Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The all-you-can-eat salad bar of rights ... Mark Steyn
OC Register ^ | 26 Feb 2012 | Mark Steyn

Posted on 02/26/2012 8:33:13 AM PST by Rummyfan

CNN's John King did his best the other night, producing a question from one of his viewers:

"Since birth control is the latest hot topic, which candidate believes in birth control, and if not, why?"

To their credit, no Republican candidate was inclined to accept the premise of the question. King might have done better to put the issue to Danica Patrick. For some reason, Michelle Fields of The Daily Caller sought the views of the NASCAR driver and Sports Illustrated swimwear model about "the Obama administration's dictate that religious employers provide health care plans that cover contraceptives." Miss Patrick, a practicing Catholic, gave the perfect citizen's response for the Age of Obama:

"I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans."

(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marksteyn

1 posted on 02/26/2012 8:33:16 AM PST by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

I wonder if her driving judgment is as flawed as her reasoning skills?


2 posted on 02/26/2012 9:08:43 AM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

.
“I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans.”
-Danica Patrick
.
.
“...the whole reason we have elected officials is so we don’t have to think all the time.”
-Homer Simpson.
.


3 posted on 02/26/2012 9:10:41 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (the whole reason we have elected officials is so we don't have to think all the time. -Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
Well, when "the government" mandates that drivers no longer will be able to drive cars around tracks for entertainment and money, will Ms. Patrick still believe in its "good decisions"?

American citizens were not always so naive and ignorant!

"Although all men are born free, slavery has been the general lot of the human race. Ignorant—they have been cheated; asleep—they have been surprised; divided—the yoke has been forced upon them. But what is the lesson? ... the people ought to be enlightened, to be awakened, to be united, that after establishing a government, they should watch over it ... It is universally admitted that a well-instructed people alone can be permanently free."

So-called "progressives" understand the "divided" part of Madison's cautionary words, but the rest of us seem to ignore the rest of Madison's statement.

Might it have something to do with our not having been "well-instructed" in the ideas of freedom?

Edmund Burke, in his 1775 "Speech on Conciliation," observed the following "spirit" in the founding generations:

"Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our colonies, which contributes no mean part towards the growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study. The profession itself is numerous and powerful; and in most provinces it takes the lead. The greater number of the deputies sent to the congress were lawyers. But all who read, and most do read, endeavour to obtain some smattering in that science. I have been told by an eminent bookseller, that in no branch of his business, after tracts of popular devotion, were so many books as those on the law exported to the plantations. The colonists have now fallen into the way of printing them for their own use. I hear that they have sold nearly as many of Blackstone's Commentaries in America as in England. General Gage marks out this disposition very particularly in a letter on your table. He states, that all the people in his government are lawyers, or smatterers in law; and that in Boston they have been enabled, by successful chicane, wholly to evade many parts of one of your capital penal constitutions. The smartness of debate will say, that this knowledge ought to teach them more clearly the rights of legislature, their obligations to obedience, and the penalties of rebellion. All this is mighty well. But my honourable and learned friend on the floor, who condescends to mark what I say for animadversion, will disdain that ground. He has heard, as well as I, that when great honours and great emoluments do not win over this knowledge to the service of the state, it is a formidable adversary to government. If the spirit be not tamed and broken by these happy methods, it is stubborn and litigious. Abeunt studia in mores. This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other countries, the people, more simple, and of a less mercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze." (Underlining added for emphasis)

Burke also declared to the Parliament that what he called the colonists' "fierce spirit of liberty" also must be attributed to their "religion," "under a variety of denominations agreeing in nothing but in the communion of the spirit of liberty."

4 posted on 02/26/2012 9:13:31 AM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: loveliberty2
From the same speech, I believe, of Edmund Burke, delivered on March 22, 1775, one day before Patrick Henry's "Give me liberty or give me death" speech:

"In this character of the Americans a love of freedom is the predominating feature, which marks and distinguishes the whole...this fierce spirit of liberty is stronger in the English colonies, perhaps, than in any people of the earth."

Still true of many millions of Americans today even though the elites in the government and the media dismiss them as extremists, racists, and "tea-baggers."

5 posted on 02/26/2012 9:52:38 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

“Since birth control is the latest hot topic, which candidate believes in birth control, and if not, why?”

it is? says who??

sorry, the financial meltdown of the entire free world due to the creeping crud of socialism is a tad more pressing then how you avoid responsibility while playing with your genitalia

just another commie tard trying to set the stage to have political discourse.


6 posted on 02/26/2012 9:57:03 AM PST by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Bump for later reading.


7 posted on 02/26/2012 10:08:28 AM PST by SunTzuWu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
Uhhh, I think what Ms. Patrick was really saying, in her own snarky way, is "Hey, people pay me big bucks to drive a car in circles, something I like doing so much anyway that I would be paying to do it if it weren't my job. So, I'm not going to touch anything political and take a risk of upsetting this unimaginable gravy train by saying something stupid that upsets at least one side of my ticket buying public. Excuse me if I just shut up and drive."

And I can't really blame her.

8 posted on 02/26/2012 10:36:52 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Monumental ignorance gets the nanny state it deserves.


9 posted on 02/26/2012 10:53:48 AM PST by Bullish (12-22-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sten
The Democrats introduced this as a "social issue" hoping to win over independents who are more concerned with free stuff from the government than in protecting constitutional rights--or in whether the current administration's economic policies will ever benefit the country.

They may have calculated that this issue might help Santorum win the nomination, on the idea that he'd be an easier opponent to beat because he could be portrayed as out to the mainstream on contraception. Others have suggested this.

It's a bit like Nixon's people wanting to destroy Muskie in 1972 to get an easier opponent to beat--but the Obama people didn't need to resort to the same "dirty tricks" as in 1972 because they had the media ready to cooperate (e.g.. Stephanopoulos as moderator at the debate). They probably figure that Santorum in 2012 would be like McGovern in 1972--fervent support from the base but unable to win the people in the middle.

10 posted on 02/26/2012 11:19:31 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson