"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think."
“Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.”
“For the bureaucrat, the world is a mere object to be manipulated by him.”
“They’re waiting for us to act. They’re waiting for us to lead. They don’t want us to put our finger up to the wind. They don’t want us reading polls; they want us to look and see what’s the best thing for America and then do what’s right.”
The preceding four quotations are attributable in order to: Adolf Hitler, Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, and President Barack Obama. Our President, by virtue first of his actions and now his words, has clearly shown he believes himself and his constituents to be shepherds of the American People. Gone are the long-held tenets of Abraham Lincoln’s America. As the unprecedented power grab continues, whether by virtue of Sen. Dodd wrangling for control of the banking system or ObamaCare, it has become painfully obvious that our government no longer believes we are capable of governing ourselves. It is difficult to watch a country once so driven by pride, become now as meek as mice.
In truth, everything has progressed according to plan. We have seen economical woes and panicked. We have been told that evil was to blame and suitably cowered. We have heard that it is because of our decadence and irresponsibility that we suffer. We agreed. Our problems were shown to be far beyond our ability to grasp, so we wisely let go. We were delivered a President, missing only a cape, to save us and we celebrated.
Now, with celebration ended and the glitter fading away, we stand in an empty ballroom with broom in hand. All that remains is the soon to be delivered tab, and the failing hope that we can cover it.
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” –Thomas Jefferson
Here are a few more:
ReplyDelete"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." ~Soren Kierkegaard
"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ~1755 letter to the Governor of Pennsylvania from the Assembly as published by Benjamin Franklin~
I find it interesting that the previous administration was supposed to be the one that destroyed all our liberties and spat on the Bill of Rights and led us down the path to complete and utter totalitarianism. Yet we find ourselves on the verge of seeing congress foist upon us something that somewhere in the neighborhood of 60%-70% of the American people do not want in its current form.
And three people appear willing to do anything to get it passed. Including buying votes, changing the meaning of the word "vote" to mean "we almost voted" and otherwise trampling on the rules of the legislative branch of government.
Oh, by the way, most of the evil totalitarian rules of the previous administration are still in place. Guantanamo is still open, we are still holding people without charges, we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are still holding military tribunals...
I would disagree slightly with your views on the quote from our president, though. I think the American people do want our leaders to be strong and not beholden to the every whim of the political winds. To be willing to do what's in the best interest of the country rather than what the uneducated masses desire.
However, during those times where what is in the best interest of the American people does not jive with what the majority want, it is the duty of those strong leaders to plainly, honestly and completely use their bully pulpit to lay out to the people why they are doing what they are doing and why it is the best course for America.
When you have complete control over the executive and legislative branches of government and you can't get your message out, something is amiss. Either you are a truly incompetent leader, your actions are indefensible, or both. I prefer "both" in this instance.
The leaders of both houses of congress have been unable to put forth any reasonable explanation of the benefits of their plan other than to offer broad generalities. I attribute this to the 2000+ page length of the thing and that - due to the deals being made to garner votes - nobody truly knows what is going to happen if it is passed.
As Nancy Pelosi herself said, "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
Uhhhhhhhhh, no. Tell me what is in it NOW, before it becomes LAW, rather than let me open a box full of rattlesnakes later on.
If a strong and trusted leader tells me that I must sacrifice for the greater good, it is an easier sell if he tells me what my sacrifice will do for my fellow man. Telling me that I must sacrifice because he/she says so and they know what's best might work on a six-year-old, but not on someone who has a basic grasp of the real world.
If anyone is a position of power in Washington could answer these two questions, I would be more likely to support their health care efforts:
1. If most benefits don't kick in until 2014, why must we rush through the process now instead of taking the time to make it the best bill possible?
2. How can you violate the laws of supply and demand by increasing demand and not expecting the price of healthcare to go up or causing a massive shortage in available care?
While I agree with you, Terry, on the majority of your points, I would take issue with your notion that it is sometimes necessary for those who govern to act apart from the will of the 'uneducated masses'. While I admit that the majority of people in this country are painfully unversed in our nation's rich heritage and the vision of our forefathers, I believe that it is incumbent upon every leader to heed the voice of the people before rendering a judgment or choosing any course of action which may be contrary to to the will of the governed. After all, the common American in today's society is far better educated than at any other time in the history of man. According to the 2000 Census, the US has a high school graduation rate of around 80% coupled with almost 25% of the population possessing a bachelors degree or higher. To imply that the will of the people should be taken with a grain of salt smacks of elitism, and is out of step with the view that many of our founders held concerning the God-given autonomy of humankind. Consider for a moment the words of a man whom I believe to be the most intelligent and independent minded individual among the founders of this great nation. Thomas Jefferson believed that the "will of the people was the only legitimate foundation of any government" and that it is "the people, to whom all authority belongs." He also stated that "The opinions and dispositions of our people in general, in governments like ours, must be the foundation of measures." That said, I agree with you that there should be more discourse and debate between the general populace and our leaders, especially when we don't see eye to eye on particular issues, but ultimately that which separates a democracy from a dictatorship is that the will of the people ought to prevail in every instance. After all, let us not forget that the bloodiest war on American soil - the Civil War - occurred largely because leaders on both sides acted on their own judgment and gave little thought to the general consent of the people. Let's just hope that the old saying, "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it" doesn't prove its proverbial use again anytime soon. Although with the current string of abuses, it may yet.
ReplyDelete"Sic semper tyrannis!"
Terry,
ReplyDeleteWhile I value your opinions, and generally agree, I must on this point side with David. I think the fundamental difference lies within separating a "leader" from the President of the United States. As odd as it sounds, there is a fundamental difference. I would never, regardless of party, support a Presidents' choice to make a decision contrary to the will of the republic. To do so would be counter to everything to which democracy is beholden. While a true "leader" may do exactly this, and possibly be correct in doing so, not being the will of the people which elected him, the act itself would define the individual as a dictator, not a President of the people. This is a fundamental and defining difference. Case in point: As a Store Manager, I often made unpopular, but in the grand scheme, correct decisions. However, in that instance I was appointed, not elected. In essence, I was a dictator. The President, however, is elected by the masses, and, as such, IS beholden to their will. At no point do I recognize or authorize any elected leader to act contrary to the will of the group which has selected him as a representative.
I hold this to be a fundamental and defining separation of a democracy from a dictatorship, even if the President proves to be elected for misguided or misunderstood reasons. The ability for one individual to manipulate the masses, should not excuse his actions upon receiving office. In truth, they should be the defining reason for his summary removal.