Skip to comments.Time to Give Up or Time to Fight On?
Posted on 12/19/2012 12:04:26 PM PST by PapaNew
Adapted from an interview by Hugh Hewitt conducted on the day after the election, November 7, 2012.
[T]oo few prominent conservatives are skillful at explaining the problem of the modern bureaucratic state. This form of government proceeds by rules, and rules upon rules, and compliance with those rules becomes a key activity of the entire nation. That results in bureaucracy, and in the inefficiencies of bureaucracy. Constitutional government, on the other hand, proceeds by clearly stated laws.
Not grasping this is an important failure of conservative statesmen today. During the first presidential debate, Mitt Romney...said that business and prosperity require regulation. What he should have said instead was that of course we require laws in order to be productive and to live safely, but that laws are different than regulations. Laws are passed by elected (and thus accountable) representatives, they cover everybody equally, and we can all participate in their enforcement because they are easy to understand. Not one of those three things is true of the regulations imposed by independent boards such as those established under Obamacare and Dodd-Frank. Romney was not able to make that distinction, and yet that distinction is at the heart of the choice Americans must make about how they will be governed.
[Churchill] was called to lead in 1940 because he proved in the 1930s that he could do so. That same year, Churchill asked one of his assistants, John Colville, to find him the precise text of a prayer he remembered from the siege of Gibraltar. It reads:
Fear not the result, for either thy end shall be an enviable and a majestic one, or God will preserve our reign upon the waters.
We might follow Churchill in saying that prayer in hard times. We might cultivate the strength that it can give.
(Excerpt) Read more at hillsdale.edu ...
[N]ow he has promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not only the earth, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are [man]made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Hebrews 12:26-27.
"I know not what course other may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Regulations are used to bypass Congress.
Laws are used to provide checks and balances to our sorry branches of the Federal Government.
"It's dead eady to die, it's the keeping on living that's hard."
Hopefully the link works. It's iffy when I post from mobile.
Some of the great resistance strategies involve ‘going underground’ or engaging in guerrilla warfare.
Perhaps it is time to recognize that fighting,directly, the federal government with it’s media psychopaths, a propaganda spewing Hollywood and a warped academia as allies is NOT going to be effective.
However, attacking,whether verbally, through boycotts or through the polls, lefty big money supporters at a LOCAL level—democrat founders like lawyers, local left wing businesses and LOCAL politicians...might cause sever damage.
Besides, this cold war will get hot and it might be a very good idea to know who ones local enemies are.
Thanks for posting. I just got this in the mail today, too. ;-)
We have only one choice and that is to fight. Surrender means our death, probably slow and horrible whils bastards like obama and hillary laugh.If you want to live, fight. If you care for your family, fight. As bad as our side wants to face it, the facts are that we are in a fight to the death with the communists[Left,Liberal, Socialists]. I have yet to hear a communists refer to, “My Conservative friend.” Yet, I have read the term, “My Liberal friend” countless times on this forum. Liberals,Lefists, Communists, and Socialists may be some Conservatives friends, but no Conservative is the friend of Leftists, Liberals, Communists or Socialists.
I was a good article but a lousy title, IMO. I should have changed it to something like, “Shaking Out the False from the True.”
I saw Romney say what he said and I had the same conclusion: he doesn't really get it.
The entire Federal Regulatory regime only came into being in the 1930's under the New Deal. The whole notion of bureaucrats writing laws for themselves was fiercely opposed, but that opposition lost out because of the oppression of the Depression. People were simply so scared, they were willing to go along with unaccountable tyranny of the Agencies as long as they got some food.
In other words, just like now, the Communists create crises to give themselves conditions in which they can impose their will, which would never be allowed in normal time.