Video: Holocaust Survivor Cursed Out By Ground Zero Mosque Supporter
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/eyeblast-tv-staff/2010/08/25/video-holocaust-survivor-cursed-out-ground-zero-mosque-supporter#ixzz0xeZIAObk
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Video: Holocaust Survivor Cursed Out By Ground Zero Mosque Supporter
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/eyeblast-tv-staff/2010/08/25/video-holocaust-survivor-cursed-out-ground-zero-mosque-supporter#ixzz0xeZIAObk
Friday, August 20, 2010
The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters
The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters
Why layoff policemen, firemen or teachers first? Why indeed!
In case you haven’t noticed, America is broke…..really broke. Not only do we not have anymore of our own money, but we are fast running out of China’s and Japan’s money as well. As we continue to pile more and more debt on the backs of our great grandchildren, there are those who want us to continue deeper down the rabbit hole.
We are dealing with a government, from the federal all the way down to cities/towns, committed to trickle down ruination. Like crack addicts looking for their next fix, our representatives (a term I use loosely) will not stop the spending on their own; they need to be removed from the addiction. Translation: separate them from the money (or more bluntly, vote them out!). But politicians have willing allies in this collective downfall: public servants. The politicians and the public servants share a symbiotic relationship, one that is not favorable to the people both groups are sworn to serve, the public.
The latest crisis (never let one go to waste) we have to deal with is one that we are told will affect our firemen, policemen, and teachers. President Obama is calling for another $50 billion dollars in deficit spending to ‘save’ (translation: bailout and reward poor behavior) troubled States and municipalities. If this money is not thrown at the crisis, cities and states will be forced to lay off thousands, if not millions of Obama’s union buddies. President Obama made it a point to mention this measure was to ensure that we did not layoff vital public servants such as firemen, policemen, or teachers. In his ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ mentality, President Obama made this proclamation late on a Saturday, when no one was watching. As if you can ‘sneak’ $50 billion dollars past the America people without them noticing (not in this climate).
But why the firemen, policemen, or teachers? Why not the librarian, the part-time city clerk, or the street sweeper? Because those cuts will not scare us enough to open our wallets! Politicians are so transparent you can see the ‘lack of a spine’ on almost any given issue. Worse yet are the willing participants who immediately write letters to the editor or appear before the city council/school board (often at the urging of the very groups that would rather see us go bankrupt than give up one precious taxpayer penny), in support of reckless behavior that has jeopardized the stability of our nation and our communities. In the name of compassion, we have placed a yolk of financial servitude around the necks of the very people we profess to be helping. Compassion without discipline is merely the actions of an irrational do-gooder, and sometimes the uninformed do-gooder is their own worst enemy.
We hear tired old mantras - “It’s for the kids, It’s a tough job, they deserve a million dollars, It’s only $30.00 more a year – per household, It’s for the kids (that one deserved repeating).” There is no shame and no exaggeration that won’t be exploited. In a time when most people have not only not seen raises (including cost of living), but salary and benefit reductions, many public servants feel that are entitled to keep feeding from the taxpayer trough, and even demand that more and more be added.
The problem with public servant salaries and unfunded liabilities (healthcare and retirement funds) has been at epidemic levels for decades, but the matter only seems to garner our attention during a bad economy. Additionally, past attempts to bring our financial relationship with public employees into proper prospective has been met with a full-frontal attack by the unions that represent them. One only needs to look at every major city in America, or the chaos in Greece, to know that public employees are only concerned about their own self-interest.
The relationship between unions/public servants and the tax payer reminds me of the old fable ‘The Scorpion and the Frog.’ In the story the scorpion convinces a frog to take him across the river. At first the frog refuses, fearing he would be stung. But reluctantly the frog agrees, only after the scorpion promises not to sting the frog, proclaiming that the sting would doom them both. You know the rest. Half-way across the river the scorpion stings the frog. When ask why, the scorpion replied – “I’m a scorpion; it’s my nature.” Both sink beneath the water. Like the fable ‘The Scorpion (unions/public servant) and the Frog (the tax payer),’ the unions seem all too willing to sting the tax payer, knowing full well that it will spell doom for the both of them. And when asked why, unions reply “We are a union; it’s in our nature.”
In his 2009 book Plunder, Steven Greenhut, did an outstanding job at detailing how the mutually beneficial relationship between our elected officials and our public servants is not beneficial to the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab. Mr. Greenhut illustrates how public servants are the new elite, and how their compensation packages are unsustainable. Public servants are no longer the servants. We have made them the masters.
When these deals were first negotiated, they seemed balanced. Public employees would earn lower salaries than those working in the private sector, but the trade off were that public employees would receive a somewhat better retirement and more days off. Now, public employees get higher average pay than those in the private sector, much better benefits, and many more days off. The selfishness of many public servants (and the unions that represent them) is perverted, and shows a willful lack of understanding as to the collective crisis we all share. We are stealing from future generations and we don’t care. The questions is not how much longer will it take before we are like Greece, but how much like Greece are we already.
Live Free or Die
Reference articles:
Public employees living larger than ever as economy struggles
Public Pension Cuts, Once Unthinkable, Now On The Table
Even in Europe: Millions in the public sector to pay more for pension
For feds, more get 6-figure salaries
Budget Crisis, States Take Aim at Pension Costs
Government employees now take higher salaries than private workers
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Dismantling America
Thomas Sowell
Dismantling America
"We the people" are the familiar opening words of the Constitution of the United States-- the framework for a self-governing people, free from the arbitrary edicts of rulers. It was the blueprint for America, and the success of America made that blueprint something that other nations sought to follow.
At the time when it was written, however, the Constitution was a radical departure from the autocratic governments of the 18th century. Since it was something so new and different, the reasons for the Constitution's provisions were spelled out in "The Federalist," a book written by three of the writers of the Constitution, as a sort of instruction guide to a new product.
The Constitution was not only a challenge to the despotic governments of its time, it has been a continuing challenge-- to this day-- to all those who think that ordinary people should be ruled by their betters, whether an elite of blood, or of books or of whatever else gives people a puffed-up sense of importance.
While the kings of old have faded into the mists of history, the principle of the divine rights of kings to impose whatever they wish on the masses lives on today in the rampaging presumptions of those who consider themselves anointed to impose their notions on others.
The Constitution of the United States is the biggest single obstacle to the carrying out of such rampaging presumptions, so it is not surprising that those with such presumptions have led the way in denigrating, undermining and evading the Constitution.
While various political leaders have, over the centuries, done things that violated either the spirit or the letter of the Constitution, few dared to openly say that the Constitution was wrong and that what they wanted was right.
It was the Progressives of a hundred years ago who began saying that the Constitution needed to be subordinated to whatever they chose to call "the needs of the times." Nor were they content to say that the Constitution needed more Amendments, for that would have meant that the much disdained masses would have something to say about whether, or what kind, of Amendments were needed.
The agenda then, as now, has been for our betters to decide among themselves which Constitutional safeguards against arbitrary government power should be disregarded, in the name of meeting "the needs of the times"-- as they choose to define those needs.
The first open attack on the Constitution by a President of the United States was made by our only president with a Ph.D., Woodrow Wilson. Virtually all the arguments as to why judges should not take the Constitution as meaning what its words plainly say, but "interpret" it to mean whatever it ought to mean, in order to meet "the needs of the times," were made by Woodrow Wilson.
It is no coincidence that those who imagine themselves so much wiser and nobler than the rest of us should be in the forefront of those who seek to erode Constitutional restrictions on the arbitrary powers of government. How can our betters impose their superior wisdom and virtue on us, when the Constitution gets in the way at every turn, with all its provisions to safeguard a system based on a self-governing people?
To get their way, the elites must erode or dismantle the Constitution, bit by bit, in one way or another. What that means is that they must dismantle America. This has been going on piecemeal over the years but now we have an administration in Washington that circumvents the Constitution wholesale, with its laws passed so fast that the public cannot know what is in them, its appointment of "czars" wielding greater power than Cabinet members, without having to be exposed to pubic scrutiny by going through the confirmation process prescribed by the Constitution for Cabinet members.
Now there is leaked news of plans to change the immigration laws by administrative fiat, rather than Congressional legislation, presumably because Congress might be unduly influenced by those pesky voters-- with their Constitutional rights-- who have shown clearly that they do not want amnesty and open borders, despite however much our betters do. If the Obama administration gets away with this, and can add a few million illegals to the voting rolls in time for the 2012 elections, that can mean reelection, and with it a continuing and accelerating dismantling of America.
Thomas Sowell's Biography
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate
Obama’s Divine Comedy
Midway upon the journey of our life I found myself within a forest dark, for the straightforward pathway had been lost. – The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri
America is living its own ‘Divine Comedy,’ and as with Dante’s original story, there is nothing to laugh about. The right path has been lost to us because we lack direction. We are half-way through our collective journey with President Obama, and our country has strayed from the righteous path; we have wandered into a darkness of mystification that Obama cannot see through because he lacks the vision of a principled leader .
Leaders do not employ ‘hope’ as a methodology to enact ‘change’ at a time of crisis. Leaders put priorities into play and translate words into deeds. Leaders do not always see the exact crisis, but experience tells them what works and what does not work. Leaders know that sometimes their public perception should reflect the importance of the crisis. And for those of us who have been blessed to witness great leadership first hand know that one person’s calm is merely another person’s cluelessness. What America is witnessing with Obama is a community organizer, who is armed only with a naïve temperament, who has suddenly been thrust into a world consumed with peril.
For far too many, the gift of leadership is a greatly under-appreciated asset. The presidential election of 2008 is a perfect example of how artificial leadership skills can be greatly exaggerated to win over voters who lack insight of the true character of leadership, and recent events make it crystal clear that real, proven leadership is needed for the Office of the President of the United States. An unproven academic theory applied by untested underachievers does not make for great leadership; it only makes for dismal failure.
Leading up to the general election in 2008, time after time people pointed out that candidate Obama had never led anything, and time after time Obama supporters proclaimed that he is running a great campaign. It should be of no surprise too many that President Obama is failing at almost every crisis. Leading a campaign and leading a country are two uniquely different beast. Just because you own a cat doesn’t make you a lion tamer, and just because you convince enough people to vote for you does not mean you are ready to lead. Candidate Obama ran a seemly good campaign; President Obama is in way over his head. What would it matter if President Obama ‘showed some emotion (as some have suggested)’ when all it would be is misdirected irritation, and in no way an indication of leadership.
Watching President Obama these past few months trying to deal with the BP oil spill, North Korea’s overt acts of war, Iran’s continued defiance, the international community’s ‘ganging up’ on Israel, misspeaking (or butting in where it does not belong – Cambridge Police, Arizona immigration law), and an economy in chaos, one almost feels sorry for President Obama…almost. President Obama own narcissism and arrogance, fueled by willing enablers (from birth to oath), is how we find ourselves off the pathway of righteousness.
There are many people like President Obama. The halls of academia and the streets of despair are crowded with those who look at the world through the prism of underachievement, and believe that success can be achieved if only the bar was really as low as they thought it was. Ask the ‘you’ of 21 and the ‘you’ of 40 what it means to be a leader, and the answers would astound you. Is it any wonder that Obama’s resume of mediocrity was seen by fellow underachievers as the resume of a proven leader.
Every generation or so, America mistakenly tries to redefine what virtues make a great leader; and every time we realize that virtues such as integrity, commonsense, self- reliance, real world experience, confidence – balanced with humility, and a commitment to a cause higher than oneself are the intrinsic worth that makes a great leader.
America deserves a great leader every time they elect someone as President. But what Americans have failed to realize for far too long is that the President is nothing more than the extension of the country, and that it is the citizens that are the true leaders. In the end we must remember the straightforward path is our way out of the darkness of the forest, and as we have demonstrated in the past, leadership grows and gathers it strength from the people. It is time once again for the people to lead.
Live Free or Die
Monday, March 22, 2010
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
The Myth That This Healthcare Bill Will Help Reduce Cost
Let us be very clear, this healthcare bill WILL NOT reduce cost. President Obama and the Democrats are play fast and loose with the facts, and are merely playing a shell game. The United States Government (or for that matter, any government) is ill-equipped to provide services and goods, period. In fact, every time the government meddles in the free-market, chaos follows (remember “price control” under President Carter….how did that work out?)
A Cost-Control Mirage: Obama is telling people what they want to hear about health care, not what they need to know.
Also, there are things crammed into this bill that have NOTHING to do with healthcare:
Green Energy Schools: Funding for (high performance) green energy schools? Forget the fact we should be funding schools that perform high academically, but what does this have to do with healthcare?
Student-Loan Funding: This bill includes the complete takeover (and full funding responsibility) for all federal funding of college student loans. One, the government already screwed this program up, and once again, WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH HEALTHCARE!!!!????!!!!
We must keep push our legistaors to vote against this bill, and start over.
A Cost-Control Mirage: Obama is telling people what they want to hear about health care, not what they need to know.
Also, there are things crammed into this bill that have NOTHING to do with healthcare:
Green Energy Schools: Funding for (high performance) green energy schools? Forget the fact we should be funding schools that perform high academically, but what does this have to do with healthcare?
Student-Loan Funding: This bill includes the complete takeover (and full funding responsibility) for all federal funding of college student loans. One, the government already screwed this program up, and once again, WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH HEALTHCARE!!!!????!!!!
We must keep push our legistaors to vote against this bill, and start over.
Speech Text: You Call Healthcare Reform, I Call It Tyranny
The following is the script I used while speaking at the Americans for Prosperity event in Rochester, NH on March 16, 2010.
What a year it has been. Most of you in this room have spent the better part of this last year engaged in your government like never before.
We have had to fight so many issues, to the point of exhaustion, and no matter how hard we fight, they just keep coming. Some say it is unfortunate, that we have come to a point in our country when our representatives seem so willing to ignore, not only the Declaration of Independence and the united States Constitution, but the righteous will of “We the People……..”
I on the other hand have never been more proud of all of you, my fellow New Hampshirites, and do not look at this situation as unfortunate. Because I am going to share a little secret with you that too many in Washington seem to have forgotten, but yet each in this room knows all too well. The Constitution of the united States belongs to the people, and if those serving in our State and National capitols want to ignore that fact, then we Granite Staters are prepared to remind them.
This past year reminds me of one of the greatest clashes in our history. During the conflict at Gettysburg, standing on top of Little Roundtop, the furthest left flank of the Union Army, stood a regiment from Maine, commanded by Civil War hero Joshua Chamberlain.
The boys from Maine were the last line of defense, if the Confederates broke through there, they would overrun the rest of the Union positions.
Against overwhelming odds, Colonial Chamberlains troops pushed back wave after wave of the Confederate Army. Exhausted and out of ammo, the situation looked desperate.
In many ways that is how most of us feel today, but surrender is not an option, failure cannot not be the end result. If Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues break through on healthcare, the cause of freedom will be weaken. Because this bill is not only unconstitutional, it is un-American.
Make no mistake about it, we are in a new civil war, one without bullets, but the cause is the same………….liberty. Liberty is our unique American experience, which must include our ability to self govern and enjoy the benefits of a fair, but free market.
Thomas Jefferson said it best when he stated – “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”
We live in a disciplined democracy, wrapped in the blanket of a virtue known as a Republican form of government. Today Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues are tugging on that blanket, and we must resist with every fiber of our existence, or risk exposing future generations to the oppressive elements of totalitarianism.
Whether it is an excessive tax burden against the most productive in our society, or the central mandate that dictates the purchasing of healthcare, or face a penalty that includes prison, you and I (and millions of our fellow Americans) are fighting against the soft tyranny of a 2000 page bill that puts a far off centralized government in-between you and your doctor. I call it soft-tyranny because we are not being oppressed by the bullet but by the pen, but it is tyranny none the less.
And aiding in this attack on our individual liberty, one of New Hampshire’s own, Congresswoman Carol Porter. Never in my life did I ever believe that an assault on our Constitution would be lead by a representative hailing from the “Live Free of Die” State.
But who is this Congresswoman who would so willingly ignore her employers, you and I, for a piece of legislation that would dismantle the best healthcare system in the world and replace it with Castro-care?
Congresswoman Porter has made it her legislative mission, along with Speaker Pelosi, Senate Leader Reid, and President Obama to help reshape a “new” America; an America in their own image. An image where those in Washington believe they know what is best for you, even if you don’t.
And where does Congresswoman Porter stand on these issues, when she makes it a point, along with her colleagues, that those of us who seek real healthcare cost reform are nothing more than a group who can only say “NO.” But when you look at the record, who really has been the person of “NO?
Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to John Stephen, someone who has been instrumental in helping States, including NH, deal with their healthcare issues? “NO!”
Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to sitting NH Senator, and former-NH Congressman Jeb Bradley, an individual who has worked on healthcare issues both at the State and the national level, and seek his valuable council. “NO!”
And what about Sean Mahoney, who not only wrote one of the best articles regarding healthcare reform this past year, but talks to NH business people every single day about their struggles. Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to Sean Mahoney for insight? “NO!”
And what about the small business owner, who will be greatly affected (negatively) if the current understanding of this healthcare bill passes? Did Congresswoman Porter talk with Fenton Groen, owner of one of the regions leading construction companies, who not only lives in her district, but in her hometown? Did she ask Fenton for advice. “NO!”
And what about her continents? Has Congresswoman Porter been open to your suggestions and input on this matter. “NO!”
And how responsive has Congresswoman Porter been at looking at, and embracing, free-market solutions that would have a greater impact at addressing the true concerns regarding healthcare….availability and cost:
Does Congresswoman Porter support healthcare portability; (meaning the ability for you and I being able to not have our insurance tied down to our jobs)? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support real tax-credits to individuals to help cover the cost of Healthcare insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support health insurance vouchers for those that can’t purchases insurance, providing them with the ability to freely choose their own health insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter supported the ability for the individual to purchase any plan they want, across State lines, to help ensure maximum competitiveness (which has always helped reduce the cost). “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of individuals, small business, or non-profits to combine, allowing them to negotiate as a collective (buying in quantity always reduces the cost) to buy healthcare insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability for individuals, interested in purchasing through a health insurance collective, to contribute additional funds, tax-free, to help those in need of health coverage? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of the individual to contribute greater sums to THEIR flex plans, tax-free, and allow those flex-plans to roll over from year to year (tax-free). “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter defend your individual liberty, and allow you to determine your own healthcare fate? “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”
But let’s be fair, Congresswoman Porter doesn’t always say no. For example:
Does Congresswoman support a 2000+ page healthcare bill that she initially did not read, and to date many of her colleagues still have not read? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that Nancy Pelosi recently supported by saying – “You have to wait until the bill passes to know what is in it?” “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that directly or indirectly uses taxpayer dollars to fund abortion? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force healthcare rationing on all Americans? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will cut $500 billion dollars from Medicare? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would provide healthcare coverage to at least 8 million illegal aliens? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the CBO says will raise income taxes to 43% (from 35%) on many Americans? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will see the Capitals Gains taxes increase from 15% to 22.5%, in an already troubled economy? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force a $2,000.00 dollar increase in the average health insurance premium (according to Heritage Foundation based on the CBO analysis)? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will FORCE people to buy insurance they don’t need or want that would cost over $8,500.00 dollars? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would allow the IRS further intrusion into your life, by making them the enforcement arm to ensure that the mandatory healthcare insurance is being met by individuals? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that fines those who do not purchase health insurance 2.5% of their income? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that also mandates prison sentences should an individual not purchase healthcare and fail to pay the penalty fine? “YES!”
But guess what, she will make sure you have complete healthcare coverage when you are in prison!
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that taxes medical devices, such as pace makers, hearing aids, wheel-chairs, and artificial limbs? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that completes a government takeover and funding of all federal student-loan programs (what the hell does that have to do with healthcare?)? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will be passed without actually being voted on? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the overwhelming majority of her continents do not support? “YES!”
If this healthcare bill passes, with the help of Congresswoman Porter, the United States Congress will seize control of not only the best healthcare system in the world, but a free market entity that represents 1/6 of our economy.
If this bill passes, which when combined with the masses takeovers of other industries, such as the financial institutes and auto manufactures, Congresswoman Porter will be on record as to permitting the United States Government seizing close to 50% of our economy.
When a government talks about controlling the economy and business, make no mistake about it, what they are really talking about is controlling people. This is a concept our country, and most of our neighbors, are ill-prepared to handle, let alone support. And it is contrariety to the founding principles that made America the most prosperous nation on the planet.
“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” – Thomas Jefferson
We cannot remain silent, and we cannot be part of a generation that allowed this to happen!
A vote on healthcare will most likely come this week. Waiting until November will not help us now. November will give us a chance to restore sensibility in DC; but today, and tomorrow, and all of the days until the next election require our vigilance.
We need to make sure that the likes of Congresswoman Porter, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid, feel us breathing down their necks, see us taking to the streets in opposition to bad ideas, and they need to hear us not only in resistance, but in support of intellectual solutions that serve us and not enslave us!
And how do we stay engaged:
You support groups such as the AFP, help give them the muscle to resist.
Calls are nice but telegrams, letters, and visits to our Representative offices are better! (do not go in there as a group, but go in there one at a time.
Be an advocate. Get your friends and family engaged.
Help candidates who not only oppose those representatives that support such measures as this healthcare bill, but candidates that are prepared to offer real solutions and reforms that will help New Hampshire families, and not hurt them
Support such endeavors as Frank Guinta’s healthcare petition, and Congressman Steve King’s Declaration for Healthcare Independence.
Right letters to the editor or call talk radio. Don’t insult, simply state facts.
Stay informed and be ready to engage on principles and fact. Visit sites such as Heritage Foundation and the Hudson Institute. Arm yourself with the truth, because our liberal friends know so much that just isn’t so.
In closing I want to bring you back to the beginning of my remarks. I want to bring you back to Gettysburg and Littleround Top. When we last left Joshua Chamberlain and his men they were outnumbered, exhausted, and out of ammo. The situation looked hopeless, in many ways where you and I found ourselves now.
Chamberlain knew what we know today, surrender is not an option; failure cannot not be the end result. Against all odds, Colonial Chamberlain rallied his troops and gave them the only order he could…….fix bayonets!
Chamberlain and his men did something their enemy did not expect……… they charged down that hill yelling and screaming as one united force. I can only imagine what the enemy must have thought.
When the cause of liberty needed a victory, a small band of brothers from Maine gave us one. But it was their destiny to win that battle, as it is our destiny to win this one, because they had something their enemies did not possess………. They had the high ground and they were fighting for a principle greater than themselves.
Ladies and gentleman, the opposition has underestimated your determination and your resolve. We have the high ground, and our principles are worthy of our defense. So I say to tonight…..fix bayonets ……………charge!
What a year it has been. Most of you in this room have spent the better part of this last year engaged in your government like never before.
We have had to fight so many issues, to the point of exhaustion, and no matter how hard we fight, they just keep coming. Some say it is unfortunate, that we have come to a point in our country when our representatives seem so willing to ignore, not only the Declaration of Independence and the united States Constitution, but the righteous will of “We the People……..”
I on the other hand have never been more proud of all of you, my fellow New Hampshirites, and do not look at this situation as unfortunate. Because I am going to share a little secret with you that too many in Washington seem to have forgotten, but yet each in this room knows all too well. The Constitution of the united States belongs to the people, and if those serving in our State and National capitols want to ignore that fact, then we Granite Staters are prepared to remind them.
This past year reminds me of one of the greatest clashes in our history. During the conflict at Gettysburg, standing on top of Little Roundtop, the furthest left flank of the Union Army, stood a regiment from Maine, commanded by Civil War hero Joshua Chamberlain.
The boys from Maine were the last line of defense, if the Confederates broke through there, they would overrun the rest of the Union positions.
Against overwhelming odds, Colonial Chamberlains troops pushed back wave after wave of the Confederate Army. Exhausted and out of ammo, the situation looked desperate.
In many ways that is how most of us feel today, but surrender is not an option, failure cannot not be the end result. If Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues break through on healthcare, the cause of freedom will be weaken. Because this bill is not only unconstitutional, it is un-American.
Make no mistake about it, we are in a new civil war, one without bullets, but the cause is the same………….liberty. Liberty is our unique American experience, which must include our ability to self govern and enjoy the benefits of a fair, but free market.
Thomas Jefferson said it best when he stated – “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.”
We live in a disciplined democracy, wrapped in the blanket of a virtue known as a Republican form of government. Today Congresswoman Porter and her colleagues are tugging on that blanket, and we must resist with every fiber of our existence, or risk exposing future generations to the oppressive elements of totalitarianism.
Whether it is an excessive tax burden against the most productive in our society, or the central mandate that dictates the purchasing of healthcare, or face a penalty that includes prison, you and I (and millions of our fellow Americans) are fighting against the soft tyranny of a 2000 page bill that puts a far off centralized government in-between you and your doctor. I call it soft-tyranny because we are not being oppressed by the bullet but by the pen, but it is tyranny none the less.
And aiding in this attack on our individual liberty, one of New Hampshire’s own, Congresswoman Carol Porter. Never in my life did I ever believe that an assault on our Constitution would be lead by a representative hailing from the “Live Free of Die” State.
But who is this Congresswoman who would so willingly ignore her employers, you and I, for a piece of legislation that would dismantle the best healthcare system in the world and replace it with Castro-care?
Congresswoman Porter has made it her legislative mission, along with Speaker Pelosi, Senate Leader Reid, and President Obama to help reshape a “new” America; an America in their own image. An image where those in Washington believe they know what is best for you, even if you don’t.
And where does Congresswoman Porter stand on these issues, when she makes it a point, along with her colleagues, that those of us who seek real healthcare cost reform are nothing more than a group who can only say “NO.” But when you look at the record, who really has been the person of “NO?
Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to John Stephen, someone who has been instrumental in helping States, including NH, deal with their healthcare issues? “NO!”
Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to sitting NH Senator, and former-NH Congressman Jeb Bradley, an individual who has worked on healthcare issues both at the State and the national level, and seek his valuable council. “NO!”
And what about Sean Mahoney, who not only wrote one of the best articles regarding healthcare reform this past year, but talks to NH business people every single day about their struggles. Did Congresswoman Porter reach out to Sean Mahoney for insight? “NO!”
And what about the small business owner, who will be greatly affected (negatively) if the current understanding of this healthcare bill passes? Did Congresswoman Porter talk with Fenton Groen, owner of one of the regions leading construction companies, who not only lives in her district, but in her hometown? Did she ask Fenton for advice. “NO!”
And what about her continents? Has Congresswoman Porter been open to your suggestions and input on this matter. “NO!”
And how responsive has Congresswoman Porter been at looking at, and embracing, free-market solutions that would have a greater impact at addressing the true concerns regarding healthcare….availability and cost:
Does Congresswoman Porter support healthcare portability; (meaning the ability for you and I being able to not have our insurance tied down to our jobs)? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support real tax-credits to individuals to help cover the cost of Healthcare insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support health insurance vouchers for those that can’t purchases insurance, providing them with the ability to freely choose their own health insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter supported the ability for the individual to purchase any plan they want, across State lines, to help ensure maximum competitiveness (which has always helped reduce the cost). “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of individuals, small business, or non-profits to combine, allowing them to negotiate as a collective (buying in quantity always reduces the cost) to buy healthcare insurance? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability for individuals, interested in purchasing through a health insurance collective, to contribute additional funds, tax-free, to help those in need of health coverage? “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support the ability of the individual to contribute greater sums to THEIR flex plans, tax-free, and allow those flex-plans to roll over from year to year (tax-free). “NO!”
Does Congresswoman Porter defend your individual liberty, and allow you to determine your own healthcare fate? “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”
But let’s be fair, Congresswoman Porter doesn’t always say no. For example:
Does Congresswoman support a 2000+ page healthcare bill that she initially did not read, and to date many of her colleagues still have not read? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that Nancy Pelosi recently supported by saying – “You have to wait until the bill passes to know what is in it?” “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that directly or indirectly uses taxpayer dollars to fund abortion? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force healthcare rationing on all Americans? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will cut $500 billion dollars from Medicare? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would provide healthcare coverage to at least 8 million illegal aliens? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the CBO says will raise income taxes to 43% (from 35%) on many Americans? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will see the Capitals Gains taxes increase from 15% to 22.5%, in an already troubled economy? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will force a $2,000.00 dollar increase in the average health insurance premium (according to Heritage Foundation based on the CBO analysis)? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will FORCE people to buy insurance they don’t need or want that would cost over $8,500.00 dollars? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that would allow the IRS further intrusion into your life, by making them the enforcement arm to ensure that the mandatory healthcare insurance is being met by individuals? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that fines those who do not purchase health insurance 2.5% of their income? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that also mandates prison sentences should an individual not purchase healthcare and fail to pay the penalty fine? “YES!”
But guess what, she will make sure you have complete healthcare coverage when you are in prison!
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that taxes medical devices, such as pace makers, hearing aids, wheel-chairs, and artificial limbs? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a healthcare bill that completes a government takeover and funding of all federal student-loan programs (what the hell does that have to do with healthcare?)? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that will be passed without actually being voted on? “YES!”
Does Congresswoman Porter support a bill that the overwhelming majority of her continents do not support? “YES!”
If this healthcare bill passes, with the help of Congresswoman Porter, the United States Congress will seize control of not only the best healthcare system in the world, but a free market entity that represents 1/6 of our economy.
If this bill passes, which when combined with the masses takeovers of other industries, such as the financial institutes and auto manufactures, Congresswoman Porter will be on record as to permitting the United States Government seizing close to 50% of our economy.
When a government talks about controlling the economy and business, make no mistake about it, what they are really talking about is controlling people. This is a concept our country, and most of our neighbors, are ill-prepared to handle, let alone support. And it is contrariety to the founding principles that made America the most prosperous nation on the planet.
“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” – Thomas Jefferson
We cannot remain silent, and we cannot be part of a generation that allowed this to happen!
A vote on healthcare will most likely come this week. Waiting until November will not help us now. November will give us a chance to restore sensibility in DC; but today, and tomorrow, and all of the days until the next election require our vigilance.
We need to make sure that the likes of Congresswoman Porter, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid, feel us breathing down their necks, see us taking to the streets in opposition to bad ideas, and they need to hear us not only in resistance, but in support of intellectual solutions that serve us and not enslave us!
And how do we stay engaged:
You support groups such as the AFP, help give them the muscle to resist.
Calls are nice but telegrams, letters, and visits to our Representative offices are better! (do not go in there as a group, but go in there one at a time.
Be an advocate. Get your friends and family engaged.
Help candidates who not only oppose those representatives that support such measures as this healthcare bill, but candidates that are prepared to offer real solutions and reforms that will help New Hampshire families, and not hurt them
Support such endeavors as Frank Guinta’s healthcare petition, and Congressman Steve King’s Declaration for Healthcare Independence.
Right letters to the editor or call talk radio. Don’t insult, simply state facts.
Stay informed and be ready to engage on principles and fact. Visit sites such as Heritage Foundation and the Hudson Institute. Arm yourself with the truth, because our liberal friends know so much that just isn’t so.
In closing I want to bring you back to the beginning of my remarks. I want to bring you back to Gettysburg and Littleround Top. When we last left Joshua Chamberlain and his men they were outnumbered, exhausted, and out of ammo. The situation looked hopeless, in many ways where you and I found ourselves now.
Chamberlain knew what we know today, surrender is not an option; failure cannot not be the end result. Against all odds, Colonial Chamberlain rallied his troops and gave them the only order he could…….fix bayonets!
Chamberlain and his men did something their enemy did not expect……… they charged down that hill yelling and screaming as one united force. I can only imagine what the enemy must have thought.
When the cause of liberty needed a victory, a small band of brothers from Maine gave us one. But it was their destiny to win that battle, as it is our destiny to win this one, because they had something their enemies did not possess………. They had the high ground and they were fighting for a principle greater than themselves.
Ladies and gentleman, the opposition has underestimated your determination and your resolve. We have the high ground, and our principles are worthy of our defense. So I say to tonight…..fix bayonets ……………charge!
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Don’t Like Tea Parties, Try Coffee!
Leave it to liberals to create a counter movement in which their symbol is a beverage topped with frothy milk, and whose motto is “espresso yourself.”
Lacking even one original bone in their vegan induced, emaciated bodies, this group of beret wearing neoprogressives have decided that they need to stand up “against” the tea party movement by writing a coffee manifesto!
The founder of the “movement,” Annabel Park, a documentary film maker (big surprise, the perfect vocation for the founder of such a group) even offered a motivating rallying cry:
"let's start a coffee party ... smoothie party. red bull party. anything but tea. geez. ooh how about cappuccino party? that would really p!ss 'em off bec it sounds elitist ..."
Gee you think, elitist? Where do I sign up?
Bruce Maiman wrote an interesting blog piece, in which he suggested some items that should be part of the coffee party planks:
Lacking even one original bone in their vegan induced, emaciated bodies, this group of beret wearing neoprogressives have decided that they need to stand up “against” the tea party movement by writing a coffee manifesto!
The founder of the “movement,” Annabel Park, a documentary film maker (big surprise, the perfect vocation for the founder of such a group) even offered a motivating rallying cry:
"let's start a coffee party ... smoothie party. red bull party. anything but tea. geez. ooh how about cappuccino party? that would really p!ss 'em off bec it sounds elitist ..."
Gee you think, elitist? Where do I sign up?
Bruce Maiman wrote an interesting blog piece, in which he suggested some items that should be part of the coffee party planks:
* No sleeping until after the midterm elections
* YOU TYPE EVERYTHING IN CAPITAL LETTERS
* Ability to pass people on the highway without driving in your car
* Rename your kids "Cappuccino," "Americano" and "Mocha Latte"
* Tendency to lick window panes at Starbucks
* All videos watched in fast-forward
* Can only stand still during an earthquake
* Pulse can only be measured using the National Debt Clock
* You do 20 miles on the treadmill before you realize it's not plugged in
* You're shaking like Jim Bunning at an unemployment office
* You don't sweat, you percolate
Can’t wait for the first meeting when they breakout the bongo drums and unveil the new group flag, which just happens to feature a picture of Juan Valdez and his burro.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
NH’s Own Punxsutawney Phil: Governor Lynch
Like the famous weather predicting rodent from the Keystone State, New Hampshire has its own version of Punxsutawney Phil, and his name is Governor Lynch. But now the only time Governor Lynch seems to emerge from his lair is when most of his constituents are without those pesky modern conveniences, like heat, water or communication with the outside world.
N’er to be seen or heard from during our recent budget woes, Governor Lynch can always be counted on to pop out of his den when it is time to declare a State of Emergency. Putting on his best Timberland Duck Boots and canvas “I am in charge” jacket, Governor Lynch has perfected the illusion of leadership when New Hampshire is in need of being declared a disaster zone.
Bravo, Hopkinton John. While members of your Party are running around imposing excessive taxes and fees, while at the same time declaring war on small business with the recent ill-advised LLC tax, New Hampshire can sleep well knowing you can be found scurrying about the fallen trees and the out-of state line crews, as a fumbling media trips over themselves (and the downed branches) in a effort to get just the “right” action photo of you.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
NH: Does Congressman Paul Ryan Deserve Our Fawning
With Congressman Paul Ryan’s recent visit to NH, I could not help but notice how easily some have forgotten how the Republican Party found themselves out as the majority. Everyone wants to get their picture taken with him, and no one wants to ask him the tough questions.
Maybe's its the euphoria of "certain victory" that many believe will come the Republican Party's way this Fall. Or maybe it because Congressman Ryan is young, providing the illusion of a Party newness. And although Ryan in the past, more times than not, has voted as a conservative (which I greatly appreciate), he also has a history of voting for political gain:
He has little to no private sector experience. But he is young, and he is saying what we need him to say now; so NH welcomes him with open arms, wooed by his youth, and tough talk at the Healthcare Summit. But we have a greater responsibility as NH voters, it is called accountability. NH owes it to the rest of the nation to be tough on not only Democrats, but Republicans. He voted for some of the very things many of us stood against, and frankly has been in Washington far too long not to be tainted.
Some in NH care more about a photo op than holding our elected representatives accountable. I have nothing against Congressman Ryan, and feel in many ways he is far better than most in Congress. But I have gotten to the point that I need to acknowledge that part of the problem in DC is career politicians. Congressman Paul Ryan is a career politician.
Maybe's its the euphoria of "certain victory" that many believe will come the Republican Party's way this Fall. Or maybe it because Congressman Ryan is young, providing the illusion of a Party newness. And although Ryan in the past, more times than not, has voted as a conservative (which I greatly appreciate), he also has a history of voting for political gain:
- Voted YES on $192B additional anti-recession stimulus spending. (Jul 2009)
- Voted YES on $15B bailout for GM and Chrysler. (Dec 2008)
- Voted YES on granting Washington DC an Electoral vote & vote in Congress. (Apr 2007)
- Voted against the original stimulus package, but than wrote that he supported the Energy Center of Wisconsin’s grant application, which “intends to place 1,000 workers in green jobs.” The funds for this center would come directly from stimulus funding he VOTED AGAINST.
He has little to no private sector experience. But he is young, and he is saying what we need him to say now; so NH welcomes him with open arms, wooed by his youth, and tough talk at the Healthcare Summit. But we have a greater responsibility as NH voters, it is called accountability. NH owes it to the rest of the nation to be tough on not only Democrats, but Republicans. He voted for some of the very things many of us stood against, and frankly has been in Washington far too long not to be tainted.
Some in NH care more about a photo op than holding our elected representatives accountable. I have nothing against Congressman Ryan, and feel in many ways he is far better than most in Congress. But I have gotten to the point that I need to acknowledge that part of the problem in DC is career politicians. Congressman Paul Ryan is a career politician.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
The Mount Vernon Statement
The Mount Vernon Statement
Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world. They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.
* It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal.
* It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life.
* It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
* It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.
* It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith.
If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.
February 17, 2010
Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding.Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world. They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. In recent decades, America’s principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant.
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead — forward or backward, up or down? Isn’t this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature’s God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man’s self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.
* It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal.
* It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life.
* It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions.
* It supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.
* It informs conservatism’s firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith.
If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose.
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America’s founding principles.
February 17, 2010
It is not the Party’s Fault; It’s the “Isms”
This is in response to a Letter to the Editor blaming Republicans for all America’s economic woes throughout our history:
I could not help but response to David B. Munsey revisionist history of the role Republicans played in the economy. But in order to fairly represent the true nature of the discussion, the dialogue should really focus on the difference between the “ism” that controlled the debate at the time of the economic up or down. Was it progressivism or conservatism that was the overall guiding principles? By worrying less about the party affiliation, and focusing more on the reining “ism,” you start see an obvious trend.
First, Mr. Munsey ignores the Great Depression of 1920. That’s right 1920, not 1931. The WORSE economic crash to occur in modern record keeping was the crash under progressive Woodrow Wilson (D). Wilson applied a high tax rate (upwards of 70%) and massive deficit spending (spending outpaced tax revenues X 3). The fastest recovery out of a major economic downturn occurred under the great “forgotten” President, conservative Calvin Coolidge (R). President Coolidge reduced the tax rate to 25% and cut spending by a whopping 50%! It is the combination of a fair tax percentage and STRICT spending controls that resulted in higher tax revenues and unprecedented employment (98.1 % employment). Under Coolidge’s conservative leadership we saw the largest increase of the middle class in history.
The next economic downturn, 1929, which contrary to misconception, was not the start of the “Great Depression.” However, the downturn of 1929 was the result of the progressive policies of President Herbert Hoover (the “forgotten progressive”) (R). Hoover ignored the lessons of the Wilson administration and abandoned the conservative principals established by Coolidge. Hoover initially maintained the lower tax rate, but increased spending to record deficit levels (much like we saw under Bush 43). Also under Hoover, we started to see the heavy hand of government being applied to business. Lo and behold, the economic collapsed, eventually leading to the depression of 1929.
I noticed that Mr. Munsey ignored the next two great dips in our economy, 1931 (the Great Depression) and 1938, probable for good reason; they would not play very well into his argument of Democrat (good) versus Republican (bad). The Great Depression was the direct result of heavy taxation, deficit spending, confusing government control, and lastly, Hoover and the Congress trying to “spend” their way into prosperity (sound familiar?). Policies that would be continued under FDR.
1938, America saw another major economic downturn with high unemployment (19% ), out of control spending , a punishing tax code (67%), the heavy hand of government entanglements within the market, and continued attempts by the US government to spend their way into prosperity. In fact FDR’s attempt to “control” the economic resulted in the comment made by FDR’s Secretary of Treasury, "We've tried spending money. We are spending more money than we have ever spent before, and it does not work."
I could go on, but why bother. When our government is guided by progressive policies, economic downturn will follow. Whenever the government is guided by conservative principals, true economic prosperity follows. Mr. Munsey is simply reciting from the playbook of the “new progressives,” which currently exist in both major Parties.
40% of all Americans identify themselves as Conservatives, and for good reason. They understand that both deficit spending and a punishing tax code are immoral. They also understand that government should function the same way a responsible household does; with a balance check book and by not stealing from your neighbors to make up for a lack of fiscal responsibility. It is progressive policies that have failed us, and both the Democrats and Republicans are guilty.
I could not help but response to David B. Munsey revisionist history of the role Republicans played in the economy. But in order to fairly represent the true nature of the discussion, the dialogue should really focus on the difference between the “ism” that controlled the debate at the time of the economic up or down. Was it progressivism or conservatism that was the overall guiding principles? By worrying less about the party affiliation, and focusing more on the reining “ism,” you start see an obvious trend.
First, Mr. Munsey ignores the Great Depression of 1920. That’s right 1920, not 1931. The WORSE economic crash to occur in modern record keeping was the crash under progressive Woodrow Wilson (D). Wilson applied a high tax rate (upwards of 70%) and massive deficit spending (spending outpaced tax revenues X 3). The fastest recovery out of a major economic downturn occurred under the great “forgotten” President, conservative Calvin Coolidge (R). President Coolidge reduced the tax rate to 25% and cut spending by a whopping 50%! It is the combination of a fair tax percentage and STRICT spending controls that resulted in higher tax revenues and unprecedented employment (98.1 % employment). Under Coolidge’s conservative leadership we saw the largest increase of the middle class in history.
The next economic downturn, 1929, which contrary to misconception, was not the start of the “Great Depression.” However, the downturn of 1929 was the result of the progressive policies of President Herbert Hoover (the “forgotten progressive”) (R). Hoover ignored the lessons of the Wilson administration and abandoned the conservative principals established by Coolidge. Hoover initially maintained the lower tax rate, but increased spending to record deficit levels (much like we saw under Bush 43). Also under Hoover, we started to see the heavy hand of government being applied to business. Lo and behold, the economic collapsed, eventually leading to the depression of 1929.
I noticed that Mr. Munsey ignored the next two great dips in our economy, 1931 (the Great Depression) and 1938, probable for good reason; they would not play very well into his argument of Democrat (good) versus Republican (bad). The Great Depression was the direct result of heavy taxation, deficit spending, confusing government control, and lastly, Hoover and the Congress trying to “spend” their way into prosperity (sound familiar?). Policies that would be continued under FDR.
1938, America saw another major economic downturn with high unemployment (19% ), out of control spending , a punishing tax code (67%), the heavy hand of government entanglements within the market, and continued attempts by the US government to spend their way into prosperity. In fact FDR’s attempt to “control” the economic resulted in the comment made by FDR’s Secretary of Treasury, "We've tried spending money. We are spending more money than we have ever spent before, and it does not work."
I could go on, but why bother. When our government is guided by progressive policies, economic downturn will follow. Whenever the government is guided by conservative principals, true economic prosperity follows. Mr. Munsey is simply reciting from the playbook of the “new progressives,” which currently exist in both major Parties.
40% of all Americans identify themselves as Conservatives, and for good reason. They understand that both deficit spending and a punishing tax code are immoral. They also understand that government should function the same way a responsible household does; with a balance check book and by not stealing from your neighbors to make up for a lack of fiscal responsibility. It is progressive policies that have failed us, and both the Democrats and Republicans are guilty.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Progressivism is Dead – What Next?
Where has the time gone? We are more than a year into the Obama Era, and contrary to what some in media are saying, there is no ambiguity; President Barrack Obama’s first year in office will go down in history as the worse first year of any presidency. Period. This distinction does not rest solely with the President; he has had plenty of help from an inept, Democratically controlled Congress. But also complacent in this great American mistake, was the push into office by an electorate more concerned about “making history,” instead of embracing our historical responsibly.
In late 2008, I wrote extensively about then candidate Barrack Obama (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama 2008 Archives), and over this past year I have continued to write about the Obama Administration (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama - 2009/2010 Archives). I spent much of the time on my two radio shows (New Hampshire Perspective and Right Here, Right Now ) detailing the disaster that has been the first year of the Obama world. Nothing I wrote or said made any difference. So I have decided to say something I usually avoid when I know I am right….”I told you so…….!” The problem with this “I told you so,” is that it comes at great expense to our country.
Standing before us is tattered country, moving in so many directions, lacking focus and leadership. Go down the list of concerns that many people expressed prior to the election of 2008, and is it any wonder we find ourselves in this collective mess: lack of experience, no real-world accomplishments, governing by theory versus reality, rhetoric over substance, shady associations, sounding moderate - but living/legislating leftist, and demonstrating overwhelming derision beliefs regarding America.
And for those who bought into the hype, and wanted to be part of history……how is that working out for you? When you vote like a “left-winger (caught up in the emotion, ignoring commonsense and a higher intellectual understanding, voting to “make history” instead of voting with an understanding of history, dismissing serious concerns as mere campaigning rhetoric),” than you shouldn’t be surprised when you wake up surrounded by a nightmare of leadership that is currently smothering us.
Have you ever notice that many left-wingers want to talk about “failed” policies, based on their special eyesight, but only if they were Republican initiatives, and based on their inimitable pass/fail system. But left-wingers want to ignore an American landscape littered with their failed policies. And so it goes with our current state of affairs. There is very little truth in media, very little faith in government, and no hope that the two parties can work together. This is the Obama legacy, a failed leader born of failed policies.
Proving once again of their inability to embrace reality, their inherent aptitude for ignoring (and at times, perpetuating outright falsehoods) of our unique American history, and their dogmatic support of anything that ignores our Constitutional foundation, left-wingers have led us to a dark place. Left-wingers have closed their eyes to policies and principals that have been shown to work, choosing to lead by failed theories, and not allowing themselves to be guided by practical realities. Is it any wonder that left-wingers have had to rename their movement several times throughout history (Progressive > Communist > Socialist > Liberals > New Progressives). The left-wingers have managed to destroy another perfectly good word (progressive)…….. again! I have a suggestion to all the left-wingers seeking to rename their delusional movement. Just call it what it is…….Regressivism! I guarantee you that Regressivism rings more true to left-wing propaganda, and will last a lot longer as a moniker for their abortive movement.
Frankly, I do not care what we call those on the left, but I am more concerned with what the left stands for; bigger government and more and more repressive policies. Over time, as government grows bigger and takes on more control over our daily lives, America will undergo a major transformation away from our unique American persona of self-reliance towards a radical change to a self-imposed serfdom. Americans almost seem to be embracing these policies of bondage, where in the past an overwhelming majority would resist the heavy hand of government in our lives with every fiber of their existence. Only time will tell whether Americans wake up from this self induced servitude, or if we fall deeper under the spell of oppressive, leftist policies.
There is one distinction that will be forever part of the Obama legacy. He will be forever known as the most successful underachiever in world history. Ill-prepared for the job he sought, capitulated into that role by a people who forget the consequence that is theirs alone when choosing the leader of the free world.
In late 2008, I wrote extensively about then candidate Barrack Obama (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama 2008 Archives), and over this past year I have continued to write about the Obama Administration (A Rendezvous with Destiny - Obama - 2009/2010 Archives). I spent much of the time on my two radio shows (New Hampshire Perspective and Right Here, Right Now ) detailing the disaster that has been the first year of the Obama world. Nothing I wrote or said made any difference. So I have decided to say something I usually avoid when I know I am right….”I told you so…….!” The problem with this “I told you so,” is that it comes at great expense to our country.
Standing before us is tattered country, moving in so many directions, lacking focus and leadership. Go down the list of concerns that many people expressed prior to the election of 2008, and is it any wonder we find ourselves in this collective mess: lack of experience, no real-world accomplishments, governing by theory versus reality, rhetoric over substance, shady associations, sounding moderate - but living/legislating leftist, and demonstrating overwhelming derision beliefs regarding America.
And for those who bought into the hype, and wanted to be part of history……how is that working out for you? When you vote like a “left-winger (caught up in the emotion, ignoring commonsense and a higher intellectual understanding, voting to “make history” instead of voting with an understanding of history, dismissing serious concerns as mere campaigning rhetoric),” than you shouldn’t be surprised when you wake up surrounded by a nightmare of leadership that is currently smothering us.
Have you ever notice that many left-wingers want to talk about “failed” policies, based on their special eyesight, but only if they were Republican initiatives, and based on their inimitable pass/fail system. But left-wingers want to ignore an American landscape littered with their failed policies. And so it goes with our current state of affairs. There is very little truth in media, very little faith in government, and no hope that the two parties can work together. This is the Obama legacy, a failed leader born of failed policies.
Proving once again of their inability to embrace reality, their inherent aptitude for ignoring (and at times, perpetuating outright falsehoods) of our unique American history, and their dogmatic support of anything that ignores our Constitutional foundation, left-wingers have led us to a dark place. Left-wingers have closed their eyes to policies and principals that have been shown to work, choosing to lead by failed theories, and not allowing themselves to be guided by practical realities. Is it any wonder that left-wingers have had to rename their movement several times throughout history (Progressive > Communist > Socialist > Liberals > New Progressives). The left-wingers have managed to destroy another perfectly good word (progressive)…….. again! I have a suggestion to all the left-wingers seeking to rename their delusional movement. Just call it what it is…….Regressivism! I guarantee you that Regressivism rings more true to left-wing propaganda, and will last a lot longer as a moniker for their abortive movement.
Frankly, I do not care what we call those on the left, but I am more concerned with what the left stands for; bigger government and more and more repressive policies. Over time, as government grows bigger and takes on more control over our daily lives, America will undergo a major transformation away from our unique American persona of self-reliance towards a radical change to a self-imposed serfdom. Americans almost seem to be embracing these policies of bondage, where in the past an overwhelming majority would resist the heavy hand of government in our lives with every fiber of their existence. Only time will tell whether Americans wake up from this self induced servitude, or if we fall deeper under the spell of oppressive, leftist policies.
There is one distinction that will be forever part of the Obama legacy. He will be forever known as the most successful underachiever in world history. Ill-prepared for the job he sought, capitulated into that role by a people who forget the consequence that is theirs alone when choosing the leader of the free world.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Heathcare: What Would Dr. King Do?
Over the past few weeks, some in the media, along with many left-leaning groups (such as Progressive Democrats for America, Democrats.com, After Downing Street), aided by easily manipulated, everyday citizens (through a letter writing campaign), have inaccurately been trying to invoke the civil rights movement of the past by declaring that Martin Luther King would have supported the current attempts at health care reform. I strongly disagree with these false assertions. Dr. Martin Luther King is one of my personal heroes; imperfect like all of us, but truly committed to a cause greater than him.
Let me say without hesitation that I believe that health care reform is needed (as it relates to cost and individual control over our plans), but the immorality we have witnessed throughout this current legislative process would not be one that Dr. King would support. One only need to read King’s “Letter from Birmingham” to know where Dr. King’s heart and mind were on the matters of injustice and individual liberty, and his deep understanding of our Judeo-Christian values, which were the guiding principles that led to the creation of our Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, and the birth of our nation.
But more importantly, Dr. King would never support any reform that would not only permit, but fund, a system that would advance the genocide that is abortion. Nor would Dr. King support a law that places a choker and chains of overwhelming debt around the neck of future generations - “The Negro cannot win if he is willing to sacrifice the futures of his children for immediate personal comfort and safety. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
What we have witnessed this past year with bribes, behind the doors dealings, class envy, and demonization of individuals is everything Dr. King stood against! Dr. King would clearly see that there are no “White Only” signs in the windows of our current health care system, but would see an economic injustice that does not allow the free market to provide a fair and equal service to all; instead a necessary service is being subjected to regulations that are more about control and power, and have nothing to do with providing for those that seek that service. Dr. King would see the heavy hand of government (something he knew was easily corrupted), either immorally subjugating the will of the people, or worse yet, binding them to the chains of a new slavery; governmental dependency that does nothing to lift people up, but only serves to place all of us into a collective misery. Equal maybe, just no.
Portability in health plans, flex plans that roll over, tax breaks for the purchase of the plans, and yes when necessary, “locally-controlled” plans that provide for those who lack coverage. Picture the ability of individual groups: church groups, nonprofits, fraternal organizations, small businesses, and even groups such as bowling league and softball teams, being able to pool their resources and negotiate freely for health insurance coverage. And imagine a system that allows each of us to freely donate, within a community cooperative, to provide for those in need of health insurance. People helping people, without the waste of a defectively constructed, and most assuredly a poorly managed, government plan.
Dr. King would want us to do something to help those in need; but he would more likely to support a systems that promotes self-reliance, over a system that only serves to further support an existence of continued servitude.
Let me say without hesitation that I believe that health care reform is needed (as it relates to cost and individual control over our plans), but the immorality we have witnessed throughout this current legislative process would not be one that Dr. King would support. One only need to read King’s “Letter from Birmingham” to know where Dr. King’s heart and mind were on the matters of injustice and individual liberty, and his deep understanding of our Judeo-Christian values, which were the guiding principles that led to the creation of our Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, and the birth of our nation.
But more importantly, Dr. King would never support any reform that would not only permit, but fund, a system that would advance the genocide that is abortion. Nor would Dr. King support a law that places a choker and chains of overwhelming debt around the neck of future generations - “The Negro cannot win if he is willing to sacrifice the futures of his children for immediate personal comfort and safety. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
What we have witnessed this past year with bribes, behind the doors dealings, class envy, and demonization of individuals is everything Dr. King stood against! Dr. King would clearly see that there are no “White Only” signs in the windows of our current health care system, but would see an economic injustice that does not allow the free market to provide a fair and equal service to all; instead a necessary service is being subjected to regulations that are more about control and power, and have nothing to do with providing for those that seek that service. Dr. King would see the heavy hand of government (something he knew was easily corrupted), either immorally subjugating the will of the people, or worse yet, binding them to the chains of a new slavery; governmental dependency that does nothing to lift people up, but only serves to place all of us into a collective misery. Equal maybe, just no.
Portability in health plans, flex plans that roll over, tax breaks for the purchase of the plans, and yes when necessary, “locally-controlled” plans that provide for those who lack coverage. Picture the ability of individual groups: church groups, nonprofits, fraternal organizations, small businesses, and even groups such as bowling league and softball teams, being able to pool their resources and negotiate freely for health insurance coverage. And imagine a system that allows each of us to freely donate, within a community cooperative, to provide for those in need of health insurance. People helping people, without the waste of a defectively constructed, and most assuredly a poorly managed, government plan.
Dr. King would want us to do something to help those in need; but he would more likely to support a systems that promotes self-reliance, over a system that only serves to further support an existence of continued servitude.
Happy Birthday James Madison
Today we mark the anniversary of the birth of our countries 4th President, James Madison. As a kid the only thing I knew about President Madison was his wife’s name was Dolly, and she made great cup cakes.
James Madison was a member of that eternal fraternity we would later call “The Founding Fathers.” At the ripe old age of 36, Madison was the primary author of the united States Constitution; a distinction that would earn him the larger than life nickname of “Father of the Constitution.” James Madison was also the author of many of the Federalist Papers, which many feel was Madison’s efforts to strengthen the true meaning of the Constitution, due in part to early attempts to usurp the Constitutions original intent.
James Madison was an enigma to many because of his political swings back and forth throughout his life. As he wrote the Constitution (based on his participation in the creation of the Virginia Constitution), he originally resisted the need for the Bill of Rights, insisting they were not necessary. He would shift from a strict State’s rights proponent, to a reluctant advocate for a stronger central government, back to his original belief that stronger State’s rights and limited central government should be the order of the day.
Madison opinion of another Founding Father, Alexander Hamilton, would also shift with time. Madison originally looked upon Alexander Hamilton has a threat to America’s new liberty, but would then enter into a restless relationship with Hamilton during the time of Federalist Paper and Madison’s Presidency.
Madison also had an unusually relationship with Thomas Jefferson. At first Madison and Jefferson did not get along very well. But later they would become very good friends, writing numerous, lengthy conversations back and forth to each other. During Jefferson presidency, Jefferson would come to rely on Madison’s advice, especially on matters of the Constitution.
In Madison we find a fair, intelligent, open-mind, yet cautious man. Madison possessed that rare combination of common-sense and intellect, who was not reluctant to listen to others, and when a convincing argument was made, change his mind. Not bad qualities then, or now.
Happy Birthday President Madison
James Madison was a member of that eternal fraternity we would later call “The Founding Fathers.” At the ripe old age of 36, Madison was the primary author of the united States Constitution; a distinction that would earn him the larger than life nickname of “Father of the Constitution.” James Madison was also the author of many of the Federalist Papers, which many feel was Madison’s efforts to strengthen the true meaning of the Constitution, due in part to early attempts to usurp the Constitutions original intent.
James Madison was an enigma to many because of his political swings back and forth throughout his life. As he wrote the Constitution (based on his participation in the creation of the Virginia Constitution), he originally resisted the need for the Bill of Rights, insisting they were not necessary. He would shift from a strict State’s rights proponent, to a reluctant advocate for a stronger central government, back to his original belief that stronger State’s rights and limited central government should be the order of the day.
Madison opinion of another Founding Father, Alexander Hamilton, would also shift with time. Madison originally looked upon Alexander Hamilton has a threat to America’s new liberty, but would then enter into a restless relationship with Hamilton during the time of Federalist Paper and Madison’s Presidency.
Madison also had an unusually relationship with Thomas Jefferson. At first Madison and Jefferson did not get along very well. But later they would become very good friends, writing numerous, lengthy conversations back and forth to each other. During Jefferson presidency, Jefferson would come to rely on Madison’s advice, especially on matters of the Constitution.
In Madison we find a fair, intelligent, open-mind, yet cautious man. Madison possessed that rare combination of common-sense and intellect, who was not reluctant to listen to others, and when a convincing argument was made, change his mind. Not bad qualities then, or now.
Happy Birthday President Madison
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
The Super Bowl and Abortion, and Why Scott Brown is Wrong
The past few weeks have lent themselves to the topic of abortion. The anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the Tebow family Super Bowl commercial, Susan Estrich’s recent opinion piece, or the recent comments made by America’s new “man of the people” Scott Brown, have let us blow off a little philosophical steam, without really accomplishing anything. And after the Super Bowl, the topic will be placed back in that dark closet America stores its deficiencies; and that is a shame.
What we do at the moment of a life revealed will determine not only that baby’s fate, but the fate of all humanity. Our sense of not only our compassion towards our fellow man, our kindness to those in need, and our charity to mankind rest with the very first time many of us held the fate of a pure life in our hand, only to realize that it is not our choice to make. It is God’s will, or nature’s vocation, or the stork; whatever method you subscribe to, all of it enviably leads to one concrete fact. Standing before us, safe in the womb, is a living being. Commonsense demands you surrender to fact and reason; it is then your choice to ignore it or embrace it.
When we feel that we have the power over life and death, than we should not be surprised when people choose to use that power; whenever, wherever. The very essence of our communal respect for all existence starts at life’s beginning. Our humanity starts in the womb, the vessel that nature or God deemed to the safest place for our undefined destiny. Each of you reading this was offered the opportunity to make a difference, because you were given the gift of life; ultimately because someone recognized your humanity, and did not succumb to a “truth is relative” concept used to define life.
What some people have lost in this debate is the essential question of fact. Is the baby in the womb a human life? Not, “does the baby have a soul.” Not, “is the baby perfect.” Not, “can I afford this child.” Not, “is this the right time.” Not, “should I bring a baby into this painful world.” Not, “but it is a woman’s body.” Not, “but I wanted a boy.” Nor is the question of how the baby was conceived relevant to the most basic truth. The only thing that matters is whether the baby in the womb is life?
The question of life is beyond reproach; it is mans own selfness and insecurities that opens the door to “debate,” and closes the window to the known genuineness of our being. It is mankind’s own hubris that allows all us to be devalued.
There is no greater hope for humanity than the innocents and purity of a child. Each time we exercise power over another human being in a way that extinguishes innocent life, than we chip away at not only our individual humanity, but our shared empathy.
If you choose to ignore your own humanity, be honest about. Society has deemed, for now, that the practice of taking of an innocent human life (for whatever reason) to be the province of a free-society; not a just society, not a compassion society, not a moral society, but a free society. If you support abortion, then don’t bother with the facade that reduction should be a goal, all while supporting the endeavor that will end the life. If you support abortion as “public policy,” but not as a personal decision you would choose, please recognize that people are keenly aware of your own inconstancies.
And if you support life, put into action a course of kindness and charity that makes people want to choose life. Let all know that they are never alone, and that you value all other life above your own.
Brown, Estrich, and even Tebow are all wrong, but so are all of us. All of us have failed to live up to the promise declared over two-hundred years ago – “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Our past failure to live up to the absolute truth that is our Declaration of Independence has been corrected, but our future injustices await our resolve. But make no mistake about it, the issue of abortion is “not settled,” and as with the question of slavery, we only need to recognize that, as a country, we are sanctioning a transparent injustice.
What we do at the moment of a life revealed will determine not only that baby’s fate, but the fate of all humanity. Our sense of not only our compassion towards our fellow man, our kindness to those in need, and our charity to mankind rest with the very first time many of us held the fate of a pure life in our hand, only to realize that it is not our choice to make. It is God’s will, or nature’s vocation, or the stork; whatever method you subscribe to, all of it enviably leads to one concrete fact. Standing before us, safe in the womb, is a living being. Commonsense demands you surrender to fact and reason; it is then your choice to ignore it or embrace it.
When we feel that we have the power over life and death, than we should not be surprised when people choose to use that power; whenever, wherever. The very essence of our communal respect for all existence starts at life’s beginning. Our humanity starts in the womb, the vessel that nature or God deemed to the safest place for our undefined destiny. Each of you reading this was offered the opportunity to make a difference, because you were given the gift of life; ultimately because someone recognized your humanity, and did not succumb to a “truth is relative” concept used to define life.
What some people have lost in this debate is the essential question of fact. Is the baby in the womb a human life? Not, “does the baby have a soul.” Not, “is the baby perfect.” Not, “can I afford this child.” Not, “is this the right time.” Not, “should I bring a baby into this painful world.” Not, “but it is a woman’s body.” Not, “but I wanted a boy.” Nor is the question of how the baby was conceived relevant to the most basic truth. The only thing that matters is whether the baby in the womb is life?
The question of life is beyond reproach; it is mans own selfness and insecurities that opens the door to “debate,” and closes the window to the known genuineness of our being. It is mankind’s own hubris that allows all us to be devalued.
There is no greater hope for humanity than the innocents and purity of a child. Each time we exercise power over another human being in a way that extinguishes innocent life, than we chip away at not only our individual humanity, but our shared empathy.
If you choose to ignore your own humanity, be honest about. Society has deemed, for now, that the practice of taking of an innocent human life (for whatever reason) to be the province of a free-society; not a just society, not a compassion society, not a moral society, but a free society. If you support abortion, then don’t bother with the facade that reduction should be a goal, all while supporting the endeavor that will end the life. If you support abortion as “public policy,” but not as a personal decision you would choose, please recognize that people are keenly aware of your own inconstancies.
And if you support life, put into action a course of kindness and charity that makes people want to choose life. Let all know that they are never alone, and that you value all other life above your own.
Brown, Estrich, and even Tebow are all wrong, but so are all of us. All of us have failed to live up to the promise declared over two-hundred years ago – “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Our past failure to live up to the absolute truth that is our Declaration of Independence has been corrected, but our future injustices await our resolve. But make no mistake about it, the issue of abortion is “not settled,” and as with the question of slavery, we only need to recognize that, as a country, we are sanctioning a transparent injustice.
The Reagan Renaissance
As I look around America, I find myself back in 1979. Our economy is falling apart. Government is running up massive deficits. Our place in the world is diminishing. But now is not the time to succumb to the failed idea that government is the answer. No, now is the time for all of us to recommit ourselves to the principals that once saved this country, and can do it again. A commitment to Conservative Principals.
America has lost its way, but the American spirit has not vanished. At the time of our last great despair a leader came forth. Some called him nothing more than a former B-actor; they underestimated his love for our country, and the keen insight he possessed, and his ability to delivery, that would help make America into that “bright, shining city on a hill.”
This Saturday will mark what would have been Ronald Regan’s 99th birthday. The best gift we can give him is to remember how great we were as a nation when he was our President; and how we can move forward by returning to those key principals. Let’s us declare February 6, 2010, a new beginning, a “Reagan Renaissance.”
I encourage everyone to:
Read Ronald Regan’s 1977 CPAC speech ( Ronald Reagan's 1977 CPAC Speech)
View his greatest speech – A Time for Choosing (A Time for Choosing)
View his farewell address to America (Ronald Reagan's Farewell Address )
Monday, January 18, 2010
It Has Always Been "The People's Seat"
What does the battle between Scott Brown and Martha Coakley really mean? Why has this race captured the attention of an entire nation? Why is the media fascinated with this race? The answer is simple….hope and change.
It is more than just Republican against Democrat, Liberal against Conservative; it is the understanding of the principle that we are a representative republic and not an elected aristocracy. It is the appreciation of knowing that it is the “people’s seat,” and not the throne of a self-professed nobility, who believe that it is their seat to hand down from one lord to the next. It is the hope that every generation remembers that it is the elected who answers to the people, and that change can never come at the expense of our founding principles…….. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…”
Believe or not this campaign is not even about Scott Brown (who is an incredible person first and valid candidate second). This is about the simple belief that it is the consent of the governed that have been preordained to control their own destiny, and will not be “subjects,” ruled by a few bigheaded elitist. Elitist whose fingers burn whenever they touch the Constitution, whose ears bleed when the Declaration of Independence is read aloud, and who have grown blind and deaf to the will of the people. Elitist who expel any original thought once they are elected, and whose asses grow accustom to a chair that is on loan to them.
There are events that happen to every generation that reaffirms the founding principles that are at the very core of this “great experiment” known as America. Every once in awhile “We the People….” is more than just a catchphrase used by politicians to harvest votes. "We the People…” becomes the rallying cry not just against something, but in support of an idea or cause worth fighting for. Revolutions aren’t just won with bullets, especially in America. Every so often a course of action becomes so apparent that the American people “take to march” and fight for a cause greater than the individual.
The Brown vs. Coakley is the manifestation of everything our Founding Fathers expected from us. Massachusetts’ own Sam Adams knew that every generation would need to be “eternally vigilant” as to the cause of our own liberty when he said – “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” Today, the new “Sons (and Daughters) of Liberty” are preparing to fire the second shot heard around the world. This is not about the “41st vote,” or “derailing” President Obama’s agenda, but a stand against tyranny and arrogant authority. This about reminding those in Washington that the only thing that is inevitable is that if they chose to govern in a manner that is contrary to our Republican principals, than their days are numbered.
Benjamin Franklin, was standing outside Independence Hall when the Constitutional Convention ended, when he was approached by a Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia, who asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it."
Regardless of whether Scott Brown wins or not, the message will be clear. Every race, every campaign, and every candidate will have to prove that they understand that it is the people’s seat they seek, and that they are just temporary occupants. In the end, it is important for all Americans to remember that it is our “Republic,” ............if we “can keep it.”
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
The Character of Conservatism Part Five: Against Anti-Republican Tendencies
Against Anti-Republican Tendencies
When Thomas Jefferson entered the White House as our third President he was well aware that the nation was divided after an intense election process and the final result. Vice-President Jefferson defeated President Adams in an election that had both candidates being declared an enemy of the Constitution, an exaggeration born from campaign enthusiasm, but had the eyes of a young nation peering cautiously at their new President.
Even today some question Jefferson’s interpretation of the Constitution and maybe that is justified (the Louisiana Purchase is often cited as a break from Constitutional intent). But it is important to remember that not only did President Jefferson not participate in the Constitutional Convention, he was separated from the process by an entire ocean (Jefferson was serving in France as the Constitution was being written), so we should not look to him for any in-depth elucidation. One must look to the Federalist Papers written by James Madison (The Father of the Constitution) for a truthful explanation of the Constitution’s intent. Fortunately Jefferson (and a young America) benefitted from a close friendship with Madison, and Jefferson often sought the counsel of Madison during his presidency on matters regarding Constitutional interpretation.
But at the time of his first inauguration, Jefferson understood that there were forces already in play trying to move America away from the first principals of our republic, the belief that liberty and rights are central values, and that the people were, as a whole, sovereign. Jefferson first inaugural speech rejected the concept of inherited political power, and declared with confidence, an expectation that every citizen to be independent in their performance of civic duties.
The character of conservatism can be found in two of President Jefferson’s writing; the Declaration of Independence (a foundational document of Conservatism) and his first Presidential Inaugural speech.
Friends and Fellow-Citizens:
CALLED upon to undertake the duties of the first executive office of our country, I avail myself of the presence of that portion of my fellow-citizens which is here assembled to express my grateful thanks for the favor with which they have been pleased to look toward me, to declare a sincere consciousness that the task is above my talents, and that I approach it with those anxious and awful presentiments which the greatness of the charge and the weakness of my powers so justly inspire. A rising nation, spread over a wide and fruitful land, traversing all the seas with the rich productions of their industry, engaged in commerce with nations who feel power and forget right, advancing rapidly to destinies beyond the reach of mortal eye—when I contemplate these transcendent objects, and see the honor, the happiness, and the hopes of this beloved country committed to the issue, and the auspices of this day, I shrink from the contemplation, and humble myself before the magnitude of the undertaking. Utterly, indeed, should I despair did not the presence of many whom I here see remind me that in the other high authorities provided by our Constitution I shall find resources of wisdom, of virtue, and of zeal on which to rely under all difficulties. To you, then, gentlemen, who are charged with the sovereign functions of legislation, and to those associated with you, I look with encouragement for that guidance and support which may enable us to steer with safety the vessel in which we are all embarked amidst the conflicting elements of a troubled world. During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.
Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.
I repair, then, fellow-citizens, to the post you have assigned me. With experience enough in subordinate offices to have seen the difficulties of this the greatest of all, I have learnt to expect that it will rarely fall to the lot of imperfect man to retire from this station with the reputation and the favor which bring him into it. Without pretensions to that high confidence you reposed in our first and greatest revolutionary character, whose preeminent services had entitled him to the first place in his country's love and destined for him the fairest page in the volume of faithful history, I ask so much confidence only as may give firmness and effect to the legal administration of your affairs. I shall often go wrong through defect of judgment. When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not command a view of the whole ground. I ask your indulgence for my own errors, which will never be intentional, and your support against the errors of others, who may condemn what they would not if seen in all its parts. The approbation implied by your suffrage is a great consolation to me for the past, and my future solicitude will be to retain the good opinion of those who have bestowed it in advance, to conciliate that of others by doing them all the good in my power, and to be instrumental to the happiness and freedom of all.
Relying, then, on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.
Jefferson’s first inaugural address was an example of the perfect political speech, and I do not mean that in the negative. What I mean by that is that it was crafted by its author to address its immediate audience, the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government, to remind them that they not only served at the will of the people, and “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed …..,” but it was the intent of Jefferson “to unite a proper energy in the Executive, and a proper stability in the Legislative departments, with the essential characters of Republican Government,” a belief that was expressed by Madison to Jefferson in September of 1787 (in a letter from Madison in Philadelphia to Jefferson in France).
Jefferson’s speech was meant to set the tone to address issues facing our young nation as a united Republic, the most important, to work together to remain true to originally intent of the Constitution. But more than this, Jefferson’s had an opportunity to reaffirm what he originally wanted to say in the Declaration of Independence. Most know the line …”Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…” But few know that Jefferson originally wrote…”Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Property…” Jefferson understood that governments true role was first and foremost “provide for the common defence,” and conduct itself in a manner that creates the smallest footprint upon individual liberty:
“Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.”
Jefferson’s first inaugural speech is the essence of a liberty based Republic, a sentiment later reaffirmed by Ronald Reagan:
“Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the—or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment……….
“…… defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government…….the full power of centralized government"—this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.”
One of the fundamental natures of conservatism is the understanding that our republic can not withstand the weight of its own oppression when it chooses to interfere with the liberty of others by confiscating from those willing to work and give it to those who are not.
The strength in Jefferson’s first inaugural address is its dedication to the genuineness of Republicanism, the governmental foundation that America is built upon. Jefferson spoke to unity without compromise to one’s own principal, a tone that would later be captured so brilliantly by Ronald Reagan.
Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence would come to serve as the foundation, his first inaugural speech the frame, and his presidency the crown that would all later be known as Jeffersonian principal, and by progression, an evolutional component of the character of conservatism.
When Thomas Jefferson entered the White House as our third President he was well aware that the nation was divided after an intense election process and the final result. Vice-President Jefferson defeated President Adams in an election that had both candidates being declared an enemy of the Constitution, an exaggeration born from campaign enthusiasm, but had the eyes of a young nation peering cautiously at their new President.
Even today some question Jefferson’s interpretation of the Constitution and maybe that is justified (the Louisiana Purchase is often cited as a break from Constitutional intent). But it is important to remember that not only did President Jefferson not participate in the Constitutional Convention, he was separated from the process by an entire ocean (Jefferson was serving in France as the Constitution was being written), so we should not look to him for any in-depth elucidation. One must look to the Federalist Papers written by James Madison (The Father of the Constitution) for a truthful explanation of the Constitution’s intent. Fortunately Jefferson (and a young America) benefitted from a close friendship with Madison, and Jefferson often sought the counsel of Madison during his presidency on matters regarding Constitutional interpretation.
But at the time of his first inauguration, Jefferson understood that there were forces already in play trying to move America away from the first principals of our republic, the belief that liberty and rights are central values, and that the people were, as a whole, sovereign. Jefferson first inaugural speech rejected the concept of inherited political power, and declared with confidence, an expectation that every citizen to be independent in their performance of civic duties.
The character of conservatism can be found in two of President Jefferson’s writing; the Declaration of Independence (a foundational document of Conservatism) and his first Presidential Inaugural speech.
Friends and Fellow-Citizens:
CALLED upon to undertake the duties of the first executive office of our country, I avail myself of the presence of that portion of my fellow-citizens which is here assembled to express my grateful thanks for the favor with which they have been pleased to look toward me, to declare a sincere consciousness that the task is above my talents, and that I approach it with those anxious and awful presentiments which the greatness of the charge and the weakness of my powers so justly inspire. A rising nation, spread over a wide and fruitful land, traversing all the seas with the rich productions of their industry, engaged in commerce with nations who feel power and forget right, advancing rapidly to destinies beyond the reach of mortal eye—when I contemplate these transcendent objects, and see the honor, the happiness, and the hopes of this beloved country committed to the issue, and the auspices of this day, I shrink from the contemplation, and humble myself before the magnitude of the undertaking. Utterly, indeed, should I despair did not the presence of many whom I here see remind me that in the other high authorities provided by our Constitution I shall find resources of wisdom, of virtue, and of zeal on which to rely under all difficulties. To you, then, gentlemen, who are charged with the sovereign functions of legislation, and to those associated with you, I look with encouragement for that guidance and support which may enable us to steer with safety the vessel in which we are all embarked amidst the conflicting elements of a troubled world. During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.
Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter—with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people—a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.
I repair, then, fellow-citizens, to the post you have assigned me. With experience enough in subordinate offices to have seen the difficulties of this the greatest of all, I have learnt to expect that it will rarely fall to the lot of imperfect man to retire from this station with the reputation and the favor which bring him into it. Without pretensions to that high confidence you reposed in our first and greatest revolutionary character, whose preeminent services had entitled him to the first place in his country's love and destined for him the fairest page in the volume of faithful history, I ask so much confidence only as may give firmness and effect to the legal administration of your affairs. I shall often go wrong through defect of judgment. When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not command a view of the whole ground. I ask your indulgence for my own errors, which will never be intentional, and your support against the errors of others, who may condemn what they would not if seen in all its parts. The approbation implied by your suffrage is a great consolation to me for the past, and my future solicitude will be to retain the good opinion of those who have bestowed it in advance, to conciliate that of others by doing them all the good in my power, and to be instrumental to the happiness and freedom of all.
Relying, then, on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.
Jefferson’s first inaugural address was an example of the perfect political speech, and I do not mean that in the negative. What I mean by that is that it was crafted by its author to address its immediate audience, the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government, to remind them that they not only served at the will of the people, and “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed …..,” but it was the intent of Jefferson “to unite a proper energy in the Executive, and a proper stability in the Legislative departments, with the essential characters of Republican Government,” a belief that was expressed by Madison to Jefferson in September of 1787 (in a letter from Madison in Philadelphia to Jefferson in France).
Jefferson’s speech was meant to set the tone to address issues facing our young nation as a united Republic, the most important, to work together to remain true to originally intent of the Constitution. But more than this, Jefferson’s had an opportunity to reaffirm what he originally wanted to say in the Declaration of Independence. Most know the line …”Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…” But few know that Jefferson originally wrote…”Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Property…” Jefferson understood that governments true role was first and foremost “provide for the common defence,” and conduct itself in a manner that creates the smallest footprint upon individual liberty:
“Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.”
Jefferson’s first inaugural speech is the essence of a liberty based Republic, a sentiment later reaffirmed by Ronald Reagan:
“Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the—or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment……….
“…… defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government…….the full power of centralized government"—this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.”
One of the fundamental natures of conservatism is the understanding that our republic can not withstand the weight of its own oppression when it chooses to interfere with the liberty of others by confiscating from those willing to work and give it to those who are not.
The strength in Jefferson’s first inaugural address is its dedication to the genuineness of Republicanism, the governmental foundation that America is built upon. Jefferson spoke to unity without compromise to one’s own principal, a tone that would later be captured so brilliantly by Ronald Reagan.
Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence would come to serve as the foundation, his first inaugural speech the frame, and his presidency the crown that would all later be known as Jeffersonian principal, and by progression, an evolutional component of the character of conservatism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
