What Does Let It Burn Mean?

As one of the first, if not the first, people to say Let It Burn, I’m clearly thrilled with the growing chorus of voices joining the movement.

Like any movement, there are true believers and Let It Burn In Name Only (LIBINO) types. Since it’s never too early to purge a movement of its impure elements, let us lay out some key principles of Let It Burn.

1- America isn’t a conservative country anymore and hasn’t been for a while. Yes, you can point to lots of surveys that show people identify themselves as conservatives and they even say government should be doing fewer things.

The fact is, a conservative country doesn’t “accidentally” elect Barack Obama twice. It doesn't continue to send Democrats to the Senate who voted for ObamaCare and force the GOP to run as the saviors of Medicare.

People want the ever expanding welfare state, they simply don’t want to have to pay for it. They are happy to pretend they can “ask the rich to pay a little more” (it won't work) or to pile on debt for some generation to be born later to pay for it. What they are very clear about in their votes is...”don’t you dare touch my “free” stuff”.

One foundation of conservatism is to see the world as it is, imperfections and all, and not the way we wish it to be. Unless we can admit the reality of the country we are living in, Let It Burn makes no sense.

If you think we're just one or two tactical moves and a great candidate away from political victory, you're not in the Let It Burn camp.

2- Gabe and several commenters yesterday wondered, why isn’t Bob Corker’s “tax cuts now, entitlements later” idea consistent with Let It Burn?

The answer is simple: It’s a deliberate action is based on doing several things- raising taxes and then magically reforming entitlements.

Even if the GOP managed to "win" this standoff with Obama by generating more revenue through tax reform than hiking tax rates, who cares? We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.

“Let It Burn” is about inaction. There’s no point in trying do anything that avoids going over the fiscal cliff/sequestration. Remember, the deal that got us to this point was agreed to by House Republicans, Senate Democrats and signed by Obama. That’s as bi-partisan as it gets. I’ve heard from squishy low information voters, Obama and the media that “bi-partisan problem solving” is the Holy Grail of politics. Well, here it is.

Will it lead to massive disruptions? Yes. That’s the point. The current system is rigged against conservative. We should play no part in its perpetuation. If you can’t win the game, concede and start new one. That’s the heart of Let It Burn.

This isn't some petty "I lost so I'm taking my ball and going home" tirade. This is what people want. It's simply not sustainable. If we can't stop them, we don't have to continue to enable them either.

Bill Kristol has a column attacking the Wall Street Journal for opposing any tax hikes. John Podhoretz challenges any conservative to argue with it. Well, I just did.

What Podhoretz should have done is challenge any Republican to argue against Kritol’s analysis. That can’t be done in a serious way.

We need to start disassociating conservatism from the GOP. We’ve tried it for 30 years. It hasn’t worked.

We’ve tried to save the country from the folly of expanding liberalism and the country said, “we don’t want to be saved”. Let It Burn just means letting them have what they want and rebuilding later.

After 2010 I had some hope that we might be able to turn this massive welfare state around. The full implementation of ObamaCare means that isn’t going to happen. At least not absent a total collapse of our fiscal house of cards. Let It Burn isn’t an option, it’s an eventuality. The questions are will we be complicit in it any longer and do we want to delay it? I say no. Let the liberals own it. Very few things are made better by delaying the day of inevitable reckoning.

What makes you think that the Americans want a constitutional Republic?

So if we only had the right hands on the control of the government gone wild, we could step back from the abyss? I think you underestimate how hard American and many on FR will oppose your efforts.

To bring the situation under control, promises made by the government to the people will necessarily be broken. Looking at a government one tenth the size of present government may allow us to keep a few of the promises to the most destitute.

In 1950 every retiree on social security was supported by 15 active workers. By the end of 2010 there were only 3.3 workers for each retiree. The government believes there will only be two per retiree by 2025. A Wall Street Journal editorial a couple weeks ago highlighted the fact the government is facing not a $16 trillion debt but an $87 trillion debt if you take into account the unfunded liabilities of social security, Medicare and Medicaid. If you fast forward 20 years until all the boomers are retired that soars to $202 trillion according to Boston University.

So if we only had the right hands on the control of the government gone wild, we could step back from the abyss?

Actually, YES! For too long, we have been been fed TV "Novocaine" shows with no real ADULT conversations taking place about the actual State of our Union. Can't count on the Democrats because they will call the sky blue when they can benefit and then will turn around and call the sky green when they see benefit. And the Republicans can't figure out how to lead even when handed the whole thing! The years of 2005 and 2006 were a CLEAR opportunity for real reform. Instead, Bush led with SS reform and the Senate Repubs stabbed him squarely between the shoulder blades. Then the Repubs spent like Democrats.

During the run up to this election, I did hear from MANY people that desired a better choice between Obama and Romney.

The old analogy of conservatives being the last centurions guarding the walls of freedom and civilization, is now officially retired.

That our constitutional government has been overthrown is evident in that it's defenders are now viewed as barbarians at the gates, and now it is socialists/unions/LGBTs/jihadis who are the guardians of "civilization" and "freedom" according to their new twisted definitions.

They have made us out to be the barbarians. And we apologize and try to reason with propagandists that we are not barbarians, as though liars cared about the truth.

Personally, I no longer see it as a conflict of ideas or an electoral contest. I see it as a war. And the advantage in being accused unjustly, is that an insecure enemy accuses you of being that thing he's most afraid of you becoming. They accuse conservatives of being right wing fanatics, because conservatives truly becoming right wing fanatics is a liberal's worst nightmare, and we apologize and try to prove we are moderate and willing to negotiate in response. That is a mass media guilt trip and a losing strategy.

They consider us the backward, the neanderthals, the Visigoths and Vandals who want to destroy their totalitarian socialist Utopia. And we try to reason with them that we are not, or worse, submit into depressive silence under their diatribes.

I am a barbarian and a threat to your civilization? Fine. Thank you. I approve of the label, and accept the role. I AM a barbarian, and a threat to your communistic-faggotry-jihad so-called "civilization". Rather than being ashamed that you mistake me for what you fear, I embrace and devote my whole self to becoming what you fear, because I am your enemy, and you should fear me.

My income went underground years ago. This depraved emperor may not miss my few tax dollars, but it pleasures my barbarian soul that I prosper while he fails. I threw out my TV and the Hollywood media machine can grind on without my dollars for it's grease. Not long after 9-11 I stopped funding OPEC and began walking almost everywhere, the Islamic jihad may not have slowed it's atrocities, but I am stronger and healthier and more independent. I practice martial arts regularly, and the people you may think own the streets, don't own the piece I occupy when I walk by, and I change the environment to some degree with my presence. I contribute nothing to this corruption in Washington seeking to twist our minds, co-opt our freedoms and feed on our American soul like the vampiric parasites that they are. So you can add outlaw, and crazy, too, if you wish.

I don't care if what I do changes one thing outside myself. I am the one who is changed. Changing into what, I don't know, but backward and barbarian is what they call us, as if it is the worst thing in the world...and for these enemies to the "backward" America we've lost, the worst thing in their world is what I want to become. What I do may not change anything, outside of me, but it does change me, changes me like the fire and hammering of steel at a blacksmith's forge, and I leave my final shape or result to The Master, if He gives me the strength and purpose for this I leave it to Him what tool I in the end become to suit His purpose.

I embrace my inner barbarian, wild and free as a Viking setting foot on the shores of a new land. Down with a corrupt, venal, vile, liberty crushing "New Rome". God Bless a renewed America.

“I did hear from MANY people that desired a better choice between Obama and Romney.”

A better choice would be statesmen/women instead of politicians. I think they are an endangered species if not extinct. Politicians got us in this mess and more politicians or different politicians won’t get us out.

Running on a platform of ending SNAP, SS, SSI, Medicare, Medicaid and disbanding HUD, DHS, DOE, Interior department, department of Labor, Department of Education might win an election if held on Free Republic, but a citizenry that has elected President Obama as it’s leader twice?

I have a low mileage car that was only driven to church on Sundays to sell you. Zero down and 2 years the same as cash.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.