And a Blind and Tame Submission.
...ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole...But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity.
Well the federal government has not gone mad. Rather the people have become apathetic, lazy, submissive and dependent. James Madison was arguing for the ratification of the Constitution and insisted the States - and the people - had nothing to fear from a federal government. His arguments were persuasive, he believed the American people would resist encroachments by the federal government and assured the skeptics that the Constitution offered absolute protection against such encroachment. He was wrong.
Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.
He called it an insult to the people:
Blind and submissive. Turns out the American people are not easily insulted. Here is a taste of what we are submitting to:
Much of the criticism of the $787 billion stimulus bill is focused on its cost. But what's really at issue is a matter of life and death. Buried deep in the package, there is an expensive new healthcare program that could jeopardize the health, even the lives, of millions of patients.
The bill funnels about $1 billion into government-run "comparative effectiveness research" (CER). Sounds innocuous enough -- that's a relatively paltry sum given the package's $800 billion-plus price tag. But CER will have profound effects on the availability of top-notch treatments in this country. Stripped of bureaucratic jargon, it is the precursor for a national healthcare rationing board.
Virtually every government-run CER program ends up closing off patient access to the best treatments in the name of "cost consciousness." When bureaucrats are put in charge of medical care, cutting down on bills is prioritized over fighting disease.
There are plenty of proposals included in the stimulus package that aren't actually tied to economic recovery. But CER is the only one that threatens the lives of countless Americans. It's too dangerous to be ignored.
Yet the American people think it's just grand.
Hill staffer Tom Jones is going through the omnibus spending bill with a fine-tooth comb, and Twittering his earmark findings, including:
* $200,000 for “Tattoo Removal Violence Prevention Outreach Program,” pg. 283;
*Maine lobster earmark in the omnibus, pg. 173;
*$5.8 million earmark for the “Ted Kennedy Institute for the Senate…for the planning and design of a building & an endowment,” pg. 232;
*and National Council of La Raza, $473,000 earmark from Sens. Bingaman and Menendez, pg. 212.
"3.6 trillion dollars is one out of every four dollars produced in the United States. It's 25% of the GDP. It's 2 and a half Californias... We are going from an era where we looked for the private sector to create wealth to where we are looking for the government to orchestrate the economy. Barack Obama says, "The government must lead." So I take it the private sector is no longer going to decide where investments should go but rather the government is going to decide that we're going to have a certain kind of energy sector, a certain kind of manufacturing, a certain kind of service sector. That seems to me pretty arrogant."
University of Maryland Economist
February 27, 2009
Senator Tom Coburn: new debt proposed by Administration's budget is larger than the total amount of debt accumulated by the government from 1789 to today.
“If President Obama gets his way, the 92 percent of American homeowners who pay their mortgages on time will be forced to do with less in the future so that the Obama administration can use their money to reward banks that offered bad loans to customers who had no business accepting them,” said Bill Hobbs, communications director for the Tennessee Republican Party. “Government has no business forcing one American to pay another American’s mortgage. It’s time for the Obama administration to stop the bailout madness, unshackle the economy and the creativity of the American people by reducing personal and business taxes and cutting government red-tape and interference in the economy, and let the free markets work.”
Government interference? How about government control.
As for freedom of choice, Obama's all for it. Or maybe not:
The rollback of the so-called conscience rule comes just two months after the Bush administration announced it late last year in one of its final policy initiatives.
If we are going to be a nation that supports the “freedom to choose,” then it seems to me that has to go both ways. Professional health workers should be “free to choose” whether or not they will participate in what they find to be morally objectionable.
Freedom that is only one-sided i.e., “she is free to have a late term, partial-birth abortion and you are not free to refuse her request” or “she is free to demand this contraception and you are not free to refuse to fill that prescription,” is not really freedom.
It is enslavement. Dress it up any way you want. If the government is forcing you to do what your conscience tells you not to, under threats to your freedom, your purse or your livelihood, then you are not free.
As The Anchoress points out, FREEDOM is not necessarily on Obama's radar screen:
But you know, the other night, when Obama addressed the joint houses of Congress, he only used the world “freedom” once. Just once. It’s not really what he’s about. Not really on his radar.
Apparently not on the radar of many Americans either.
There is a bright spot, however, for those of us who value our freedom and who take responsibility for our mistakes, pay the consequences and move on. Those of us who believe that freedom is much too precious to trade for a mortgage payment. Maybe the unprecedented power-grab by Barack Obama and the Democrats has finally caused us to wake up and fight back.
There is, as the old ’60s song goes, something happening here. And what it is, is very clear: A grass-roots revolt against the culture of entitlement. The spendzillas in Washington do not speak for us.
Will we, as Madison so passionately argued, defend our rights? Or will we submit?