Of headlines, stupidity, Founding Fathers and JFK

I had several things I was going to post about today but, like I do every morning, I read the Drudge Report headlines.

I was struck by the stuck-on-stupid actions and comments of people - and I couldn't help but wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of some of these things.

For example:

Detroit Mayor: 'We are in an environment of entitlement'...

“We are in an environment, I think, of entitlement, we’ve got a lot of people who are city workers, who for years and years, 20, 30 years, think they are entitled to a job and all that comes with it,” Bing said.

He added: “Nobody wants to go backwards, but in order for us to move this city forward we’re going to have to take a step or two backwards — and then, I think, all of us have to participate in the pain that’ s upon us right now.”

He's right, but nobody wants to admit it and, if he wasn't Black, he would probably be called racist for saying so.

Fast food workers demand $15 per hour salaries...

Yeah - because I should earn what I think I'm worth rather than what my employer thinks I'm worth and because flipping burgers and putting the right food on a tray is as valuable as being able to run a multi-million international company.

So much for a 99-cent menu.

Any job I hold should pay me a wage that is capable of supporting a family of four, regardless of the job, the skills that are (or are not) required or the resulting impact on the cost of the products or services I'm providing via that job.

This concept is being promoted by unions and willingly adopted by gullible individuals - and it is completely and totally opposite of all the principles on which this country was based.

If you can hold any job and be paid what you want, where is your drive to succeed and excel? What is your motivation to do better and be a more active contributor to your community? What happened to the idea of building a better mousetrap?

And where does such a concept lead? What would our Founding Fathers think of this attitude? Forget turning over in their graves - they're spinning faster than a top

UPDATE: EGYPT ISLAMISTS HURRIEDLY APPROVE NEW CONSTITUTION...

Liberals, leftists, Christians, moderate Muslims withdrew before vote...

Retains Islamic law as main source of legislation...

No equal rights for women; owning slaves not banned...

Remember when President Barack Obama and other leftists were praising the so-called Arab Spring and saying how democracy in Egypt was such a good thing? Now we find that their new constitution doesn't contain equal rights for women and doesn't ban the owning of slaves.

How do you have an otherwise 'civilized' nation that takes such positions? And will we have outraged comments from our president, leftists, womens' rights organizations and the NAACP???

Syria shuts down Internet...

Curtails land lines, cell phones...

Things have been really bad in Syria for a long time, but not many have paid as much attention to what's going on there - at least, not compared to Egypt and other countries in the area. But I'm not surprised by the action to block the Internet - limited communication and reporting on events is usually one of the first things an oppressive government does in order to prevent news about what they are doing from getting out. Controlling the message is critical to tyrants.

And then I think about some of the other news reports I've read in the last several days, including:

Judge: Northside ISD CANNOT Expel Student for Rejecting RFID Tracking Chip

says district's tracking program 'violates fundamental Constitutional Rights'

Seriously? We're letting schools track our kids? Are we just getting them used to be tracked by the controlling authority?

TSA Refuses to Show at Committee Hearing

Claims House Transportation Committee has no jurisdiction over it

Are we going to continue to let agencies ignore the checks and balances inherent in the system by letting them thumb their collective noses at Congress?

And on a local level, we have politicians and the daily paper calling for a ban on a type of business they don't like. Yes, in this era of high unemployment and people and businesses leaving the city, they want to ban a job provider who pays property taxes, income taxes, wages and who purchases supplies and goods, contributing to the overall economy of the area.

What kind of bizzaro world are we in?

With all this, I got depressed at the state of the world today because it seems so daunting to fight against the constant attack on individual liberty and penchant for being dependents of governmental tyranny.

But then I remember these three quotes and I'm ready to face the day:

"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." ~ John F. Kennedy

"[W]hat country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that [the] people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils." ~ General George Stark

Welfare turns opponents into dependents

From National Center for Policy Analysis:

Political analysts have noted that because the number of those in the ruling elite amounts to only a small fraction of the number in the ruled masses, every regime lives or dies in accordance with public opinion. No matter how powerful or pervasive a regime is, it can still be overrun by the sheer superior numbers of the people it governs. However, this traditional political framework has been undermined by the development of the modern welfare state, says Robert Higgs, a senior fellow with the Independent Institute.

While the original framework would dissect the country into two populations, the gladly ruling and the reluctantly ruled, the welfare state has created a third group: dependents. Though they are most certainly ruled, they are often fierce defenders of the regime and its advocated status quo, thereby breaking ranks with the rest of the ruled who only tolerate it. They do this because the welfare state allows the current regime to be the primary provider for an ever-growing body of dependents, and this dependency engenders loyalty.

• An index of dependency developed by the Heritage Foundation found that the metric increased from 19 in fiscal year 1962 to 272 in fiscal year 2009.

• The Heritage researchers found that in 1962, 21.7 million persons depended on the government-run programs included in their index, yet this same figure for 2009 had grown to 64.3 million.

• Adding dependents not included in the Heritage study might easily increase the number to more than 100 million people, or to more than a third of the entire population.

The handouts of the welfare state exploit this large swathe of the population and earn their repeated and unwavering votes by perpetuating the status quo. As greater portions of the population come to rely on the government for their livelihood, the more clout it will inherently have as its number of detractors dwindles.

An additional symptom of this growing trend, which can be seen in the current political sphere, is that the creation of a status quo-supporting population inherently causes increased resistance to change. This conservativeness manifests itself in a lack of radical policy and in the loss of personnel turnover in Washington.

Source: Robert Higgs, "The Welfare State Neutralizes Opponents by Making Them Dependent on Government," Independent Institute, December 8, 2011.

America heading down the wrong path

"A recent poll showed that nearly half the American public believes that the government should redistribute wealth. That so many people are so willing to blithely put such an enormous and dangerous arbitrary power in the hands of politicians -- risking their own freedom, in hopes of getting what someone else has -- is a painful sign of how far many citizens and voters fall short of what is needed to preserve a democratic republic." ~ Thomas Sowell

That was my thought when I read the release on the Gallup's 2011 Economics and Finance poll, conducted April 7-11.

According to Gallup, 47% believe the government should "enact heavy taxes on the rich to redistribute wealth in the U.S," while 49% disagree. At least this is better than in 2007 when the results were exactly opposite ... but with a margin of error around +/- 4%, that isn't saying much.

The breakdown is even scarier:

* 71% of Democrats believe in redistribution
* a majority of Republicans disagree, but a whopping 28% agree.
* 64% of non-whites agree
* the more money you make, the less you tend to agree. 63% of people with incomes under $30,000 agree.

Another finding in the poll indicates just how far we've come from the American Dream of working hard to better yourself: "...more believe there are too many rich people than too few, 31% vs. 21%."

Wikipedia defines the American Dream thusly:

The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States in which freedom includes a promise of the possibility of prosperity and success. In the definition of the American Dream by James Truslow Adams in 1931, "life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" regardless of social class or circumstances of birth.

We still have the possibility of prosperity and success, but too many people see themselves as victims (constantly promoted by so-called leaders) and now believe that they needn't work for their achievements, but that the government should take from those who have worked and achieved and give it to others who haven't, simply because.

These polling numbers reflect a trend, especially among Democrats and their proclaimed constituent groups (non-whites and the less well off), toward Marxism:

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need."

President Barack Obama and other Democrat leaders routinely espouse class warfare - pitting the haves against the have-nots. How far the Democratic Party has come since John F. Kennedy said:

“Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.”

This poll shows that a large majority of Democrats want the government (the country) to take from others and give to them, rather than asking what they can do to make their own lives (and thus the country) better. They no longer assume individual responsibility for themselves and their welfare.

The entitlement attitude is promoted by not only the history since President Roosevelt's 'new deal,' but also in the rhetoric of today's politicians. It is promoted in the union/democrat-dominated school systems and perpetuated generationally through welfare.

And this isn't a new perspective - it's a growing one. A nationwide survey by Columbia Law School in May 2002 of voting age Americans found the following:

Almost two-thirds think Karl Marx's dogma, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" either was, or may have been, included in the Constitution.

Question:

Does the Constitution include the following statement about the proper role of government: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"?

Answer:

Yes: 35%
No: 31%
Don't Know: 34%

Have we come to the point where we're a democracy instead of a democratic republic? Are we already in the dependency to bondage stage as noted below?

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

* From bondage to spiritual faith;
* From spiritual faith to great courage;
* From courage to liberty;
* From liberty to abundance;
* From abundance to complacency;
* From complacency to apathy;
* From apathy to dependence;
* From dependence back into bondage.

When I read the results from Gallup's poll, I cannot help but wonder if we are too far gone from the path of individual liberty and freedom that our Founders set us upon.

But then I see Tea Party groups and events like the We The People Convention and I'm encouraged.

I just don't know if it's too little - too late.