And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever.
Perhaps the single most repellent feature of the political class that has served America so disastrously in recent decades is its shameless venality in parlaying "public service" into a guarantee of an eternal snout at the trough.
[A] wise and frugal government ... shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.
Not one of the viable candidates for election to the presidency next year is worthy of the office or deserving of a positive vote.
Each and every one of them is a proponent of big and ever expanding government and thus of further curtailment of individual freedoms, liberties, rights and responsibilities. They all have and are promoting a government solution for any and all real and imagined problems.
On the other hand, it is unlikely that any of the Republicons would do as much damage as the incumbent holder of the office were he to be reelected. You ain't seen nothing like what Obama would do in a second term during which he would be free to act as he wishes without the restraining prospect of having to face the voters again for return to another term in office.
Despite the admirable efforts of the Tea Partiers, they have lost out, defeated by the prevailing political establishment autocrats.
The bottom line is that citizens who believe that the size and scope of government should be cut and confined to the limits prescribed by the Constitution again will be without a candidate for whom to vote. Instead, we again will be forced to seek to defeat the worst candidate by casting our ballots for the one likely to do somewhat less harm.
The chattering class -- made up of those with the fools' names and fools' faces most often seen in public places (as well as the media) -- is noisily atwitter again . . . over, this time, Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich having said that "Palestinians" are an "invented people," meaning that they are indistinguishable on any objective basis from other Arabs.
Mr. Gingich's statement is, without question, absolutely correct.
The uproar is about his temerity for having uttered such a self evident but politically unacceptable truth. To do so was so de classe . . . so de rigueur . . . so gauche.
Calls to mind the same reaction the same oligarchs had when Ronald Reagan had the bad taste to state publicly that the Soviet Union was an "evil empire."
Such self evident truths apparently are not to be uttered openly in polite society . . . or at least the society inhabited by the chattering lackwits.
That explains why they so loathed John Bolton and Jeane Kirkpatrick, who as America's representatives to the U.N. routinely spoke truth in and to that body that most of its members went to great lengths to keep hidden.
Poll results this week indicate that California's lotus eating majority is likely to approve its moonbeam governor's proposal to increase -- supposedly temporarily -- the state sales tax and the income tax rate on those earning a million dollars or more a year. The increases are being promoted as "necessary" to avoid spending cuts the pols can use to best frighten and stampede the voters.
Hiking the sales tax, which already is the nation's highest, will be a bonanza for retailers in neighboring states and those engaged in doing business on the internet. And, as other states -- but not freeloaders always willing to benefit at the expense of others -- have learned, increasing income taxes on high earners almost always yields less than projected because some of the targeted productive citizens can and do relocate to other jurisdictions.
At some point prior to the scheduled expiration date of the tax increases, the economy will improve, tax receipts will rise, yielding a surplus, which the politicians of course will spend . . . and commit to continue spending on new and expanded programs that of course will come to be seen as vital. So the hosing will come five years down the road, when taxpayers will be asked to make the increases permanent to avoid having to eliminate or cut the increased spending that will have come to be seen as essential. The arguments will be that continuing the 'temporary' rates will just continue what already exists and therefore not constitute a tax increase.
. . . and so goes the perpetual upward tax and spend ratchet/racket.
A driver was stuck in a traffic jam on the highway outside Washington, DC. Nothing was moving. Suddenly, a man knocks on the window.
The driver rolls down the window and asks, "What's going on?"
"Terrorists have kidnapped Congress, and they're asking for a $100 million dollar ransom. Otherwise, they are going to douse them all in gasoline and set them on fire. We are going from car to car, collecting donations.
"How much is everyone giving, on average?" the driver asks.