The beginning of this extremely well done video lays out the call to Catholics to help protect their faith and their values:
In generations past, the Church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. This generation of Catholics must do the same.
Now I am an evangelical Protestant, not Catholic, so there are theological points on which we will never agree upon. That said, I believe that there is a message here for Bible believing Christians who take their faith seriously and personally (i.e., not a “back row Baptist” or a “country club Christian”) as well as to Catholics. I do believe that Obama, as with many Progressives, see a personal faith as being a hindrance to implementing Bigger Government -they realize that in order to have fealty to government, there must be no nothing “above” Government.
Make no mistake – there is a political battle going on simply because it is a Presidential election year. But also make no mistake – there is a philosophical battle going on for the soul of what this country can and should be; what should the Land of the Free have as its guiding principle? This battle is between two diametrically opposed visions – the first is that now being pushed by the radical vision of Obama and his punishing posse of Progressives defined by the socialist collective ideal. In this world, Government is the most important part of the country’s life and guides and defines (and ultimately demands) how the rest of us will live our lives. Here, they would devolve us back to a system where elites and technocrats, within the almost unlimited confines of the Administrative State, would carefully let us know what is good and bad, right and wrong. All, we are assured, would live equitably with completely shared values – predetermined by the Politically Correct set. Society well defined and ‘efficient’ – the messy chaos that would otherwise exist is, well, would be a thing of the past.
The alternative is what this Republic was founded upon – radical vision that all men are created equal with Rights given by their Creator where each person is free to make of themselves what they will, all the gift of both the genius and sacrifices of our Founders. The new notion that we get to decide how we are to be governed by our consent by a Government that is (supposed to be) responsive to us (instead of the other way around). Further, that Government is bound by a limiting document that explicitly lays out what it can and cannot do, what each part of that government should and shouldn’t do, and all for our benefit (instead of for the benefit of Government).
Hmmm, this is not how I thought this post was gonna go; well, words happen. What got me started was the that phrase that is now the title (from Hot Air and ended up as the title of my previous post: You’re On Your Own vs We Refuse to Leave You Alone) as well as a memory that got kicked off as I read it.
That was a line from one of Obama’s recent campaign speeches. Now if you took it at face value, it sounds like what any politician would be. Further, most Americans, steeped in the traditional values of Americana would do the “fill in the blank” – and this is exactly how that phrase was supposed to be taken. But how come the Media never asks “”and where is ‘where’?”
“I ran for this office to get us to where we need to be.”
What’s the context? This: “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” But we know where he is going – he’s told us. “We Can’t Wait”…if Congress won’t act…his use of Executive Orders….his agencies and departments choosing to make rulings, regulations, and statutes that far exceed their authorizing legislation. Add to that an almost complete regard to rulings of the court system. Obama rails on the outside, but with a smile on the inside. You see, it is an inside job. Added by Harry Reid and the other Progressive and Democrat Socialists in the Senate and the House, they are making Congress irrelevant (what is it, 1200 days since the Senate passed an operating budget?). Government has grown larger, has inserted itself into almost every aspect of our lives because of the actions of past and present Democrats – and Republicans. Under the guise of “helping” and “we have DO something!”, bit by bit, Govt ended up doing more and more.
Expectations are being set. If you know no different, then what is the loss? We still are the Land of the Free, right? Er….sigh….is the water boiling yet?
I think that the most succinct definition of Obama’s “where we need to be” was here:
My own interpretation of this cartoon is broader than Ramirez perhaps intended. It is not just forcing religious institutions to pay for contraception, etc., that is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Rather, for the federal government to dictate any coverages that must be included in private insurance policies is well beyond any enumerated power in … Read more
One of my Samsphere buddies has a post that makes a lot of sense – at least, for a lot of other states. Here in NH, we see this in play every March in every hamlet – those that wish to be merely left alone after the basics of government have been fulfilled, finally get … Read more
Update and Bumped: Well, I just saw over at Michelle Malkin’s place that Capital One has pulled their ads. Well, I have just “pulled (re: cancelled) my credit card with them. And TMEW will be doing the same later on today. My message to the polite young lady (who said she’s been getting MORE than a few calls similar to mine) is: “put the ads back, and I’ll come back. Not until – pass that upward to the Chuckleheads upstairs”.)
————————————————–
Just as it isn’t about getting free contraceptives – it’s about standing up for the Constitution. Slutgate is the excuse for the Left’s faux outrage to pummel a single person – but that is the distraction the Left wants you to believe. It is not about civility – the Left has spewed far more vile at far more women on the Right over far more years. Why? To insult and to intimidate those on the Right, to force us to think that it is time for us to dejectedly leave the field of political / philosophical battle on our own. And then they win and then they have a clear road to continue to dismantle the Rights given to us by our Creator. To Progressives, ‘inalienable Rights” are simply an alien idea that has to be put down – for they have no God but Bigger Government. Freedom is what they would have us believe we get from men – in the political scene, they wish to believe they have the right to act as gods to determine how we shall run our lives.
And we see them, via Media Matters (funded by George Soros) and Van Jone’s Color of Change working behind the scenes, trying to achieve the real goal – seeing their political opportunity to silence Rush Limbaugh. Thus far, they (the tip of the spear of the Left, to give them their due) have convinced 22 advertisers to leave Rush Limbaugh. They have orchestrated a massive turnout of emails and calls to those companies to “leave Rush, or we leave you”: 400,00 have signed a petition to get Rush yanked.
“Please, Daddy Government, may I have some more condoms and Pills?”
How debasing to have to ask Government for a handout to engage in the most intimate of sexual relations? This gives lie to the idea that Progressives and Feminists want Big Government out of their bedrooms. Nay, they are inviting them in! After all, if Government cannot make those evil companies and churches give me a pregnancy and STD experience, well, I need to beg some more.
It used to be “hear me ROAR”, right? Sandra Fluke and those supporting her, while thinking they are using their outside voices, are really whimpering: “please provide for my needs”. Strong, independent, able to provide for themselves and the ability to compete equally against men? Wasn’t that the original point of feminism – the Matriarchy rising above Patriarchal society?
But isn’t this just a whole charade with Sandra Flake? You have this “reproductive justice” advocate, picking a religious Law school deliberately to be an agent provocateur to get free stuff KNOWING that it was against their theology – but perhaps this is not their ” moment in the sun”she and her fellow travelers think it is? Maybe, is the “full circle” moment? From Oppressed to Freedom to Oppression, for if you have to beg for stuff from Government for a roll in the hay, you are not free. Dependency is never free – not even from the Progressive “Freedom from Want”, for as Communism /Socialism has shown us, The Bigger the Government, the smaller the citizen. Given the backdrop of a $16 Trillion debt, it is clear that their selfishness to assuage their urges have addled any financial sense they have. It is the ME generation on steriods – you MUST give to me, even as I prostrate myself to Government.
Good going, dudettes – you swapped one Master for another – happy now? Or do you even realize it?
Reduced to begging. Does that make the Feminists the “useful idiots” of Progressives who are ALL about central control, who do not trust citizens with their own freedom, and who must be dancing in the halls thinking “hey, we got another group dependent on us!” Who are all about taking away our precious Liberty and go back to the Oppression that reigned over most before the Declaration of Independence, all in the name of Equality (like the French Revolution worked out well) ).
I just received a lovely email from my old friend, Donna Brazile. OK, we’re not old friends. For some reason she has decided to put me on her email list. She writes:
This week, the Senate votes on a GOP amendment that would let your employer decide what health care you can receive. If they morally object to birth control, it’s gone. If some corporation thinks cancer screening is too expensive, forget it.
This amendment is dangerous, and the people pushing it need to lose their jobs.
It is insane that we get our health care from our employers. That happens because we have given a tax advantage to in-kind compensation such as health care. It’s a horrible idea and it leads people to complain about our employers deciding what health care we can receive. Our employers are just a conduit for government mandates, rent-seeking and inefficiency related to health care. What the government has done is tax-advantage health care via employers and then tell them what has to be covered. So the real outrage is that because of this, the government mandates the mix of my compensation package, biasing it toward a luxury health-care package that is the result of special interest clamoring.
“…a power grab as Government is reaching into yet another part of our private lives to force us to fulfill the selfishness of Progressive politicians such as yourself, putting your ideology ahead of our freedoms”.
From her own official US Senator website and the transcript of her Senate floor address from Feb 7. Read through it – how often do you read the words “freedom” or “liberty”? Does she quote one of the Founders? Does she reference the Constitution? Does she talk about Government overreach? Does she talk about freedom of choice for all people, regardless of any special identity group?
What is her highest value?
…I also commend the President for standing up for women’s health and reaffirming the recommendation of the Institute of Medicine to protect access to affordable birth control for all women. The decision to require health plans’ coverage of contraception with no copays or deductibles will change the lives of millions of women and their families for the better.
Ah yes, the Institute of Medicine – this batch of unelected bureaucrats have decided, in all of their fantabulous wisdom, that their pronouncement of a “want” (or even a “maybe should have”). Look, in terms of actual medical advice, they certainly should give it. But the United States is neither a hospital or an academic Ivory Tower. Instead, this is a political matter, a cultural matter, and one that should be rightly measured against the timeless principles of the Constitution.
What Jeanne has shown us, however, the game plan is plain from a Progressive’s standpoint: consult “the experts”, do not question them, and immediately put their expert recommendations into policy. After all, they know better what we need than we do.
My questions is, how long do the Progressives think that they can play King Canute and believe they can tell the Laws of Economics to suspend themselves (“with no copays or deductibles”).
“I believe in compromise when both parties have similar goals in mind, but today, the goals of the Democratic and Republican parties are at polar opposites. On one hand, you have a party pushing for more dependence and collectivist, big-government policies, and on the other hand, you have a party that wants more freedom and … Read more
From June OK, I have no idea how I got on NH Insider blogger (and NH House Rep ) Steve Vaillencourt’s email list, but I have. Mostly I read (even briefly) and sometimes I just delete (don’t be offended as I sometimes have to do it to LOTS of incoming email – I barely keep … Read more
Especially when a decision for Freedom has to be made: Update thoughts: He voted “present” when it came to Iran and blew the chance to speak well of that nascent freedom movement. Instead of just giving speeches favoring Freedom over the mullahs, he remained silent – so much for the Obama / Samantha Powers doctrine … Read more
The above quote is from a post over at The Corner of NJ Governor Chris Christie. Very much in line with what Gov. Rick Perry of Texas has said:
“My goal is to make Washington as inconsequential to your daily life as possible.
People DON’T want to think about politics all the time. For most people, it is a waste of time as they deal with their jobs, their spouses. They have reality based lives to lead, actual families to take care of, jobs to perform in. Hobbies, past times, and causes other than politics to care about and in which to get involved.
Problem is, Progressives are convinced that it IS their job to hijack (word specifically chosen) Government so as to then be able to “shape” our lives so that “we will be better”.
If unions were abortions everyone would have the right to chose not to be party to it. Some liberal justice would have long ago ensconced that “right” into the US Constitution. And we would not be having this debate in New Hampshire. Workers could decide if they wanted to abort the union. But Democrats are hypocrites and choice shall not be permitted in the workplace. You will not, cannot be permitted to choose for yourself.
I had never seen this clip before, so this was fun to watch. Coming from free market economist Milton Freidman’s PBS Free to Choose series, this featured one of my favorite political pundit / economist, Dr. Thomas Sowell who argues the points as a conservative black commentator when white socialist Dr. Francis Fox Piven (she of the "collapse the system" theory that nearly bankrupted the City of New York) decided to espouse that the black civil rights movement was about equal outcomes.
She fares not well at all:
In this clip from the 1980 Free To Choose, socialist Frances Fox Piven tangles with Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell. Sowell, in particular, is incisive with his discussion of "process" versus aspiration — concluding that whatever the purported social goals, liberty suffers.
Sowell is right; just as the TEA Party, Conservatives, and Libertarians lament that Big Government under Obama is on a tear to pick economic winners and losers, the Democrat use of Identity Politics actions is also used to pick political winners and losers.
In both cases, Sowell rightly points out, as in the economic sphere, when Government tries to "give" something to one set of people, it must necessarily take something away from others in the area of results, with the result in the diminution of Freedom from the "donor" group in some fashion. Progressives have no problem with this problem – they are blinded to the ‘side effects’ or collateral damage sustained by others that are not the focus of the direct actions.
Or, as in a practical example using the current Occupy Wall Street movement (versus the 1980s topic of affirmative action), while the "open" desired result is the "re-empowerment" of the 99%, the tearing down of the 1% is the actual aim at the second layer, with the ultimate destruction of capitalism at the next deeper layer. In this example, the economic freedom to choose and act of the 1% would be curtailed for the freedom of the 99% (a badly worded sentence, but given the lack of conciseness of what the OWSers want, who knows?). The problem, which OWSers confirm, is that they cannot distinguish which of the 1% have legitimately earned their wealth vs those that have used crony capitalism to illegitimately taken their wealth.
So, in the grand tradition of Democrats, Socialists, and Communists,…
“Much of the self-righteous nonsense that abounds on so many subjects cannot stand up to three questions: (1) Compared to what? (2) At what cost? and (3) What are the hard facts?” —Thomas Sowell
The Union Leader’s Mark Hayward features a front page story today entitled, “Activists: Feds’ bill would lead to gun control“. The thesis of Hayward’s article is that two activist are against the bill because it gives the federal government a toe-hold into states’ rights and is a pretext to arbitrary national gun control.
The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, HB 822, passed in the U.S. House yesterday and enjoyed strong support. The intent of this legislation is to allow law-abiding citizens with a concealed-carry permit in one state to carry concealed in states with similar systems. Obviously, the bill must have some strong support because Charlie “the RINO” Bass is a co-sponsor.
Yet my good friend and esteemed fellow gun advocate Representative J.R. Hoell opposes the bill. J.R. asserts, “The federal government will then want a photo ID for concealed- carry. Then a microchip Real ID card.”J.R,the feds already want that, irrespective of “how” or “who” regulates guns. And numerous attempts at nationalizing gun registration, gun control, microstamping of ammunition, suing gunmakers, the assault weapons ban and any other novel, unique or creative trick, dreamed up by the pablum-puking, ant-gun liberals has already dawned within the halls of our congress…irrespective of this legislation.
Freedom. The choice to make our own decisions. And as been recently said, our personal freedom is also tied to our economic freedom – how free are we with respect to financial decisions? So, time to pick up the pitchforks and muskets, and charge those that are in charge of creating "the level playing field"; … Read more
Manchester City Democrats are concerned. People need to know which candidates in City races have links to the Free State Project, so they’ll "know where they stand on the issues." (From the Tuesday morning edition of the Union Leader)
It sounds like the folks at the Suckley (Sullivan/Buckley) School for Orwellian Linguistics are using peoples lack of knowledge about the liberty movement to frighten them out of voting for anyone they can label as a Free Stater.
Guilt by association. Prejudice. Create division. Fear mongering narrative. Typical.
Of course we could never in a million years suggest that the gentleman crapping on a police car at the Occupy Wall Street (Democrat Party Endorsed) protest, is in any way an example of the Democrat Party. (Looks like he’s trying to pass ObamaCare.) The trash, the arrests. Then of course there are other recent union protests, violent threats, wishing rape and violence on Republican Women, video games where you get to kill Republican ‘Zombies,’ calling Republicans Racists for liking a conservative candidate who happens to be black–while calling the black man a monkey in a window…Can you find any prominent New Hampshire Democrats who have spoken out against any of the ill heaped on their opponents? Probably not. That is because they support it.
Mike had posted the video from Senator Jim DeMint’s Palmetto Freedom Forum where most of the current Republican candidates for President went through a grilling, one by one, from the moderators. One of those moderators was Princeton Professor Robert George, a Constitutional guru. After the forum, he spoke to the reporters concerning the real meaning … Read more
