Thomas Jefferson-Letter to Samuel Kercheval (July 12, 1816)
President Obama begs to differ with Mr. Jefferson:
All of history I believe supports Mr. Jefferson’s conclusion that all governments tend toward tyranny over time. Kipling put it well:
All we have of freedom, all we use or know– This our fathers bought for us long and long ago.
Ancient Right unnoticed as the breath we draw– Leave to live by no man’s leave, underneath the Law–
The history of Mr. Obama’s own administration is a damning refutation of the argument that he makes:
1. The HSS contraceptive mandate that discards religious liberty for crass political advantage.
3. An attitude towards the Second Amendment that careens between contempt and hatred.
4. Attempting to silence chaplains who speak out against the HHS Mandate or Gay Marriage.
5. Restricting religious freedom to a mere freedom to worship.
6. The Supreme Court rejected the Obama Administration’s position that anti-discrimination laws trumped the right of religious groups to choose their own ministers: ” We cannot accept the remarkable view that the Religion Clauses have nothing to say about a religious organization’s freedom to select its own ministers.” Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC
7. A refusal to defend laws passed by Congress in court, The Defense of Marriage Act is the most glaring example, if the administration disagrees with the law.
These and many other infringements on American liberty indicates that with Mr. Obama at the helm tyranny may not be right around the corner, but it is certainly within an easy stroll.
I think the following is the definitive Kipling poem to describe Obama and the current political class.
“A Servant When He Reigneth”
Three things make earth unquiet
And four she cannot brook
The godly Agur counted them
And put them in a book –
Those Four Tremendous Curses
With which mankind is cursed;
But a Servant when He Reigneth
Old Agur entered first.
An Handmaid that is Mistress
We need not call upon.
A Fool when he is full of Meat
Will fall asleep anon.
An Odious Woman Married
May bear a babe and mend;
But a Servant when He Reigneth
Is Confusion to the end.
His feet are swift to tumult,
His hands are slow to toil,
His ears are deaf to reason,
His lips are loud in broil.
He knows no use for power
Except to show his might.
He gives no heed to judgment
Unless it prove him right.
Because he served a master
Before his Kingship came,
And hid in all disaster
Behind his master’s name,
So, when his Folly opens
The unnecessary hells,
A Servant when He Reigneth
Throws the blame on some one else.
His vows are lightly spoken,
His faith is hard to bind,
His trust is easy boken,
He fears his fellow-kind.
The nearest mob will move him
To break the pledge he gave —
Oh, a Servant when he Reigneth
Is more than ever slave!
Thank you both, T. Shaw and Donald.
The abuses of the office and blatant disregard to the peoples voice has done wonders for gun & ammo. sales. Go figure.
Politicians should remember they are playing a dangerous game. As Talleyrand reminds them, “Governing has never been anything other than postponing by a thousand subterfuges the moment when the mob will hang you from the lamp-post, and every act of government is nothing but a way of not losing control of the people.”
“Politicians should remember they are playing a dangerous game.”
Politicians will only remember this is a dangerous game when the people over whom they lord their authority are armed sufficiently to remind them.
“He said to them, ‘But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one.'” Luke 22:36
When Obama said “Because what they suggest is that our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule is just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.” I am reminded that you can never trust someone who urges you to trust them. Obama references “voices” rather than facts. This is because all he has is a “voice” and not truth. The real irony is that he says he’s engaged in an experiment in self-government. He’s not. He’s engaged in removing self-government and placing everything in the hands of a leftist authoritarian bureaucracy. This is proven by everything that Donald has listed, and then some. I would add to this the complicity of the press through hiding facts rather than reporting them. This is done so that the only “voice” most people hear is that of the administration. When only misinformation is being fed to voters, then there is no possibility for “self-government”. Gosnell, Benghazi, Obama’s birth place, and the way the Affordable Care Act was presented to the American public were all examples of the media acting as an arm of the administration in burying the facts and substituting rhetoric and lies.
A.S.
“…misinformation is being fed to voters…”
Control the media, unfortunately they will control the voters. What a battle….uphill all the way.
“tyranny” is beside the point, people on both sides’d agree that the government is under no obligation have to tolerate something that’s wrong, they just disagree on what’s wrong. and a lot of conservative talking heads are unwilling to substantively oppose Obama on several of the aforementioned issues cuz they don’t seriously disagree with him on the merits. The HHS mandate, for instance, you had a bunch of pundits essentially saying “well we agree the Church’s position is insane but this is overreach” vs. “birth control is a fundamental right.” one of those stakes out a stronger claim than the other
Rubbish JDP. The idea that the government can compel religious groups to fund contraception is the very epitome of tyranny. You miss the point completely.
Thomas Jefferson: “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”
Variation: “The people will not understand the importance of the Second Amendment until it is too late.”
A big problem among conservatives, that doesn’t exist among hate-filled liberals, is the propensity to scratch out each others’ eyes.
The other night I had a beautiful dream. In the dream, I woke up and Ronald Reagan was President.
“The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”
Variation: “The people will not understand the importance of the Second Amendment until it is too late.”
One of many fake Jefferson quotes floating around the internet T.Shaw:
http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/beauty-second-amendment-quotation
Jefferson did quote Cesare Beccaria in regard to laws restricting fire arms:
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Mac,
Thanks. I was going to put in the caveat that I saw that on facebook; but I also saw it elsewhereo.
In any case, it fits the expanding tyranny situation.
Am I wrong about pundits’ refusal to engage Obama/the Democrats on the merits of these issues? The mainstream conservative position is indifferent to SSM and only objects to it procedurally, i.e. they don’t want it done through the courts. Similarly most agree with Obama that the Church’s position on BC is irrational. Once that’s conceded what’s to stop people from saying it’s something that has to be provided, religious objections or no, and lumping denial of coverage in with other practices we don’t permit period, even with a religious liberty defense.
i’m speaking broadly about known “mainstream conservatives” but, their heart really doesn’t seem to be in these sorts of arguments, except for discussing the political angles.
Name the pundits you are referring to JDP. What I have found is that there has been widespread appreciation of the tyranny of the Obama administration attempting to cause groups to act against their consciences. One does not have to share the opposition of the Church to contraception to recognize that simple fact.
Well if any well-known conservative pundit’s argued against/expressed skepticism of BC in and of itself since this happened I’d be very surprised, I haven’t heard of it. I think Hannity some time ago told a priest he thought good Catholics could use contraception. My main point though is a sort of asymmetry in the arguments. You’re right that you don’t have to be against it to oppose the HHS mandate but when one side is asserting that the Church’s position is irrational/evil/whatever, and the other doesn’t strongly dispute this but instead appeals to religious liberty in general, they’re not addressing the left side’s premises.
u’re right that you don’t have to be against it to oppose the HHS mandate but when one side is asserting that the Church’s position is irrational/evil/whatever, and the other doesn’t strongly dispute this but instead appeals to religious liberty in general, they’re not addressing the left side’s premises.
In a sense, this is completely backwards. The fact that pundits and commentators are backing the Church despite disagreeing with the teaching on contraception only strengthens the religious liberty argument. If we turn this into a simple bc good vs. bc bad debate, then we’re losing sight of the larger issue.
As for this:
The mainstream conservative position is indifferent to SSM and only objects to it procedurally
Rubbish. While it’s true that many conservatives discuss the undemocratic way in which SSM is forced upon us, that is only one of a larger set of arguments employed against SSM. As one who listens to and reads a lot of conservative opinion leaders, most (Ingraham, Medved, Levin, Bennett, Prager on radio, just to name some, and scores others on blogs and opeds) make substantive arguments against same sex marriage.
It seems you are picking nits in the methods of argument for no particular reason.
I am a nit-picker. I think tyranny & tolerance rhetoric is useless cuz in today’s political environment, for good or ill, people with the strongest opinions are generally willing to be pretty authoritarian so long as they think doing so’s good for society.
“The fact that pundits and commentators are backing the Church despite disagreeing with the teaching on contraception only strengthens the religious liberty argument”
yes and no. A general religious liberty argument seems more broadly appealing, but if people don’t engage on substance, how do they object when others start lumping it in with other religious practices we wouldn’t or don’t tolerate, or going on about how religious organizations can’t “impose” their views in matters like this? Like I mentioned, one side is staking out a stronger claim here that the religious liberty arguments don’t match, because liberals don’t believe in religious liberty for “irrational” views when they intersect with the public sphere, and this characterization isn’t meaningfully challenged.
I spoke generally on SSM. However I get the sense that a bunch of the GOP political class/select conservative pundits are either resigned to it/supportive and just waiting for a more opportune time to say so. i realize it’s not everyone, but on the whole it seems like it’s given up.
Tyranny may consist of taking from you your arms, your property, your right to speak and so on but the worst tyranny is that which tries to take away your soul.