Skip to main content

Thinking of Reagan...

I'm not usually one to look backwards, but I was listening this morning, to Ronald Reagan's famous "A Time for Choosing" speech, given in 1964 in support of Barry Goldwater. In speaking about the greatly-expanding government and rapidly higher levels of taxation occuring at the time, he said:

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a "greater government activity in the affairs of the people." But they have been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves--and all of the things that I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations.

  • For example, they have voices that say "the cold war will end through acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism."
  • Another voice says that the profit motive has become outmoded, it must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state; or our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.
  • Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader, and he said he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions in power imposed on him by this antiquated document. He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best.
  • And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."

Well, I for one resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me--the free man and woman of this country--as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"--this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bill Clinton: 'Screw It, I'm Running For President'

This is a hilarious article from "The Onion"...and, as with all satire, has a sprinkle of truth...here is a snippet: Although some have pointed out that it is unconstitutional for Clinton to run for a third term in office, he has silenced most critics by urging voters "not to worry about the Constitution for now" and assuring them he will address those legal issues immediately after regaining control of the White House. "All I am asking of the American people is four more years," Clinton said at a fundraiser Tuesday where tens of thousands of South Carolinians gathered to stare in gape-jawed wonderment at the former president. "Well, maybe eight. Actually, you know what, definitely eight. Eight more years."

Negative ads

Questioner mentioned Gordon Smith's offer to stop negative ads on both sides. Merkley - "I don't have negative ads, I have ISSUE ads." Audience laughed - I don't think Merkley was trying to be funny. Bad moment for Merkley.

U.S. Tax Rates Compared to the rest of the world–a.k.a “U.S. Corporations are not the evil empire”

Below is a graph showing our tax rates compared to the rest of the industrialized world (taken from Wikipedia): Two things to note: Our personal income taxes are not as bad as some anti-tax zealots would have you believe…they are lower than most. Our corporate rates, however, are horrific.  They are higher than any other industrialized country save Japan. Lesson to be learned:  it’s easy for politicians to sell lower taxes for individuals.  Much harder to sell lower rates for corporations.  And very easy for liberals to paint corporations as getting off easy (the “big, bad conglomerate” schtick).  However, it’s just not true.  “Facts are stubborn things.”  - John Adams