“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” — The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, July 4, 1776.
Last night the Democratic National Convention started 2012 convention with a short video clip on the big screen at the Charlotte Convention Center proclaiming proudly that “We all Belong to the Government.”
In a statement right out of a communist state, the Democrats started their convention with a bit of propaganda declaring we all belong to the government. Seriously. They started their convention with this video:
“We do believe you can use government in a good way. Government is the only thing we all belong to,” the narrator says, with the words “Democratic National Convention” appearing in the bottom left. “We’re different churches, different clubs, but we’re together as a part of our city, or our county, or our state — and our nation,” the narrator adds. But despite the video playing on the convention floor, the two major players at the convention quickly passed blame.
“The video in question was produced and paid for by the host committee of the city of Charlotte. It’s neither an Obama For America (OFA) nor a DNC video, despite what the Romney campaign is claiming,” the Obama campaign told Buzzfeed. “It’s time for them to find a new target for their faux outrage.”
Dan Murrey, executive director of the host committee, fell on his sword:
“The “Welcome to Charlotte” video was solely produced and paid for by the Host Committee’s New American City Fund, which promotes the city of Charlotte and welcomes our guests. The intent of this video was to tell the story of this region and it is completely unaffiliated with the Obama campaign or the Democratic National Committee.”
This is still unreal. The founders, like Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and Washington, must be rolling over in their grave. The constitution starts with “We the People,” not we the government. The government belongs to us, we do not belong to the government. The government is our servant. We do not serve government. We are Americans. We are not all wards or property of the state, despite Barack Obama’s best efforts.
But even though the campaign and the DNC want to distance themselves, the idea of the preeminence of government is alive and well at the convention, meaning the video fits right in with the message and the disavowing is curious. For example, Fox’s Chris Wallace observed after Michelle Obama’s Tuesday night speech:
“I’ve got to say, listening closely to the speech one of the things that struck me was it was all about government,” Wallace said Tuesday night during Fox News’ coverage of the DNC. “When she talked at the beginning about the people who exemplify the best of the American spirit, she talked about teachers”
He continued:
“When she talked about ways to build the middle class, it was all about the auto bailout and student loans and health care reform, once again, all government programs…That was a subtle subtext to the entire speech.”
I think we can say the Democrats are fully embracing Barack Obama’s claim that “you didn’t build that.” It’s clear from this we did not take Barack Obama out of context. The Democrats really do believe government built it all.”
I think we can say the Democrats are fully embracing Barack Obama’s claim that “you didn’t build that.” It’s clear from this we did not take Barack Obama out of context. The Democrats really do believe government built it all.
This is what the Soviets did in their propaganda. They portrayed the people
"We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given-potential."
Now the words "God-given" have been removed. Religion is, after all, the opiate of the people and is unnecessary when we are all collectively creatures of the state.
By the way, you’ve now heard the Democrats’ audio that “we all belong to the government.” I’ll see you that and raise you Clint Eastwood. Listen to what he had to say on this topic and tell me who is more in touch with America?
American history can be divided into three phases: the American Founding, the crisis of slavery and the Civil War, and Progressivism.
The meaning of the American Founding can best be understood by considering two primary source documents: the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Looking to the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” as the source of their arguments, the Founders established a constitutional system of limited government, marked by the separation of powers, and based on the consent of the governed through a system of representation. We are now in the throes of the progressivism of the masterminds who would rule us with their vision of a state run utopia where government, not natures God doles out our rights. No matter what the talking heads and spin doctors of the Democrat party will tell you this is what the Democrats really believe.
The idea of a “living constitution” takes concrete political shape in the form of a bureaucratic administrative state. As a result, modern American government to a large degree consists of thousands of unelected masterminds, bureaucrats and numerous unaccountable regulatory agencies. By their very nature, they undermine the Founding principles of limited government, representation, and the separation of powers. Unless the American people—the sovereign rulers of the United States of America—halt the growth of bureaucratic despotism, we risk losing the last vestiges of constitutional government. And the Democrat spin doctors call this a “distraction” from their real issue of providing government sponsored social justice.
Both the pro-slavery proponents in the Civil War and the tenets of Progressivism challenge and offer a critique of the American Founding. They both assume that the principles of the Declaration—natural rights, equality, consent of the governed—are historically and scientifically false. The forward march of science and an ever-improving human nature—progress—have disproved them, which in turn requires that the government instituted by the Founders be discarded and replaced.
For over one hundred years, Progressives have systematically derided the principles of the American Founding as outdated and inapplicable to the complexities of contemporary politics. According to Woodrow Wilson, the Founders’ Constitution is mechanistic and Newtonian, rather than evolutionary and Darwinian. Wilson sought to substitute the notion of a “living constitution” for the Founders’ Constitution. The Newtonian axioms got us to the moon and beyond while the evolutionary theories of Darwin produced Auschwitz.
The idea of a “living constitution” takes concrete political shape in the form of a bureaucratic administrative state. As a result, modern American government to a large degree consists of thousands of unelected masterminds, bureaucrats and numerous unaccountable regulatory agencies. By their very nature, they undermine the Founding principles of limited government, representation, and the separation of powers. Unless the American people—the sovereign rulers of the United States of America—halt the growth of bureaucratic despotism, we risk losing the last vestiges of constitutional government.
Progressive political science was based on the assumption that society could be organized in such a way that social ills would disappear. Frank Goodnow, president of Johns Hopkins University and the first president of the American Political Science Association, helped pioneer the idea that separating politics from administration was the key to progress. In his speech, given at Brown University in 1916, he addresses the need to move beyond the ideas of the Founders when he stated:
“In a word, man is regarded now throughout Europe, contrary to the view expressed by Rousseau, as primarily a member of society and secondarily as an individual. The rights which he possesses are, it is believed, conferred upon him, not by his Creator, but rather by the society to which he belongs. What they are is to be determined by the legislative authority in view of the needs of that society. Social expediency, rather than natural right, is thus to determine the sphere of individual freedom of action.
…..
“As our conditions have changed, as the importance of the social group has been realized, as it has been perceived that social efficiency must be secured if we are to attain and retain our place in the field of national competition which is practically coterminous with the world, the attitude of our courts on the one hand towards private rights and on the other hand towards social duties has gradually been changing. The general theory remains the same. Man is still said to be possessed of inherent natural rights of which he may not be deprived without his consent. The courts still now and then hold unconstitutional acts of legislature which appear to encroach upon those rights. At the same time the sphere of governmental action is continually widening and the actual content of individual private rights is being increasingly narrowed
We no longer believe as we once believed that a good social organization can be secured merely through stressing our rights. The emphasis is being laid more and more on social duties. The efficiency of the social group is taking on in our eyes a greater importance that it once had. We are not, it is true, taking the view that the individual man lives for the state of which he is a member and that state efficiency is in some mysterious way an admirable end in and of itself.”
A few more observations on last night’s Roman Carnival called the Democratic National Convention, or as I like to call it — The Vagina Monologues.
Last week the Democrats trotted out their outrage specialists to lament on televisions everywhere that Mitt Romney did not talk about any of the wars.
Yesterday, the Democratic National Convention started in Charlotte and the Democrats are doing their best to not mention one word: sixteen, i.e. the $16 trillion in national debt the nation faces as of close of business this past Friday. If you have a problem getting your head around the number 16 trillion here are a few breakdowns that may help you:
- $16 trillion translates to $135,000 for every family in the United States
- With 16 trillion you could buy the New York Yankees 8,600 times
- With $16 trillion you could buy Apple 25 times
- $16 trillion is greater than the combined GDP of all of Europe
In fact, the Democrats spent Monday night attacking the GOP for a so called war on women while remembering Ted Kennedy. Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.
The entire night seem focused on “reproductive rights” which is just a politically correct euphemism for abortion which is itself a politically correct euphemism for killing kids.
So no talk about debt or entitlements or jobs, but abortion was a fixation. It’s just as galling that the media spent several weeks painting the GOP as out of touch on abortion when, in fact, the Democrats’ abortion on demand position is even more out of touch with both American men and American women.
The most striking thing about the whole convention so far is that, for a President campaigning on the motto “Forward” we saw Kennedys, a celebration of Ted Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, and a whole lot of the past.
As an aside, there is a whole lot of Republican outrage that the Democrats used now deceased Ted Kennedy to attack Mitt Romney from beyond the grave. In their tribute, they used bits of Kenney’s campaign against Mitt Romney for the Massachusetts Senate in 1994.
I’m not upset they used Ted Kennedy to attack Mitt Romney from beyond the grave. I’m upset they accused Mitt Romney of killing a woman and used a man who really did kill a woman to attack Mitt Romney.
I will have a difficult time watching tonight’s coverage of the DNC Convention
No comments:
Post a Comment