The Patriot Post Brief 5-14-2012

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Brief 5-14-2012
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

The Foundation

"The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." --Patrick Henry

Opinion in Brief

"[Mitt] Romney and other Republicans need to show a little more confidence in the reasonableness of conservative policies and in the American people to support them when they are plainly explained. Romney does not need to apologize for his monetary success; he doesn't need to strip high-income earners of legitimate tax deductions; he doesn't need to throw bones to the global warming zealots; and he doesn't need to pander to Democrats on student loan extensions. If Republican candidates insist on allowing Democrats to make this election a contest over which party cares more about the American people, then perhaps they ought to make the case that compassion means we quit spending the nation and our children into bankruptcy and that we should re-establish economic policies that history has proved lead to economic growth. But they mustn't stop there. They must also take the offensive and show that it is the Democratic Party and its left-wing media echo chamber that have been taken over not merely by liberals but by extremist liberals, most notably typified by President Barack Obama. They no longer have to rely on his past radical associations. They can point to his record of extremism in office across the board. Obama's record is as radical as it gets (given the center-right beliefs of the electorate), and his policies have manifestly failed -- unarguably. It's imperative that Republicans make that case aggressively and unapologetically. If they do so, they'll have to spend much less time agonizing over whether they look extreme themselves. Stop the navel gazing and read the tea leaves, GOP. Shine the spotlight on Obama and his unacceptable extremism." --columnist David Limbaugh1

Re: The Left

"This week the Obama reelection campaign released an ad called 'We're Coming Back.' It's a blatant rip-off of Ronald Reagan's 1984 'Morning in America' ad that pointed out how much stronger, prouder and better America had become during my father's first four years. The Obama ad claims that we're on the road to recovery and says the president is working hard to finish the job he started. It's not supposed to be funny. But there's one serious problem with the Obama ad -- after four years of his reign of errors things are not getting better. And he has no new ideas, just the same bad Big Government ones he's been pushing -- more taxes, more spending and more regulation. When 'Morning in America' ran in 1984, inflation and interest rates were half what they had been in 1980 and were going down. There were no more lines at the gas pumps and no more gloomy talk from the Oval Office about a national 'malaise.' Ronald Reagan turned the country around the right way. He lowered taxes, cut regulations and got the government off the back of businesses and out of the way of the American people. After four years of my father's administration, Americans could see real signs of improvement and a hopeful future for the country. That's why RR was re-hired. After four years of President Obama, our only hope is that in November he is fired." --columnist Michael Reagan2

Political Futures

"[Last week's] forced retirement of Senator Richard Lugar of 'Indiana' should prove a bracing lesson in the use of the pike for didactic purposes. It's also one of the best arguments for the repeal of the 17th amendment in a long time. As I've said before, senators no longer represent their states to Washington, they represent Leviathan to the states, handing out either goodies or punishments as their whim and the political winds dictate. Their primary allegiance is not to the voters back 'home' but to their cloakroom colleagues (hence the 'bipartisanship' fetish that is particularly virulent in the Senate) on Capitol Hill, and to the Beltway parasites who feed off them. Indeed, Lugar didn't even live in Indiana. According to this story3, he stayed in a hotel in Indianapolis, at taxpayer expense, whenever he deigned to visit. ... In the name of 'democracy,' the 'progressive'-era amendment fundamentally upset the balance of state-fed power that had been built into the Constitution, tipping it inexorably in favor of Washington. Unmoored from state or region for a minimum of six years -- and more likely, twelve or 18 -- the senators now form a club without a purpose except for their own reelections. Far from enhancing democracy, the very nature of the office now mocks it." --columnist Michael Walsh | http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/299501/iau-revoir-les-enfantsi-michael-walsh]

Essential Liberty

"What is the Constitution or the laws when it comes to ideological soul mates, especially young soul mates who remind the aging 1960s radicals of their youth? Neither in this nor any other issue can the Constitution protect us if we don't protect the Constitution. When all is said and done, the Constitution is a document, a piece of paper. If we don't vote out of office, or impeach, those who violate the Constitution, or who refuse to enforce the law, the steady erosion of Constitutional protections will ultimately render it meaningless. Everything will just become a question of whose ox is gored and what is the political expediency of the moment." --economist Thomas Sowell4

Government

"A child leaving home alone for the first time takes a risk. So does the entrepreneur who opens a new business. I no more want government to prevent us from doing these things than I want it to keep us in padded cells. Everyone has a different tolerance for risk. One person takes out a second mortgage to start a business. Another thinks that sounds nerve-racking, if not insane. Neither person is wrong. Government cannot know each person's preferences, or odds of success. Even if it did, what right does it have to tell them what to do? When government gets in the business of deciding which risks are acceptable and which aren't, nasty things happen. This includes government's attempt to improve life by regulating gambling and the use of medicine, banning recreational drugs and mandating safety devices in cars. In what sense are we free if we can't decide such things for ourselves? ... In a free country, it should be up to adult individuals to make their own choices about risk. Patrick Henry didn't say, 'Give me safety, or give me death.' Liberty is what America is supposed to be about. Let's start treating people as though their bodies belong to them, not to a controlling and 'protective' government." --columnist John Stossel5