I have been meaning to write about this topic for a loooooooong time, but I have never got around to it. The topic is Czars. Not the Romanovs or any other of their ilk, but the neo-czars appointed by presidents for the last 25 years. The Drug Czars of the Reagan era were the first (at least to my memory) and that was about it until now. I could handle this one slip. But no more. President Obama or should I say Czar-in-Chief Obama is utterly obsessed with this term. (or someone on his staff--car czar, insurance czar, etc) It is ridiculous and insulting to all democratic Americans to have czar anything. We have elected leaders not autocratic tyrants. Why does anybody think giving someone unlimited power (albeit in a small context) is a good idea? It can only make such abuse seem normal and commonplace to the masses. We never want them getting used to such an reality. Humanity has spent hundreds of years trying to rid the world of despots and this administration has taken an annoyance to a whole new level. They are encouraging the underminding of republican institutions. Enough already.
Lurita Doen in USA Today finally had a piece on this same topic, HERE, which sparked my thoughts this morning.
PS LA TIMES had a similar piece back in March. Guess it hasn't slowed the movement.
Robert Samuelson at Newsweek has been writing some of the most profound short-length essays about the economy the last nine months or so. I have posted many of them. I think what makes them strong is his total lack of agenda beyond a sound economy. He has acted like one of the few level two thinkers out there. He poses questions without getting partisan or angry. He's not a Paul Krugman who clearly has an agenda and blathers it out to everyone who will hear. And he's not a Republican hammering away at the President and Congress for purely politically reasons. Instead he gathers the data, looks towards the future, and asks the hard questions Americans of all stripes wish to avoid.
His latest essay poses the one question every American must answer and I hope everyone who voted for Obama will seriously ask themselves and then answer the tough follow up questions.
That question is How big a government do we want? On the surface this is clearly a level one question, but it really is a reflective one when you take the time to break it down. This was really the question people should have been asking themselves going into the voter's booth last November. And then the second question is how do we pay for an expanded government flush with even more entitlements. USA Today had a series of polls regarding Health Care and low and behold it found the majority of Americans want better health care but don't want to pay for it.
Right there is a big problem that has been plaguing the Republic for some time. Too many people believe they are entitled to stuff on someone elses dime. As Samuelson states, "We face an unprecedented collision between Americans' desire for more government services and their almost-equal unwillingness to be taxed." Something has to give. Our president, the Democrats, and too many Republicans in Congress seem to want it all. This isn't practical or realistic. Though it is how many get elected. Unfortunately someone always has to pay and the Democrats' old song and dance about the rich paying only works for so long. The middle-class will have to pay as well down the road. And then free people will find ways around tyranny. They will even move with their feet if they have to.
So I ask merely for all the Obama voters out there to read Samuelson's article and reflect on the only question and then for them to formulate a real answer--not merely a level one response but also on the consequences of an expanding Federal Government today and in the future. Unfortunately I don't think anyone will step up to the plate.
Big decisions need to be made. I only hope they are the right ones.
The Fourth of July is tomorrow and in honor of our 233rd birthday I have written a small piece on Liberty.
Eternal Liberty
Mark A Trexler
Eleven score and thirteen years ago our fathers in liberty shaped on this continent a new world—a republic to enlighten and enrich mankind. Rejecting the tyranny and monarchy of a centralized power they reached deep into antiquity to usher in a new age of reason and humanity. More importantly they hitched our future onto the radical truth that all men are created equal. Not equal in ability or talent but in birth and law. Men and women would live their life free of despotism and pursue their happiness in the way they choose, free from the whims and decrees of kings and dictators. Happiness wasn’t guaranteed, failure sat next to success as equals, but the choice to pursue one’s own fate through freewill was a centerpiece of the republic. Knowing that men were not angels and would never live in an idealized utopia and also knowing that anarchy was a twisted cousin of freedom, they fashioned a government, for the people and by the people, limited in scope, but strong at heart to maintain our precious and fragile natural rights. That government, always run by men and not by angels, has been far from perfect—it too has momentarily succumb to the will and corruption of selfish interests and the mania of war, but has always righted the ship with modernization and hardship. The continual restoration of our traditions, our humanity, and our government is never done. Folly is ensured to those people who embrace the lightly proferred laurel, the easy, ungrudged praise.
Across the decades we as a people have struggled and travailed to live up to the maxim all men are created equal—a task each generation seizes and battles. We have nobly won great advancements, we have cauterized the original sin of slavery, and widened the franchise of suffrage, but we have let slip the other half of the equation, no less in value. And that is the notion of liberty—the freedom to live one’s life without the burden of others dictations, freedom from coercion of the bayonet, and freedom from the manipulation and caprice and impulses of so-called great and powerful men. When individuals and communities, through reason and spirit can govern the republic we will flourish as we have for hundreds of years. When the shackles and lash of oppression are given reign, however slowly, we must be ever vigilant to strike down dangers to the republic, especially those that initially seem like benefits of the greater good.
I ask all Americans and future Americans to remember on this Fourth of July the long-standing faiths of our blessed nation—those natural rights and national values that are more than mere dusty words from bygone eras. Our liberties have long ago given us power, but only if we trust in them and maintain them and use them in our daily lives. Once embraced we can forever dip into that stream of liberty cascading across the ages and refresh our government and ourselves. We must remember that all of this, large and small, is no accident. Through our collective freewill we make choices that herald the future. Let us make those choices wise and fruitful ones. Bear in mind we always have the opportunity for disastrous lapses in judgment as well as bold deeds and exceptional achievements. We must hold tight our convictions and conserve the lifeblood of our revolution—a moment in time when we cast off tyranny and the dictations of faraway kings through suffering and sacrifice and established here, on this soil, a republic cast in justice, nurtured in equality, and conceived in eternal liberty.
Someone has finally given a decent answer to a question that has bugged me for some time. Why do the most oppressive nations use monikers like Democratic and Republic in their official names when they are anything but? Especially when the hate the West and all the traits that we stand for.
Today marks the 200th Birthday of Abraham Lincoln (and with the possible exception of George Washington) our most beloved and often misunderstood president. Myth, legend, and historical truth are bound to get blended in popular culture, especially about someone so large in our history and who died so tragically at 56 years old.
Even for someone like Lincoln his life can be narrowed down to a few key facts. Because he is so honored (outside some of the more extreme state-rights Lincoln haters and the homosexual myth-mongers) is his legacy is battle over by both sides of the political aisle. Lincoln was a Republican so obviously there is a strong connection.
However I find it very curious that he is embraced so much on the left, especially now of the Obama Adminstration. From Lincoln to Obama news stories and so on. Wow, how history can be mixed about. Understanding and reading Lincoln would give a little clearer view of what Lincoln believed in. I don't pretend to speak for him but he was a true devotee of Natural Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Again and again in speeches he denounced those who believed in Might makes Rights. Our natural rights give us might he often said. He also believed in how people "ought" to live harking back to Socrates and Cicero and the Enlightenment. And as a railroad lawyer he also understood the need for expanded commerce and the freedom from government intervention. [granted his protective tariff stance was a product of a young industrial nation] And his firm belief in truth and justice saw him through the darkest days of the Civil War, especially when he made the wrong decisions.
So as another day in our Republic's history passes let use it to encourage a reexamination of our history (the a more accurate Lincoln) and of the better angels of our nature.
Posts
