman once told me that during a flood crisis in her local town, the only people who were out helping their neighbors were liberals, and the conservatives were all at their own homes staying warm and dry. When I asked how she knew this was true, she said, “Because the liberals are for the poor and less fortunate and they give more, but conservatives are only out for what they can get for themselves.”
Did she have data and documentation to support her assertions that the people who were shown on the local TV news who were sandbagging areas to protect homes from the rising waters were in fact liberals, without a conservative in sight? Nope.
Did the news media poll these hardworking folks about their political persuasion? Nope.
Had this women gone out to the locations of disaster and ask these generous people if they were liberals or conservatives? Nope.
Because Everyone Knows It’s True
So, how did she know that only the liberals were helping their neighbors while the conservatives were home helping themselves? Easy. She had been told thousands of times by the liberal media and her parents that, “The liberals are for the less fortunate, while the conservatives are for the rich.” When I asked her specifically how she knew that the “liberals are for the poor, and the conservatives are for the rich,” she said, “Because everyone knows it’s true.”
Interestingly, this women lived only a couple of miles from the rising water where people were working around the clock to help their neighbors. Did she and her husband, both extreme liberals, drive the three or four miles in their expensive car and sandbag and help the “less fortunate"? Nope. They went home to their dry house each night after work and watched the “less fortunate” on the local news.
So, What Have you Done for the Poor Lately?
It gets better. I began talking with her about charitable donations, and she informed me that if it were not for the generosity of liberals like her, the less-fortunate would be far worse off than they are now. So, I asked her how much money her family had given in the last 12 months to charitable organizations. This liberal, for-the-less-fortunate woman, told me, with a sense of superiority, that she and her husband had given $20 to a charity. And, that each year they give to this same charity when they are called upon to do so.
Another liberal whom I know was complaining that he didn’t want Republicans in political office because, as he said, “They are only for the rich. The Democrats are the only ones who care about the poor.” Not quite believing what her husband was saying, his wife rolled her eyes and blurted out that they themselves had not given a dime to a charity for more than ten years.
The Same Old Rhetoric in the 2004 Election
During this last presidential election, we all once again heard the same old rhetoric coming out of the liberal media and from many misinformed souls who claimed, in essence, that Kerry voters were more generous than those tightfisted Bush voters, that liberals care about the less fortunate, and conservatives only care about themselves and their rich friends. (By the way, I’m not rich, and I have no rich friends.)
So What Are the Facts?
According to the 2004 "Generosity Index" published by the Catalogue for Philanthropy, the most generous people live in the “red states,” and the least generous people live in the “blue states.”
Excuse me? What was that Again?
The states that went for George W. Bush had more generous people in them than did the states that went for John Kerry. How can that be? We all know that “The liberals are for the less fortunate, while the conservatives are for the rich.”
The Seven Most Generous States were Red (Bush states)
According to Generosity Index of 2002, the charitable contributions in 2002 showed that the seven most generous states are red states: Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama. These states all voted for George W. Bush.
The Seven Least Generous States were Blue (Kerry states)
Well, I wonder then which were the seven least generous states. Well, let’s see: New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and Massachusetts. All blue states, all John Kerry states. (See Generosity Index 2002)
Religious Conservatives and Their Contributions
Over the years, if one would care to look at it honestly, it has been the religious conservatives, by and large, who have set up shelters for the poor and provided food and clothing to the poor. Churches and faith-based organizations all across America and throughout our history have led Americans in charitable giving.
Liberals Are Active Too
Recently, however, a liberal group in my area (Seattle and its environs) has been soliciting funds for their charitable organization. Are they out to help people, the “less fortunate"? Well, not exactly, Their goal? To save some whales. For a charitable donation of just $500, they can continue their philanthropic work of saving whales. Homeless humans get less than our “seagoing cousins.”
Assertions and Documentation
Some may object to this “documentation” and my obvious over generalizations. However, I believe that conservatives are, in fact, more generous and helpful to the “less fortunate.” I am sure that some would argue that it is more complicated than I have implied here, and that is undoubtedly true. However, at least this documentation has some “teeth.” The only “documentation” that I have ever gotten from the liberal camp went something like this, “Because everyone knows it’s true.” (Not everyone, honey.)
==========================
A Reader Responds:
Whatever the statistics, there are certainly good and bad people on both sides. The problem with the ultra liberal types is that they confuse generosity with government involvement. A liberal wants generosity to be a part of his or her political platform--which is often nothing more than another out-of-control government program--while the conservative wants the government to stop being so "generous" with the taxpayers money! Conservatives would rather have the government give back some of their money so that (if they so choose) they have more money to be generous with.—Dr. Carmen DiCello
Ric's Response: True, Carmen. And just one of those out-of-control government programs that the liberals push is abortion at tax payers' expense.
Send comments about this, or any, Coffee Talk to Rick Walston at: CES @ ColumbiaSeminary.edu
(Please note that you will need to take the spaces out before and after the @ sign . . . this is placed this way to avoid spam emails.)
