Embracing Liberty Not Big Government

[bonnie]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article...ent_105013.html

Embracing Liberty, Not Big Government

By Michael Barone

Over the past 14 months, our political debate has been transformed into an argument between the heirs of two fundamental schools of political thought, the Founders and the Progressives. The Founders stood for the expansion of liberty and the Progressives for the expansion of government.

It's an argument that has been going on for a century but was largely dormant over the quarter-century of low-inflation economic growth that followed the Ronald Reagan tax cuts. It's been raised again by the expand-government policies of the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders.

Those policies, thoroughly in line with the Progressive tradition, have been advanced by liberal elites in government, media, think tanks and academia. The opposition, roughly in line with the Founders tradition, has been led by the non-elites who spontaneously flocked to tea parties and town halls. Republican politicians have been scrambling to lead these protestors.

The conservative rebellions of the late 1970s and middle 1990s were focused on taxes. The tea partiers are focusing on the expansion of government -- and its threat to the independence of citizens.

The first mention of tea parties came in February 2009 from CNBC's Rick Santelli on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, when he asked "if we really want to subsidize the losers' mortgages. How many of you people want to pay your neighbor's mortgage, that has an extra bathroom and can't pay their bills?" Then he called for a Chicago tea party.

This struck a chord. Tea partiers began to dress in 18th century costumes -- political re-enactors -- and brandished the "Don't tread on me" flag. They declared their independence by opposing Progressive policies that encourage dependence on government.

The Progressives have always assumed that people needed safety nets and would welcome dependence on government. The public's clear rejection of the Democratic health care bills has shown that this assumption was unwarranted. Americans today prefer independence to dependence on government, just as they did 200 years ago.

All this was supposed to have been consigned to the past long ago. The Progressives of the early 1900s -- Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, New Republic founder Herbert Croly -- argued that in an industrial era of mass production and giant businesses, ordinary people were helpless and needed government's guiding hand. It would be more efficient, they argued, for centralized, disinterested experts to administer national institutions than to let chaotic markets operate freely and to observe the Constitution's horse-and-buggy limits on government power. The Founders were out of date.

The Progressives had their way for much of the 20th century. But it became apparent that centralized experts weren't disinterested, but always sought to expand their power. And it became clear that central planners can never have the kind of information that is transmitted instantly, as Friedrich von Hayek observed, by price signals in free markets.

It turned out that centralized experts are not as wise and ordinary Americans are not as helpless as the Progressives thought. By passing the stimulus package and the health care bills, the Democrats produced expansion of government. But voters seem to prefer expansion of liberty.

The Progressives' scorn for the Founders has not been shared by the people. First-rate books about the Founders have been bestsellers. And efforts to dismiss the Founders as slaveholders, misogynists or homophobes have been outweighed by the resonance of their words and deeds.

The Declaration of Independence's proclamation that "all men are created equal" with "unalienable rights" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" has proved to be happily elastic. It still sings to us today, thanks to the struggles and sacrifices of many Americans who gave blacks and women the equality denied to them in 1776.

In contrast, the early Progressives' talk of an "industrial age" and an outmoded Constitution sounds like the language of an age now long past. Their faith in centralized planning seems naive in a time when one unpredicted innovation after another has changed lives for the better.

Polls and recent election results tell us that racial minorities and the so-called "educated class" -- the people who expect their kind will administer centralized institutions -- still take the side of the Progressives. Most Americans, however, are rejecting the path of dependence and are intent on declaring their independence once again.

[karl]

Quote:

The conservative rebellions of the late 1970s and middle 1990s were focused on taxes. The tea partiers are focusing on the expansion of government -- and its threat to the independence of citizens.....

It turned out that centralized experts are not as wise and ordinary Americans are not as helpless as the Progressives thought. By passing the stimulus package and the health care bills, the Democrats produced expansion of government. But voters seem to prefer expansion of liberty.

The Progressives' scorn for the Founders has not been shared by the people. First-rate books about the Founders have been bestsellers. And efforts to dismiss the Founders as slaveholders, misogynists or homophobes have been outweighed by the resonance of their words and deeds.

Here's hoping for growing awareness regarding the preciousness of liberty. Here's hoping for sustained anger at the arrogance of Democrats in ramming us with "stimulus package," Obamacare, cap and trade, and record deficit spending.

[karl]

Quote:

In contrast, the early Progressives' talk of an "industrial age" and an outmoded Constitution sounds like the language of an age now long past. Their faith in centralized planning seems naive in a time when one unpredicted innovation after another has changed lives for the better.

It's not just naive. It is frighteningly ignorant of history. Central planning is anti-liberty.

Government needs to be eliminated from SO many aspects of life in which it currently has its tentacles.

Liberty, folks. Government is the number one enemy of liberty.

[Dr. Shane]

Our lives are so much better today than they were at the founding of this nation. Our founders started something good but they were not the apostles. The Constitution was not handed down to Moses on tablets of stone.

Today we have greater liberty, greater freedom and greater opportunities than any other generation that has ever existed on the face of this planet since the time that Eve first ate the forbidden fruit.

I am an example of the American dream come true. Born as poor white trash in a trailer park, both of my parents were abusive alcoholics who divorced when I was young. Because of the compassionate and caring federal government I was fed with food stamps, rent paid with AFDC, home heated with heating assistance, mother was able to go to vocational school on student aid and I was able to get a college degree because my loving, compassionate big brother government supplied all my needs.

[karl]

Because of the compassionate and caring federal government I was fed with food stamps, rent paid with AFDC, home heated with heating assistance, mother was able to go to vocational school on student aid and I was able to get a college degree because my loving, compassionate big brother government supplied all my needs.

You are so consistent with this love for gummint theft, you're likely to be still in our pockets. Is that company you're working for getting government contracts?

[bonnie]

Quote:

You are so consistent with this love for gummint theft, you're likely to be still in our pockets. Is that company you're working for getting government contracts?

Makes you wonder what was wrong with all those poor families that did it without big daddy?

Or how were they able to?It doesn't get much poorer than my parents were.We didn't have anyone paying our heat or providing our food.My three siblings and I have all gone on to be able to do better than what we had.All have gone into their own businesses.All have been successful,ALL without government help

[Dr. Shane]

We couldn't get along without government. But for those pride-filled, government haters that think they can, I would like to see how successful they could be without any government roads. I would like to see them only hire workers educated in private schools. Oh, and they better make sure they don't ever take any money even remotely related to government.

Fact is we need government. We like, we love it and want more of it. Those that say different are living with Alice some where off in wonderland.

[bonnie]

We couldn't get along without government. But for those pride-filled, government haters that think they can, I would like to see how successful they could be without any government roads. I would like to see them only hire workers educated in private schools. Oh, and they better make sure they don't ever take any money even remotely related to government.

Fact is we need government. We like, we love it and want more of it. Those that say different are living with Alice some where off in wonderland.

True to form you are presenting a extreme argument that was never put forth by anyone except you using extreme examples.

No one has advocated dismantling the government.The scope and responsibilities of the government was pretty clearly set out.

I do not hate government,I have objection to government involving itself in area's where they have no business.

The infrastructure and protecting the citizens from invasion by another country,and having laws that either prevent or make it ilegal to harm another.

It is getting easier and easier to hire those from private schools or home schooled applicants. But again that is a extreme that only you are presenting.

As for taking money from the government in some area's it has been made that it cannot be without.Such as medicare. We can opt out of medicare but in MN we would be unable to purchase full coverage. The only option available to us is the supplemental.We were doing just fine before we had to save money government style. And no,I have no intention of going without insurance. Realistically,we are still paying what private insurance cost us so it is hardly a freebie.

What you define as pride filled is simply believing that I have no right to take from a fellow taxpayer what I can do for myself. At times maybe it was not even as well as I could have done on welfare. That was my problem. No one was obligated to feed my children,clothe them or educate them.

You might want more of it,that seems fairly obvious.I don't.

I know where the US government will lead us some day soon. While that I believe is part of biblical prophecy I don't feel any obligation to fawn and idolize and help promote those issues that will come back to bite us

[karl]

Fact is we need government. We like, we love it and want more of it. Those that say different are living with Alice some where off in wonderland.

There goes my lunch again. At least I'm losing weight. Kinda like bulemia.

[bonnie]

Quote:

There goes my lunch again. At least I'm losing weight. Kinda like bulemia.

My dad passed away in 1993.Amazes me that he just keeps getting smarter as the years go by.

He always told us never fear those outside the church,worry far more about those sitting in the pew. He was convinced that SDA's or most would embrace what we should shun and open the door wide.

[Dr. Shane]

He was convinced that SDA's or most would embrace what we should shun and open the door wide.

I do see a lot of cold-heartedness in some SDAs but not in most. Most SDAs are still compassionate and loving. I think most SDAs are very happy that the government helps out the poor, builds roads, plows snow, hires police, controls air traffic, regulates trade and insures job safety so that some wicked business owners cannot recklessly place their employees lives in danger just to increase their profit margin so they can spend a few more bucks at Disneyland.

[karl]

I do see a lot of cold-heartedness in some SDAs but not in most. Most SDAs are still compassionate and loving. I think most SDAs are very happy that the government helps out the poor, builds roads, plows snow, hires police, controls air traffic, regulates trade and insures job safety so that some wicked business owners cannot recklessly place their employees lives in danger just to increase their profit margin so they can spend a few more bucks at Disneyland.

The average Adventist is at least as center-right as the populace and we are all fed up with big government.

The revolution is happening before your eyes. There is an anti-incumbancy and anti-big spending move afoot in this country in primary elections tonight. The voters are rejecting the status quo.

We WILL get some politicians who are committed to reduce the deficit and who will work concretely towards this goal NOW. We WILL get some fiscal conservatism.

Even Democrats are running as neo-cons.

[lazarus]

Clearly the establishment took a hit but I don't think its a revolution. If it was a revolution the Murhta's seat should have gone. The more the tea baggers advance the better for the Dems. We need more GOPers to behave like the Arizona Governor.

[bonnie]

Clearly the establishment took a hit but I don't think its a revolution. If it was a revolution the Murhta's seat should have gone. The more the tea baggers advance the better for the Dems. We need more GOPers to behave like the Arizona Governor.

Oh for more like the Arizona governor.Those that would not back off of the scorn and mocking of the president.God forbid we should have anyone that understands the word "illegal".Just how politically incorrect can we get

You seem to favor the same offensive phrase as the president.

[bonnie]

Quote:

The average Adventist is at least as center-right as the populace and we are all fed up with big government.

I am not so sure this is true anymore. There are many SDA's that are in line holding their hands out.

Quote:

The revolution is happening before your eyes. There is an anti-incumbancy and anti-big spending move afoot in this country in primary elections tonight. The voters are rejecting the status quo.

The real test will come when we see if their pet handouts and subsidies are in danger

Quote:

We WILL get some politicians who are committed to reduce the deficit and who will work concretely towards this goal NOW. We WILL get some fiscal conservatism.

Even Democrats are running as neo-cons.

Fiscal conservative means the unnecessary pet projects are scrapped. Let's see how many are willing to bring government back to where it was meant to be

[doug yowell]

Quote:

The average Adventist is at least as center-right as the populace and we are all fed up with big government.

I am not so sure this is true anymore. There are many SDA's that are in line holding their hands out.

The real test will come when we see if their pet handouts and subsidies are in danger

Quote:

We WILL get some politicians who are committed to reduce the deficit and who will work concretely towards this goal NOW. We WILL get some fiscal conservatism.

Even Democrats are running as neo-cons.

Fiscal conservative means the unnecessary pet projects are scrapped. Let's see how many are willing to bring government back to where it was meant to be

Bonnie, have you ever considered speaking out on political issues?

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Quote:

The average Adventist is at least as center-right as the populace and we are all fed up with big government.

I am not so sure this is true anymore. There are many SDA's that are in line holding their hands out.

The real test will come when we see if their pet handouts and subsidies are in danger

Quote:

We WILL get some politicians who are committed to reduce the deficit and who will work concretely towards this goal NOW. We WILL get some fiscal conservatism.

Even Democrats are running as neo-cons.

Fiscal conservative means the unnecessary pet projects are scrapped. Let's see how many are willing to bring government back to where it was meant to be

Bonnie, have you ever considered speaking out on political issues?

Every now and again.LOL

[Guest]

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: lazarus

Clearly the establishment took a hit but I don't think its a revolution. If it was a revolution the Murhta's seat should have gone. The more the tea baggers advance the better for the Dems. We need more GOPers to behave like the Arizona Governor.

Oh for more like the Arizona governor.Those that would not back off of the scorn and mocking of the president.God forbid we should have anyone that understands the word "illegal".Just how politically incorrect can we get

You seem to favor the same offensive phrase as the president.

Yes he does.

[lazarus]

what offensive phrase?

[lazarus]

The more we hear from tea party folks the better.

Rand Paul, for example should keep talking. Love his position on civil rights legislation.

Tea party leader put his foot in it too. This is all good stuff.

[bonnie]

what offensive phrase?

Try tea baggers.Look up the generally understood meaning of that phrase.It could be alright tho as Obama has used it as well