The best thing about moving what the government does down from: fed to state, state, to local is that the closer it gets to you the more influence and effect (control) you can have on it. This is beauty as the left coasts could have all the socialism they want and it would be no skin off the rest of our collective noses. In fact to take that further, the less government takes from me the more empowered I become over my own destiny and the pursuit of my own happiness. That’s what the government is for; to protect us from the harm others would unlawfully do to us (internal and external), and to ensure that we have a rule of law that is consistently applied (not an arbitrary, suddenly shifting interpretation of that law like some activist judges suppose).
People try all of the time to expand the general welfare clause to encompass whatever their cause dejour is (today it healthcare, tomorrow something else), but it is primarily there to make sure there are no abuses, not to redistribute wealth on a mass scale. For instance, if some citizens tax me excessively (say, like now) they are preventing me from pursuing my own happiness – nothing ‘fair’ about that.
There is no history of any of the forefathers advocating using government funds (especially on a NATIONAL scale) to pay individual bills, which is what this suddenly developed ‘right’ to healthcare would do. The first time I ever heard of this healthcare ‘right’ was in a response to a letter I sent to Ted Kennedy maybe 10-12 years ago. I laughed my arse off until I realized that old fat bastarde wasn’t kidding.
GNW – nice
The best thing about moving what the government does down from: fed to state, state, to local is that the closer it gets to you the more influence and effect (control) you can have on it. This is beauty as the left coasts could have all the socialism they want and it would be no skin off the rest of our collective noses. In fact to take that further, the less government takes from me the more empowered I become over my own destiny and the pursuit of my own happiness. That’s what the government is for; to protect us from the harm others would unlawfully do to us (internal and external), and to ensure that we have a rule of law that is consistently applied (not an arbitrary, suddenly shifting interpretation of that law like some activist judges suppose).
People try all of the time to expand the general welfare clause to encompass whatever their cause dejour is (today it healthcare, tomorrow something else), but it is primarily there to make sure there are no abuses, not to redistribute wealth on a mass scale. For instance, if some citizens tax me excessively (say, like now) they are preventing me from pursuing my own happiness – nothing ‘fair’ about that.
There is no history of any of the forefathers advocating using government funds (especially on a NATIONAL scale) to pay individual bills, which is what this suddenly developed ‘right’ to healthcare would do. The first time I ever heard of this healthcare ‘right’ was in a response to a letter I sent to Ted Kennedy maybe 10-12 years ago. I laughed my arse off until I realized that old fat bastarde wasn’t kidding.