Skip to comments.92% Favor Strict Limits on Government To Protect the Individual
Posted on 04/18/2012 9:31:13 AM PDT by Josh Painter
Voters believe too much government power is a dangerous thing and put a very high value on protecting the rights of the individual.
Sixty-five percent (65%) of Likely U.S. Voters agree with the statement that a government powerful enough to do everything you want is also powerful enough to take away everything you have. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that only 23% disagree with that statement. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure about it. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters was conducted on April 16-17, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC...
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Then why in the hell do we elect such people as we do?
“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution ... or have failed their purpose ... or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ ‘interests,’ I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty, and in that cause I am doing the very best I can.” — Barry Goldwater
These are the 'moderates' and 'independents' we are told to lavish with praise and attention.
Makes you wonder about the other 8%.
We already have them. Called the Constitution and Bill of Rights!
Then why in the hell do we elect such people as we do?
For about 49% of the voters? OPM (other peoples money)
the other 51% or so.. I have no flipping clue.
Might it be that most of that 51% line up behind the lesser of two evils served up to us by elite party members who think they know a winner when they see one regardless of said “winners” views matching the other party? (Mitt comes to mind)
As a person who is still employed by a local government... I have seen the inner workings at a local level and we should all be very afraid. It is very scary what just a little power does to many people. I think that in previous generations this may have been held in check more frequently by peoples’ moral compasses.
It is endemic.
Because if we don't we'll just get the other guy who is even worse. (motto stolen from Romney 2012.)
I wish it were that simple. When Marxists start meddling with reason, nothing is simple, and people, most of whom have never thought through the origins and consequences of their beliefs, are walking contradictions, wanting freedom, and voting serfdom.
” - - - Then why in the hell do we elect such people as we do?”
In 2008 we were allowed to choose between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.
In 2012 we probably will be allowed to choose between Obama and Obamalite.
BTW, if you choose, you lose: a hell of a way to run a Country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree. I think there is probably 10-20% Democrat advantage due to vote fraud and a slavishly favorable press corps.
I have a solution to the fraud problem though. First require a picture ID at the poll. Next require all ballots to be securely collected in a locked container. anyone who handles that container would have to do so in the presence of an observer and both would be required to sign a chain of custody for that container of votes. Any discrepancies found in that container would result in mandatory treason charges and likely execution of anyone listed on the chain of custody.
It's all about motivation.
Largely because in too many people's eyes "the individual" tends to refer to me, and not to the other guy. The best example I can think of is the liberal demand for unlimited free speech whose object is to crack down on someone else's free speech, in the form of "hate speech" laws.
Old-school liberals weren't like that - Nat Hentoff comes to mind. These days, though, it's all about power over the other tribe. Politics has devolved into brutality and I don't see it coming back anytime soon.
“Then why in the hell do we elect such people as we do?”
Benjamen Franklin to the Constitutional Convention 2nd June 1787;
“Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men, a post of honour that shall be at the same time a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. The vast number of such places it is that renders the British Government so tempestuous. The struggles for them are the true sources of all those factions which are perpetually dividing the Nation, distracting its Councils, hurrying sometimes into fruitless & mischievous wars, and often compelling a submission to dishonorable terms of peace. And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable pre- eminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate; the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your Government and be your rulers. -And these too will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation: For their vanquished competitors of the same spirit, and from the same motives will perpetually be endeavouring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people.”
48% of these think this is a feature and not a bug. ;-(
A million other competing and more prominent issues usurped by the Federal government, general ignorance, and a total lack of alternatives.
Its the people on the other-side of the Federation you can’t see that are easiest to hurt.
Although in all honesty it doesn’t much matter who is stepping on who. In almost every case the stepping was supported under the guise of “helping people”.
You see politicians have made their carriers out of using unbridled government power to “solve” problems they define, while sudly overlooking the fact that they are stepping upon other people’s rights in the process.
The very idea that Washington was not meant to solve all the problems in the world is almost unthinkable to most of them. The concept would undercut their whole mindset in Washington. Leftist perhaps as much or more than any other group suffer from this dangerous dilution. They have been locked into the idea that Governments are capable of reshaping the nature of men.
But all the government is, is a Gun. Force that robs people of their free will, nothing more, nothing less. Leftist like to say you can’t solve every problem with the gun, maybe they should take a good close look at what they long been trying to do with the Government.
For the same reason people badmouth Congress while reëlecting over 90% of them every year - it's always “the OTHER guy's” representative that's bad, not MINE!
Limit gov’t to protect MY rights, you bet - but “the OTHER guy” over there needs to be watched, you know...
Power corrupts, the more power the more corrupting.
Your right without even a moral compass we are in real trouble. There was a very good reason the Texas Constitution was written to prohibit any athirst from holding any office of trust under Texas. If a man or woman does not fear the divine consequences of God he or she is all the more corruptible in life by power.
If we did not have a the idea that the Federal Government defines not only its own limits but the limits of our States in regard to domestic government as well, to the point where we could not even require in our constitution such commonsense measures to mitigate the cost of the corruption of power. Our life, property, and liberty would be in a far more secure position today.
Instead and for the last 150 years we have had a lawless Federal Government bound only by its own discretion.