Let’s review the outcomes from the COVID-19 crisis:
- Most sweeping restrictions, surveillance, and confinement of Americans indefinitely without due process in the history of America? Check!
- Endless welfare, debt, and spending? Check!
- Mass release of criminals? Check!
- More foreign workers as a time of record unemployment? Check!
- More rights for illegal aliens to come and remain here? Check!
Why is it that every policy outcome from this crisis is a long-standing liberal priority, even when the several outcomes contradict the rationale underlying some of the others?
If you’re wondering why all these disparate anecdotes belong in a single post, here’s my answer: They remind us that America’s ruling elite has no concern about ordinary Americans. Hillary was speaking for an entire governing class when she said people who won’t hop on the Leftist train are a “basket of deplorables. *** They’re racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic – Islamophobic – you name it.”
We’re racist because we want to be color-blind, rather than engaging in endless victim wars and because we believe that a nation without borders is no nation at all. We’re sexist because we believe that women and men are different. We’re homophobic because we’re troubled by the pressure LGBTQ activists are placing on American institutions. We xenophobic because Hillary and her followers are proud of knowing a big word with Greek roots. We’re Islamophobic because we’ve noticed that 10% of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims actively want to kill or enslave us and are supported by a much larger number than 10% — including, perhaps, the House’s own Ilhan Omar.
I’m preparing by stocking up on precious metals like lead, copper, and brass.
So the Founders decided to take a gamble. They called it a great experiment.
They would leave “the People” broad liberty, limit the coercive power of the government, and place their trust in self-discipline and the virtue of the American people.
In the words of Madison, “We have staked our future on the ability of each of us to govern ourselves…”
This is really what was meant by “self-government.” It did not mean primarily the mechanics by which we select a representative legislative body. It referred to the capacity of each individual to restrain and govern themselves.
But what was the source of this internal controlling power? In a free republic, those restraints could not be handed down from above by philosopher kings.
Instead, social order must flow up from the people themselves – freely obeying the dictates of inwardly-possessed and commonly-shared moral values. And to control willful human beings, with an infinite capacity to rationalize, those moral values must rest on authority independent of men’s will – they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.
In short, in the Framers’ view, free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people – a people who recognized that there was a transcendent moral order antecedent to both the state and man-made law and who had the discipline to control themselves according to those enduring principles.
Shriver and like-minded policymakers designed programs far more ambitious than those of the New Deal liberalism that had characterized the Democratic Party since Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s election in 1932. Though the New Deal vastly expanded the government safety net, it still recognized a connection between work and upward mobility and viewed government’s role as that of a temporary helper when someone was truly down and out. The officials behind the War on Poverty, by contrast, saw the poor as powerless, crushed by economic and cultural forces that could be overcome only with massive government help. Instead of temporary aid, welfare would now be a right, which the poor were entitled to receive, and benefits became far more generous, so that, by the late 1970s, welfare payments and other government aid now brought in about as much money as low-wage work.
Read the whole thing.
Source: The Cost of Bad Intentions
What inhumane, outrageous and bigoted Trump administration policy has attracted the attention of Ms. Salstrom? Has someone purchased a one-way ticket to Somalia for Rep. Ilhan Omar?
Not exactly, but the outrage does involve travel. The Trump administration is planning to move portions of the Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Land Management closer to where agriculture happens and land is managed.
Placing swamp bureaucrats closer to the people over which they rule is evidently inherently offensive. Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Barnacle) warned, “In the White House, there is, among some people, a real disrespect for federal employees, animated by their disrespect for the government generally. So if you’re hostile to government, you’re then … hostile to those who work in government.”
Omigod! A sensible government policy! Democrats must be scared to death!
Governments are enthusiastically weaponizing the Leftist trend of sexualizing children, because doing so dramatically increases government power.
What’s terrifying about the child transgender movement is that it’s moved beyond the moral degenerates of the entertainment and media worlds. We’ve now reached the point at which governments are rapidly internalizing it and using it to sever the parent-child bond. Last year in Ohio, parents actually lost custody for not being sufficiently supportive of their daughter’s claimed transgenderism. Currently, in Texas, a father is being told that, if he doesn’t get with his ex-wife’s program of insisting that their six-year-old son wants to be a girl, he will lose any access to his son.
We’ve been having this fight for a while. But this century things have escalated.
They escalated a whole lot after Trump’s win because the network isn’t pretending anymore. It sees the opportunity to delegitimize the whole idea of elections.
Now the network isn’t running the country from cover. It’s actually out here trying to overturn the results of an election and remove the president from office.
It’s rejected the victories of two Republican presidents this century.
There’s only been two, and they’ve rejected both.
This is a civil war between volunteer governments elected by the people and professional governments elected by… well… uh… themselves.
Of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment.
We’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and leftist professional government.
The pros have made it clear that they’re not going to accept election results anymore. They’re just going to make us do whatever they want. They’re in charge and we better do what they say.
That’s the war we’re in. And it’s important that we understand that.
Because this isn’t a shooting war yet. And I don’t want to see it become one.
Personally I’m preparing for one.
Both sides talk about taking back the country. But who are they taking it back for?
The left uses identity politics. It puts supposed representatives of entire identity groups up front. We’re taking the country back for women and for black people, and so on and so forth…
But nobody elected their representatives.
Identity groups don’t vote for leaders. All the black people in the country never voted to make Shaun King al Al Sharpton their representative. And women sure as hell didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton.
What we have in America is a representative government. A representative government makes freedom possible because it actually represents people, instead of representing ideas.
The left’s identity politics only represents ideas. Nobody gets to vote on them.
That’s because their ideas are so good they have to be forced down our throats.
Read the whole thing. Or watch the video.