You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?
Fire up the printing presses, offer bailout packages to more businesses that got where they are because of bad (and sometimes deceitful) decisions, and borrow, borrow, borrow from nations to whom we already owe untold amounts.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem.
We do not need mandatory nationalized health care, or more government programs to rule our day-to-day lives. We need the freedoms that were granted to us in the Constitution to be preserved and protected, not thrown to the wayside. Yes, the Constitution is a very old document, but it has served us very well thus far. Why change that which needs no change?
From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.
Why should the employed pay for the unemployed? Why should the industrious pick up the slack for the slothful? Each of us must do our part. If we each succeed, we all succeed.
We are a nation that has a government—not the other way around. And this makes us special among the nations of the Earth. Our Government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed.
Mr. President, I respect you as a person, but I disagree with many of the policies on which you campaigned. Do not impose your will upon the lives of the people of this nation if that will includes an intrusion which was never intended by the Founding Fathers of this, the greatest nation in the history of the world.
Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work—work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it.
Please, Mr. President, heed the words of one of the wisest men to hold the position to which you have been elected, to which you have now ascended.
We have every right to dream heroic dreams.
The above quotes were taken from President Ronald Reagan’s inaugural address 28 years ago–January 20, 1981. I have interspersed some of my own comments in between his quotes. Consider them a plea to our current President, Barack Obama, and a plea to the country as a whole to live up to the ideals that were set forth by those brave men who declared independence from an overbearing government, and fought to establish their own, which they have passed down to us.
May we never forget their sacrifice, so that we could be where we are today. May we never forget the rights that we have as citizens of the United States, and the power that we have to stand up for those rights in the face of governmental oppression.
God bless America.
9 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
I’ve been an Obama supporter, but I agree with you about the bailouts and the increased deficit spending – those types of policies are only going to make our country’s problems worse. The problem is that both major political parties do the same thing when they’re in power. I just wish that there was a major party that advocated socially liberal and fiscally responsible policies and that stuck by their principles when they got into power. The Democrats are at least socially liberal, so they’re 1/3 of the way there, while the Republicans are 0/3.
The Republicans need to do some soul searching if they have to go back almost 30 years in order to find inspiration.
Skipping over two Republican Presidents, and 12 years of a Republican controlled Congress should tell you how poor the Republican track record has been. Besides, when Reagan took office, the circumstances were very different.
I agree Matt that the track record hasn’t been good. I no longer consider myself a Republican because the party has drifted away from what made it great. However, I do think that both Bush 41 and Bush 43 were given more blame than they deserved during their respective tenures. Not that I agreed with everything either of them did, but they didn’t deserve the entirety of the blame that came upon them.
So you are reluctant to blame the Bush presidencies, but you have no problem labeling all laid off workers as “slothful”??? I know plenty of people who have lost their jobs in the past 18 months. They are not lazy!!!!
For someone who does not think it is fair to blame Bush, you certainly hold no restraint in painting the unemployed as lazy. They are unemployed because they are lazy?????
Here’s your quote:
“Why should the employed pay for the unemployed? Why should the industrious pick up the slack for the slothful ?”
You sound like a Herbert Hoover fan.
Nowhere did I say all unemployed persons are lazy. Yet, in the current system abuses are rampant. In the city where I work, there are three housing projects. Most (not all) of the people in those projects have been there for years, and show no initiative or attempt to support themselves. They are there because they are lazy and the government is enabling them to continue that lifestyle.
What does that have to do with the “unemployed” ???
You are painting someone who has worked their whole life, but has lost their job, with the same broad brush as a welfare queen.
That is exactly why the Republicans have been defeated in the last two elections.
You are unable to differentiate between the two.
Actually, I can differentiate. I can set limits to assistance given to the unemployed. It’s the Democrats who enable the “welfare queens” to exist.
Let me try this one more time.
Here is your own quote:
“Why should the employed, pay for the unemployed? Why should the industrious pick up the slack for the slothful?”
Yet when you tried to defend this, you cited a housing project near you, as a example.
In your right wing world,….unemployed = slothful=welfare housing.
I strongly disagree with your attempt to smear the unemployed this way.
Read my above comments for my response.