Skip to comments.Katherine Kersten: The costs of giving in to government
Posted on 05/24/2009 3:56:12 AM PDT by rhema
On Memorial Day, we honor our nation's warriors and their courageous defense of freedom. Their sacrifice is the highest and best, but it comes with an important caveat.
Our soldiers defend freedom outside our borders, but it is the rest of us who must constantly strive to build and maintain it within. While America's troops patrol the mountains of Afghanistan, we must guard against encroachments on freedom here at home. It is up to us to ensure that our way of life is worthy of protection by our men and women in uniform.
Our mission may not seem dramatic -- we're not called to assault a Taliban encampment or devise a strategy to foil Iran's nuclear ambitions. Instead, we make a thousand and one small decisions each year that enhance or diminish freedom's vitality within our borders.
America's military continues to be the world's best, yet today we're losing the struggle for freedom on the home front. We're giving ground in the battle against that voracious devourer of freedom -- massive, intrusive central government.
Big government is not making these inroads by threatening or intimidating us. On the contrary, it declares its good intentions in warm, reassuring tones -- promising to assume our burdens, protect us from risk and enhance our well-being.
The campaign to expand government's scope and influence is led by a president who is a master at manipulating this seductive message. Barack Obama declared his intention on Inauguration Day, when he vowed to "remake America." A skilled rhetorician, the president has couched his ambitions in words that resonate to American ears -- equality, empathy, compassion and social justice.
The consequences of central government's assault are just beginning to become apparent. Its first victims have been "greedy" bankers, financiers, and auto and insurance executives -- those classic
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Good column, and thanks for posting. The scary part is the comments in the source article where the posters actually see government intrusion and competition with private business as a good thing. The government never competes on a level playing field, but simply crushes the competition with regulation. The Post Office is always the classic example. The government can never complete fairly in the automobile or medical field without crushing the competition through regulation. If we citizens dont buy the Obamamobile, then the government will require everyone else to produce an equally crappy automobile and, once the government sticks their nose in medical care, the government will dictate the procedures you may have, and forbid private alternatives even if you want to pay for it.
Then they went after auto company CEOS. I am a far cry from a CEO, so I did nothing again.
Next in line were selected auto company bond holders and auto dealers. This is starting to get closer. The father of a dear friend is an auto dealer.
Aside from complaining at this forum and emails to my congressional delegation I admit I still haven't done anything of substance to stop the Leftist assaults on our freedoms.
I hope there exists braver souls to take on the Statists.
Very good article. Rush has been saying lately that Zero is practiced in the “low art of political seduction”. I could not agree more. This article touched on that.
“Freedoms champions are self-reliant, enterprising citizens, capable of handling their own affairs and unafraid to do so. They know that liberty brings both rewards and risks, and that the two are inseparable. If we take big governments bargain and trade our freedoms for the guarantee of a pleasant, risk-free life we will soon discover how high a price we must pay.”
BUMP! It really IS that simple.
Get with it, GOP. Make some hay while you can, you hacks!
Perhaps I didnt make myself clear. Im in no way advocating government should be in business, nor is there any Constitutional authority for such. Quite the opposite, I believe the government should only do what its constitutionally authorized to do, and nothing more. I only cited the Post Office as an example of a poorly managed government business. Now the government has inserted itself in a management role in banks and auto manufacturing, and is eager to manage our health care. How is my comment off the wall?
So we agree, the government should not be in business, and was it Regan who said the government that governs best, governs the least?
How did the Red Star's editors let this one get out? Then again, I thought they went bankrupt.
And if you see a Vet, shake they're hand, or kiss 'em on the cheek, and say Thank You!
Have a great Memorial Day.
That’s a Jefferson quote, but Reagan said many sililar things.
You said, The scary part is the comments in the source article where the posters actually see government intrusion and competition with private business as a good thing.
Which prompted me to read some of the awful remarks, it was our agreement that those posters are indeed scary!
Their very desire to have government in competition with business is a frightening development of American economic thought! It is a competition in which none would win and none would do well, except for the corrupt. Their lack of insight is shocking, but not misunderstood given the current education systems through the college level.