During the 2008 election, Barack Obama purchased 30 minutes of commercial television time. During that time, he introduced the country to four families who were having a difficult time making ends meet.
He gave them the airtime to share with us their problems and challenges and remind us of how tough the economic times in our country are. This seemed very in step with the approach of liberal politicians – always lamenting the worst.
Given the same 30 minutes of airtime, I would have used that time to introduce the country to four families who, despite the challenges we’re all facing, found ways to make ends meet and succeed.
By introducing four families who, through their own initiative and perseverance, managed to beat the economy and maybe thrive in those conditions, they might have inspired Americans to overcome.
There were certainly no shortages of stories in the news about how bad the United States economy had gotten in America. The presidential election was the perfect opportunity to inspire the nation and show them that recovery was not only possible, but they had a plan to do it.
In general, liberal politicians are prone to pointing out the negative.
Even in a thriving economy, they’ll find the story of a person who lost their job or doesn’t have healthcare or can’t afford to make ends meet with their family circumstances.
At the same time, conservatives will show you people who’ve overcome significant odds to become successful. And not always success defined by money, but by happiness or security.
Conservatives don’t define success in dollars. They define success by the feeling of accomplishment and fulfillment one gets from starting a business or working a job that allows a person to realize their potential as a person. In a word, conservatives define success by happiness.
Liberal pundits and politicians, too, I believe would define success by happiness. The difference is that liberals believe happiness has one, universal definition to which we all adhere. They believe there can be no happiness until everyone is happy.
But happiness is in the eye of the beholder. Some may not feel successful until they’ve made their first million or were able to purchase that Porsche, while others may simply consider having no debt, or finding a job, to be success.
Liberal politicians, bent on fairness, believe that happiness can only be had when everyone is making x amount of money, working x amount of hours, owning an x-sized house and driving x kind of car. To have any more is excessive and greedy (unless you’re the one laying out the rules), and to have any less is criminal (and the fault of conservatives).
If a person is laid off from a company, a conservative will tell them that this is an opportunity to pursue something better and maybe even start their own business. Others will tell that same person about the injustice of the greedy corporation, wonder how much money the CEO is making and look for a way to sue that company.
Basically, in very general terms, conservatives try to elevate all people and push them to be their very best while liberal politicians seek fairness by bringing down those who’ve achieved too much – by their definition – to a level at which things are now fair and we can all feel equal.