Going 'Backward'
By Sylvia Bokor
During
elections, Democrats routinely claim that "Republicans want to go
backward," implying that Republicans want to return to some drearily
boring, less prosperous time.
Obama resurrected that bromide in a campaign speech several days before the Democrat National Convention. Unsurprisingly, it was the Convention's theme, pounded on by every speaker. For instance, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley invited the mob to chant the slogan "Forward, Not Back" as the delegates waved signs printed with the same message.
The high point of such repetitiveness was former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm's speech, which took the claim to new depths of rabble-rousing: "America, let's rev our engines!" she yelled from the podium. "In your car and on your ballot, the 'D' is for drive forward, and the 'R' is for reverse - and in this election, we're driving forward, not back!" This unsubtle play on the initials of the two major political parties brought down the house.
Ms. Granholm's analogy starkly reveals that leftists have taken over the Democrat party. Leftists see government, not the private sector, as the engine of the economy, which explains their blindness to what economic activity requires. They see government officials as the engine's drivers, which explains their evasion of the kind of road that will result from their looting the earner to give to the non-earner, of hamstringing "the rich" to support the malingerer.
Since the Democrat Convention, the claim that Democrats want to go "Forward" and that Republicans want "to go backward" has been repeated ad nauseam. The New York Times published Obama's "I want" convention speech, which included the assertion that Obama wants "to take the nation forward but the Republicans want to take us backwards."
Of the Repulicans, Hrafnkell Haraldsson wrote, "And you thought it was crazy to time travel back to the time of dinosaurs!"
Indeed, the screams that Democrats want "to go Forward" but Republicans "want to go back" have been broadcast with Marie Antoinette-like extravagance -- and with the same understanding of economic problems.
If such mentally challenged admonitions do not move you, you will likely note that if a precipice is in front of you, it would be prudent to reverse your direction. Continuing to go "Forward" means to fall into an abyss.
As things are today, "going back" is realistically going "back to the future." It's a return to the philosophical base and mode of action that originated this nation. It's where this nation should be going. In some way, to some extent, most Americans recognize this. Otherwise, we would not hear huge majorities of the population declaring that we are on the wrong track (see the left-side panel under "RCP Poll Averages," under "Direction of Country").
"Going back" means returning to the kind of nation that in our country's infancy was known as "The Empire of Reason."
It means recapturing the freedom Americans used to have when our individual rights were recognized and considered sacrosanct, when our government defended and protected individual rights, not violated them.
It means restoring limited government, wherein the government is constrained by the Constitution and may not interfere in our lives and decisions and choices, when we had less to pay in taxes, no usurpation of states' rights, no confiscation of citizens' property, no nationalization of businesspeople's achievements, and no Federal Reserve.
Going "back" means restoring to Americans their right to start a business without government officials dictating employee salaries. It means recognizing people's right to choose their own retirement and medical programs. It means not allowing government officials to "oversee" business operations under the guise of "protecting the public." It means restoring one's right to buy the products one wants and not be forced to buy products one does not want. It means restoring the right to trade freely and voluntarily, unobstructed by government officials and regulatory agencies. It means a hand up, not a hand out.
In short, going "back" means recapturing and restoring the principles upon which this nation was founded: individual rights, limited government, and free markets.
To call such principles "going in reverse" -- and that a huge assembly of Democrat delegates scorns those principles -- shows the destructive influence of leftist doctrine on our culture. That doctrine is totally alien to the vast majority of Americans whose convictions more closely follow those of Joe the Plumber: "Don't distribute my wealth; distribute my work ethic."
The Republican leadership has not been exempt from leftist influence, which explains why several Republicans in high places have accepted the leftists' premise that the past is something dark and dreary and dreadful. Consequently, they have never correctly answered the accusation that Republicans eschew progress.
The correct answer is: "Yes, we want a return to reason. If that's 'going back,' make the most of it."
Working to restore individual rights -- the foundation of our Constitution -- is the most advanced policy possible. The recognition and protection of individual rights is essential to prosperity. To work for their restoration is to be at the forefront of the struggle for a recharged, energetic, renewed civilization.
This is why Americans should vote for Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney is the only candidate who through his actions can move us away from socialism -- the direction Obama is bent on.
Put aside the "Big Lie" spouted almost daily that Romney is "unlikable." That is merely the speaker's or writer's own confession.
Put aside the refrain that "he cannot relate to the middle class." If he cannot, why is the race neck-and-neck, and why isn't Obama leagues in front of him? Almost 50% of Americans "relate" to Mr. Romney enough to have decided to vote for him.
Put aside the notion that "no one knows anything about him." Plenty of material exists that shows what Mr. Romney is like. You will read that he is a very hard worker, a man who enjoys thought and action and is good at problem-solving. You will learn that he has the courage to make difficult decisions, how to balance a government budget, and how to reignite certainty so that men will once again be willing to take risks, start a business, and create jobs. You will learn about his extraordinary organizational skills, his ability to bring people together to cooperate and achieve a given goal.
In the November election we have a chance to return our nation to "The Empire of Reason."
This is why Americans -- Republicans, Democrats, independents, DTS alike -- should vote for Mitt Romney. He is the one man who can take the steps that will stop the fast-forward into Obama's socialist abyss. Those vital steps will be enough to get us back on track, to recoup and restore our nation of individual rights, limited government, and free markets.
Obama resurrected that bromide in a campaign speech several days before the Democrat National Convention. Unsurprisingly, it was the Convention's theme, pounded on by every speaker. For instance, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley invited the mob to chant the slogan "Forward, Not Back" as the delegates waved signs printed with the same message.
The high point of such repetitiveness was former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm's speech, which took the claim to new depths of rabble-rousing: "America, let's rev our engines!" she yelled from the podium. "In your car and on your ballot, the 'D' is for drive forward, and the 'R' is for reverse - and in this election, we're driving forward, not back!" This unsubtle play on the initials of the two major political parties brought down the house.
Ms. Granholm's analogy starkly reveals that leftists have taken over the Democrat party. Leftists see government, not the private sector, as the engine of the economy, which explains their blindness to what economic activity requires. They see government officials as the engine's drivers, which explains their evasion of the kind of road that will result from their looting the earner to give to the non-earner, of hamstringing "the rich" to support the malingerer.
Since the Democrat Convention, the claim that Democrats want to go "Forward" and that Republicans want "to go backward" has been repeated ad nauseam. The New York Times published Obama's "I want" convention speech, which included the assertion that Obama wants "to take the nation forward but the Republicans want to take us backwards."
Of the Repulicans, Hrafnkell Haraldsson wrote, "And you thought it was crazy to time travel back to the time of dinosaurs!"
Indeed, the screams that Democrats want "to go Forward" but Republicans "want to go back" have been broadcast with Marie Antoinette-like extravagance -- and with the same understanding of economic problems.
If such mentally challenged admonitions do not move you, you will likely note that if a precipice is in front of you, it would be prudent to reverse your direction. Continuing to go "Forward" means to fall into an abyss.
As things are today, "going back" is realistically going "back to the future." It's a return to the philosophical base and mode of action that originated this nation. It's where this nation should be going. In some way, to some extent, most Americans recognize this. Otherwise, we would not hear huge majorities of the population declaring that we are on the wrong track (see the left-side panel under "RCP Poll Averages," under "Direction of Country").
"Going back" means returning to the kind of nation that in our country's infancy was known as "The Empire of Reason."
It means recapturing the freedom Americans used to have when our individual rights were recognized and considered sacrosanct, when our government defended and protected individual rights, not violated them.
It means restoring limited government, wherein the government is constrained by the Constitution and may not interfere in our lives and decisions and choices, when we had less to pay in taxes, no usurpation of states' rights, no confiscation of citizens' property, no nationalization of businesspeople's achievements, and no Federal Reserve.
Going "back" means restoring to Americans their right to start a business without government officials dictating employee salaries. It means recognizing people's right to choose their own retirement and medical programs. It means not allowing government officials to "oversee" business operations under the guise of "protecting the public." It means restoring one's right to buy the products one wants and not be forced to buy products one does not want. It means restoring the right to trade freely and voluntarily, unobstructed by government officials and regulatory agencies. It means a hand up, not a hand out.
In short, going "back" means recapturing and restoring the principles upon which this nation was founded: individual rights, limited government, and free markets.
To call such principles "going in reverse" -- and that a huge assembly of Democrat delegates scorns those principles -- shows the destructive influence of leftist doctrine on our culture. That doctrine is totally alien to the vast majority of Americans whose convictions more closely follow those of Joe the Plumber: "Don't distribute my wealth; distribute my work ethic."
The Republican leadership has not been exempt from leftist influence, which explains why several Republicans in high places have accepted the leftists' premise that the past is something dark and dreary and dreadful. Consequently, they have never correctly answered the accusation that Republicans eschew progress.
The correct answer is: "Yes, we want a return to reason. If that's 'going back,' make the most of it."
Working to restore individual rights -- the foundation of our Constitution -- is the most advanced policy possible. The recognition and protection of individual rights is essential to prosperity. To work for their restoration is to be at the forefront of the struggle for a recharged, energetic, renewed civilization.
This is why Americans should vote for Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney is the only candidate who through his actions can move us away from socialism -- the direction Obama is bent on.
Put aside the "Big Lie" spouted almost daily that Romney is "unlikable." That is merely the speaker's or writer's own confession.
Put aside the refrain that "he cannot relate to the middle class." If he cannot, why is the race neck-and-neck, and why isn't Obama leagues in front of him? Almost 50% of Americans "relate" to Mr. Romney enough to have decided to vote for him.
Put aside the notion that "no one knows anything about him." Plenty of material exists that shows what Mr. Romney is like. You will read that he is a very hard worker, a man who enjoys thought and action and is good at problem-solving. You will learn that he has the courage to make difficult decisions, how to balance a government budget, and how to reignite certainty so that men will once again be willing to take risks, start a business, and create jobs. You will learn about his extraordinary organizational skills, his ability to bring people together to cooperate and achieve a given goal.
In the November election we have a chance to return our nation to "The Empire of Reason."
This is why Americans -- Republicans, Democrats, independents, DTS alike -- should vote for Mitt Romney. He is the one man who can take the steps that will stop the fast-forward into Obama's socialist abyss. Those vital steps will be enough to get us back on track, to recoup and restore our nation of individual rights, limited government, and free markets.
No comments:
Post a Comment