Jesus is just alright with the dems.

In the Mitchell Daily Republic today, there’s a huge article by reporter Kimberly Kolden on the Grassroot Democrats putting up a billboard to say how they are just like Jesus. You know, the “Jesus cares for the poor-So Do We” billboards. Actually, they are a pretty good attention getter – as evidenced by the big article.

I thought they (the GD’s) did a pretty good job explaining their position. And they also noted that they’ve got 8 of those things around South Dakota, mostly in Sioux Falls. This is not new news. What caused me to stop and write about it was a quote in the article from Roger Berggren, the Grassroot Democrat Executive Director. His quote?

“Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Change the policies of our government and maybe Americans will never have to go hungry” he said. “We believe that taxes are a dividend, or investment in our country. The government (when) spending our dollars should be focused on our values. By spending some money and changing people’s views of values, we can develop a better domestic policy to help keep the disadvantaged out of destitute poverty.”

Wow. To me, this shows why Democrats continue to have problems in South Dakota. They just don’t get it. For those who prefer the actual quote as opposed to the bastardized version, it is as follows:

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." -- Maimonides

What does government policy have to do with self sufficiency? I also disagree with the assertion that taxes are a dividend, or an investment in our country. They are what the people pay for the operation of our system of government. (Just like now, as in the time of Jesus).

The problem gets to be when Government tries to do too much, and requires more and more funding to do things that are not the business of government. The philosophical question is where to draw the line. Of course we don't want people to starve, but at what point should they be self sufficient? If I had the answer to that age old question, I'd be a rich man.

That brings us to the part of the quote that's kind of interesting coming from the other side of the aisle: "By spending some money and changing people’s views of values, we can develop a better domestic policy to help keep the disadvantaged out of destitute poverty."

So, it's the opinion of the grassroot democrats that government should spend money to change people's views? Check out this article from January. It seems that when a conservative commentator Armstrong Williams was paid to promote No Child Left Behind, that's viewed by Democrats as bad. But to spend tax dollars to change people’s views of values and develop "a better domestic policy" is A-ok according to the Grassroot Dems?

Kudos to the GD's for at least contemplating the issue of how to remedy the problem of the working poor. With two of our nation's poorest counties within our state's borders more people need to consider the challenge.

But in the same breath, the GD's need to consider the belief of most South Dakotans, including myself - In the words of Ronald Reagan - Government is the problem, not the solution.