When I was growing up in Ohio, I had absolutely no political awareness. Every time my parents voted, they’d say it was almost a waste of time. Mom was a life-long Democrat and Dad was a life-long Republican. They always said that they cancelled out each other’s vote. (In defense of my Mom, I’d like to say she was what I’d call a Truman Democrat…she understood what working for a living was like.)
I didn’t even start paying attention to politics until I moved to Tennessee in the 1980s. Even then, it wasn’t until the late ’90s that I really started to notice a few things. Until then, I never gave politics much thought and felt that there really wasn’t much difference between the two major parties.
What happened was this. Tennessee is one of seven states that does not tax personal income. It’s actually in the Tennessee State Constitution. In Article 2, Section 28, Sub section C, taxation is discussed as being levied on the value of land, other properties as valued, along with tax on merchants and other business transactions. There is no mention of taxation on personal income. What is found in this section is this: “The Legislature shall have power to levy a tax on incomes derived from stocks and bonds that are not taxed ad valorem.” (“Ad valorem” means to tax in proportion to the estimated value of the goods or transaction concerned.)
What you’ll notice in this section is that personal income is not included in the taxation plan of the State of Tennessee. There have been attempts to change this dating back to the 1930’s. While I was living there, other attempts were made in 1991, 1999, and as currently as 2002. What happened is that Tennessee had enacted a state wide medical insurance program called TennCare. However, it was badly managed and it eventually tanked. They enrolled too many people of questionable eligibility. It didn’t take long for the program fall into financial ruin. The joke was that if you had stopped for gas while driving through Tennessee, you were eligible for TennCare.
So, what to do? As with any good group of Democrats that control an entire state Legislature, they decided to enact a personal income tax. Forget this minor inconvenience that there is no constitutional provision allowing for it. Let’s not bother with the messy prospect of amending the state constitution, which would mean a state-wide referendum. No … let’s just back door it through and let the folks find out on their own.
Well, the folks found out about it before that process started and all you-know-what broke out.
The pro-tax people brought out every type of “needy” individual imaginable to tug at your heart strings. Forget the legal aspects of what they were trying to do. No, let’s focus on emotion. Damn the rule of law. And therein lies one of the cornerstones of liberalism.
Having worked with a lot of liberals, including several members of the LGBT community, I was beginning to understand just how crucial emotionalism was/is to progressives. You don’t get your way? There are legal issues involved that impedes you from doing what you want? Well, let’s just change the rules. That’ll show those damn conservatives just how wrong they are.
It’s this prevalence for an emotional focus over a constitutionally legal based policy that has come to define liberals.
The best example of this is what is going on now with immigration…or rather our lack of a cohesive, intelligent policy.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Celler Act (which was also highly promoted by Ted Kennedy), changed the way quotas were allocated by ending the National Origins Formula immigration system that had been used since 1921. This new act changed the flow of immigration to now be focused on reuniting immigrant families rather than skill based. It has contributed to the overall transformation of our country’s demographic profile, especially in the Southwest.
Flash forward to today and we have the DACA problem. The 1954 attempt at dealing with illegal immigration under the Eisenhower administration, known as Operation Wetback, would not even be considered now. As with every other attempt to fix our immigration mess, it would be labeled as “racist”. While it’s definitely true that both parties share the blame in not fixing the immigration problem, for decades, it’s now the Democrats who have created sanctuary cities; it’s the Democrats who are using people (i.e., DACA) as emotional pawns; and it’s the Democrats who, under Barak Hussein Obama, tried to hamper the mandated duty of border control officers to do their jobs. And it’s all based on emotionalism.
There’s been some discrepancy as to what President Trump actually said in a closed door meeting. Whether or not he really did call certain countries s%$tholes, is immaterial. That’s what those places are. If they were decent places, why would anyone want to leave? Even an American who doesn’t keep up with the news that often knows that immigrants come here because they know the U.S. government, by way of taxpayers, will take care of them. Their own miserable leaders in those…. uh, feces-lands, would rather pocket what wealth is available for themselves instead of helping their own people.
That’s where we get the emotional rant that “…we must do this for families and for the children.” Frankly, Americans have had enough of the emotional garbage that doesn’t match what we are seeing on our streets.
We could go on and on with further examples of liberal emotionalism versus sound policy. Thankfully, we finally have a President willing and able to take the heat that the Left dishes out daily in order to focus on what the country needs…sound, Constitutionally based policy that promotes and protects American citizens first.
And remember, even Heaven has a wall. (Rev. 21:12)
photo credit: Fibonacci Blue Tea Party rally to stop the 2010 health care reform bill via photopin (license)