Char just sent me a comment related to the Mark Steyn post from may 26th. I added the comment there, but I also wanted to give it its own post. Char pointed me to this article in the Wall Street Journal, How Hillsdale Beats Harvard. I've heard it said that private colleges are still totally independent if the only government moneys they accept are the federal student grants and loans.
Here is a good example of how that works. Or doesn't.
Kudos to Hillsdale College for consistency.
Monday, June 8, 2009
God is Good
As my husband has periodically reminded me, we shouldn't remember and acknowledge God's goodness only when we have obvious reminders of it. He is always good. But I had an experience lately that caused me to rejoice more than usual in His providence.
A week ago, Saturday, I loaded up my nine younger children, ages 5 months to almost 15 years. We had a graduation party for Joe's cousin and our Goddaughter, Amber, to attend in Redwood Falls, which is a little over a five hour drive south of us. We were then continuing on to Joe's parents' house where our oldest son Jeremy lives during the school year. He attends ECHO Charter School at a town near them. Since his school year was complete, we were bringing him home with us. Yeah!
Getting back to the story, I was driving along; all was well; we were listening to Focus on the Family Radio Theater, The Secret Garden. Our vehicle is pretty noisy, more so on a windy day like it was that day. Because of the noise, we were struggling to hear the story even at full volume. Suddenly, about half way between Sebeka and Wadena, it became much harder to hear over the thump, thump, thump from outside. I was tempted to ignore the sound, being used to the constantly changing racket of the van. But when it became apparent that I was having difficulty keeping the van from pulling over into the oncoming traffic, I suspected a flat tire.
Ah yes, the front driver's side. Flat as can be. Those steel belt wire things poking out all over. Big blowout site. Not just one of those "fix the hole and re-inflate" situations, but a "need a new tire right now" situation. Besides which, I suspected that I had no jack or spare. And it was, may I remind you, a Saturday afternoon. In the middle of nowhere. Truthfully, I was not even sure where we were. I remembered going through Sebeka, but I couldn't remember in which order the towns occurred, and I could not remember going through Menahga.
Just having a cell phone was reassuring. I knew that I could call Joe. I could call a tow truck. I could call 911 if need be. Thank you for technology. But I still had no idea how to tell them to find me. Somewhere on US71 heading south. That's a pretty big area.
After trying the two farm sites immediately adjacent, and finding no one home, Matt tried the next one down; not far, maybe 2 or 3 hundred yards. Thank you for teen age boys. Soon he returned on a golf cart driven by a Mr. Wells.
Upon seeing how far gone my tire was, Mr. Wells suggested I back into his driveway where he could work on my poor van more easily. I was a bit reluctant to try this, since I HATE backing up in this van. After a few tense minutes, I made it without managing to back into the flow of traffic.
I unloaded the kids and settled them under a lilac bush with our picnic lunch. Mr. Wells and Matt removed my flattened tire and then he gave me a ride into Wadena to see whether we could find a tire shop open on a Saturday afternoon. The second place we tried, Cenex, was open. Thank you for Cenex. They had a tire the size we needed. Thank you for tire. Soon we were on the way back to the house.
Before we went into town Mr. Wells had taken me into his house to meet his wife. He told her the kids were outside having a picnic lunch and the older ones would watch the younger. I was a little bit nervous about leaving them. Not that I feared for their safety at the hands of a strange woman. I suppose something bad could happen, but I like to believe in the lauded "Minnesota Nice" idea. I was, however, nervous the kids would have been naughty or caused Mrs. Wells extra stress. Mean, we're talking about nine children playing in a stranger's yard in this age of liability suits. I would not ever hold anyone accountable for my children getting hurt in the normal course of playing on someone else's property. Certainly not when this family was rescuing me. But Mrs. Wells had no way of knowing that.
And so we returned to find the kids playing nicely; Mrs. Wells was sitting on the front steps visiting with various of them. She did not seem at all bothered by this unusual Saturday happenstance.
When I got back from town, Inge was in immediate need of her mother, so I sat on the steps to take care of her needs. After Mr. Wells got the van "ready to roll", he gave the kids rides in his golf cart. Then he let the older ones drive each other around.
When we were ready to leave, I offered him some money for his time and work and he replied, "Absolutely not. You made our day."
Well, let me tell you, that is not what a mother of nine would expect to hear from someone. I always feel I must apologize for the sheer number of us. We are a bit overwhelming. It really made my day to have such a wonderful flat tire experience.
The behavior of the Wells' reminds me of one of my favorite Bible passages, Hebrews 13:2 "Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it."
I certainly can not hold claim to any of my family members being angels, but I do thank God for providing us with a couple of angels that day.
A week ago, Saturday, I loaded up my nine younger children, ages 5 months to almost 15 years. We had a graduation party for Joe's cousin and our Goddaughter, Amber, to attend in Redwood Falls, which is a little over a five hour drive south of us. We were then continuing on to Joe's parents' house where our oldest son Jeremy lives during the school year. He attends ECHO Charter School at a town near them. Since his school year was complete, we were bringing him home with us. Yeah!
Getting back to the story, I was driving along; all was well; we were listening to Focus on the Family Radio Theater, The Secret Garden. Our vehicle is pretty noisy, more so on a windy day like it was that day. Because of the noise, we were struggling to hear the story even at full volume. Suddenly, about half way between Sebeka and Wadena, it became much harder to hear over the thump, thump, thump from outside. I was tempted to ignore the sound, being used to the constantly changing racket of the van. But when it became apparent that I was having difficulty keeping the van from pulling over into the oncoming traffic, I suspected a flat tire.
Ah yes, the front driver's side. Flat as can be. Those steel belt wire things poking out all over. Big blowout site. Not just one of those "fix the hole and re-inflate" situations, but a "need a new tire right now" situation. Besides which, I suspected that I had no jack or spare. And it was, may I remind you, a Saturday afternoon. In the middle of nowhere. Truthfully, I was not even sure where we were. I remembered going through Sebeka, but I couldn't remember in which order the towns occurred, and I could not remember going through Menahga.
Just having a cell phone was reassuring. I knew that I could call Joe. I could call a tow truck. I could call 911 if need be. Thank you for technology. But I still had no idea how to tell them to find me. Somewhere on US71 heading south. That's a pretty big area.
After trying the two farm sites immediately adjacent, and finding no one home, Matt tried the next one down; not far, maybe 2 or 3 hundred yards. Thank you for teen age boys. Soon he returned on a golf cart driven by a Mr. Wells.
Upon seeing how far gone my tire was, Mr. Wells suggested I back into his driveway where he could work on my poor van more easily. I was a bit reluctant to try this, since I HATE backing up in this van. After a few tense minutes, I made it without managing to back into the flow of traffic.
I unloaded the kids and settled them under a lilac bush with our picnic lunch. Mr. Wells and Matt removed my flattened tire and then he gave me a ride into Wadena to see whether we could find a tire shop open on a Saturday afternoon. The second place we tried, Cenex, was open. Thank you for Cenex. They had a tire the size we needed. Thank you for tire. Soon we were on the way back to the house.
Before we went into town Mr. Wells had taken me into his house to meet his wife. He told her the kids were outside having a picnic lunch and the older ones would watch the younger. I was a little bit nervous about leaving them. Not that I feared for their safety at the hands of a strange woman. I suppose something bad could happen, but I like to believe in the lauded "Minnesota Nice" idea. I was, however, nervous the kids would have been naughty or caused Mrs. Wells extra stress. Mean, we're talking about nine children playing in a stranger's yard in this age of liability suits. I would not ever hold anyone accountable for my children getting hurt in the normal course of playing on someone else's property. Certainly not when this family was rescuing me. But Mrs. Wells had no way of knowing that.
And so we returned to find the kids playing nicely; Mrs. Wells was sitting on the front steps visiting with various of them. She did not seem at all bothered by this unusual Saturday happenstance.
When I got back from town, Inge was in immediate need of her mother, so I sat on the steps to take care of her needs. After Mr. Wells got the van "ready to roll", he gave the kids rides in his golf cart. Then he let the older ones drive each other around.
When we were ready to leave, I offered him some money for his time and work and he replied, "Absolutely not. You made our day."
Well, let me tell you, that is not what a mother of nine would expect to hear from someone. I always feel I must apologize for the sheer number of us. We are a bit overwhelming. It really made my day to have such a wonderful flat tire experience.
The behavior of the Wells' reminds me of one of my favorite Bible passages, Hebrews 13:2 "Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it."
I certainly can not hold claim to any of my family members being angels, but I do thank God for providing us with a couple of angels that day.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Manipulating Statistics and Other Peeves
Have you heard the figure being tossed about that there are 50 million uninsured people in America?
The idea that our government wants to nationalize the healthcare industry angers me on so many fronts. I don't even know where to begin. Let me try to be clear. In my frustration that may not be an easy task.
First, national healthcare does not work.
Where does it end? And who is going to pay for it? Obviously the tax payers.
And guess what. The pool of people otherwise known as the American tax payer is getting smaller and smaller. With the new tax policies going into effect, more voting Americans than not will pay no national income tax. Do I mean that I wish for more taxes? Not at all. But think about the implications. Those who don't pay any income tax often receive that great big annual bonus known as the Earned Income Credit. I know because we fall into this category. What this means is that each April or May, I get a big chunk of money from the federal government that came out of someone else's pocket. (Do I send it back? I guess I am not that noble. But I do experience pangs of conscience.)
What I am getting at is that for the first time in American history, more people will be receiving for free all the variety of government services available. Be it the traditional welfare type programs such as food stamps, WIC, housing assistance; government financial gifts such as tuition grants or the Earned Income Credit; or the many services our government offers or helps offer to all citizens such as protection from enemies, education and infrastructure. Who is going to be left to vote against such continued federal government growth if everyone is on the dole? Pity the poor souls, again the ever decreasing number of them, who pay for all this.
The third reason I get irate thinking about the healthcare industry is that those discussing these policy changes manipulate the numbers in order to secure more support for their programs. I hate being a statistic used by someone to support something I don't believe in. My family has in recent years been uninsured for short periods of time. We did this by choice. We chose not to purchase health insurance. I'll save that logic for another post. But when I hear politicians claiming that they need to step in because people are uninsured, I get my hackles up.
From Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny
So when you hear the figure 50 million uninsured Americans, be skeptical. Be very skeptical.
There is a final reason why I don't like the discussions surrounding the healthcare crisis in America. Never are the two reasons that seem to me most obvious given adequate hearing: the soaring costs physicians have to pay for malpractice insurance and the great quality of medical care to which we Americans have become accustomed.
This may sound harsh, but when we are ready to stop suing our medical practitioners, when we are ready to stop going to the doctor for every little thing, when we are ready to die instead of using the wide variety of expensive cures that are available, we can complain about the high costs.
The idea that our government wants to nationalize the healthcare industry angers me on so many fronts. I don't even know where to begin. Let me try to be clear. In my frustration that may not be an easy task.
First, national healthcare does not work.
- Ask all the doctors who have come to America from Canada or England to practice medicine because they were no longer allowed to practice medicine according to their own standards of good care.
- Ask all the patients in those and other countries who have to wait years for treatment. Or who are denied treatment because it is deemed too costly.
- Ask those who come to America at great personal expense because here they can get the treatments they need.
- Or consider the State of Oregon whose state run medical program has not payed for treatments that are not on their "approved list" but will foot the bill for physician assisted suicide. Read more about these cases here and here and here. Asounding.
Where does it end? And who is going to pay for it? Obviously the tax payers.
And guess what. The pool of people otherwise known as the American tax payer is getting smaller and smaller. With the new tax policies going into effect, more voting Americans than not will pay no national income tax. Do I mean that I wish for more taxes? Not at all. But think about the implications. Those who don't pay any income tax often receive that great big annual bonus known as the Earned Income Credit. I know because we fall into this category. What this means is that each April or May, I get a big chunk of money from the federal government that came out of someone else's pocket. (Do I send it back? I guess I am not that noble. But I do experience pangs of conscience.)
What I am getting at is that for the first time in American history, more people will be receiving for free all the variety of government services available. Be it the traditional welfare type programs such as food stamps, WIC, housing assistance; government financial gifts such as tuition grants or the Earned Income Credit; or the many services our government offers or helps offer to all citizens such as protection from enemies, education and infrastructure. Who is going to be left to vote against such continued federal government growth if everyone is on the dole? Pity the poor souls, again the ever decreasing number of them, who pay for all this.
The third reason I get irate thinking about the healthcare industry is that those discussing these policy changes manipulate the numbers in order to secure more support for their programs. I hate being a statistic used by someone to support something I don't believe in. My family has in recent years been uninsured for short periods of time. We did this by choice. We chose not to purchase health insurance. I'll save that logic for another post. But when I hear politicians claiming that they need to step in because people are uninsured, I get my hackles up.
From Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny
In 2006, the Census Bureau reported that there were 46.6 million people without health insurance. About 9.5 million were not American citizens. Another 17 million lived in households with incomes exceeding $50,000 a year and could, presumably, purchase their own health care coverage. Eighteen million of the 46.6 million were between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four, most of whom were in good health and not necessarily in need of health-care coverage or chose not to purchase it. Moreover, only 30 percent of the nonelderly population who became uninsured in a given year remained uninsured for more than twelve months. Almost 50 percent regained their health coverage within four months. The 47 million "uninsured" figure used by Pelosi and others is widely inaccurate.(In his book, Mr. Levin includes references for the above statistics. Also, to hear him speak on this subject, check out yesterday's Mark Levin Show.)
So when you hear the figure 50 million uninsured Americans, be skeptical. Be very skeptical.
There is a final reason why I don't like the discussions surrounding the healthcare crisis in America. Never are the two reasons that seem to me most obvious given adequate hearing: the soaring costs physicians have to pay for malpractice insurance and the great quality of medical care to which we Americans have become accustomed.
This may sound harsh, but when we are ready to stop suing our medical practitioners, when we are ready to stop going to the doctor for every little thing, when we are ready to die instead of using the wide variety of expensive cures that are available, we can complain about the high costs.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Mark Steyn "Live Free or Die"
I receive Imprimis, a monthly journal of Hillsdale College. Hillsdale is somewhat unique in the academic scene. From its web site, "Hillsdale’s educational mission rests upon two principles: academic excellence and institutional independence." Hillsdale accepts absolutely no money in any form whatsoever from the Federal Government.
Most months, the content of Imprimis is an adaptation from a lecture or speech given at the college. In the April edition, the featured speaker was Mark Steyn, who, in the words of Wikipedia, is a "Canadian writer, political commentator and cultural critic." I don't know a whole lot about Mark Steyn, but I've enjoyed listening to him when I catch him periodically on one or another radio show while I'm in the car. He is the author of a book I plan to request from the library, America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It.
I did like the adaptation of Mr. Steyn's speech, "Live Free or Die," in this month's Imprimis. Much of his speech is adapted from the above book, which apparently is based in part upon the ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli. This is kind of statement insurance, since the following quotes are highlights of the adaptation of a speech based on a book based in part upon a fifteenth century Florentine writer and statesman. Kind of hard to tell who or what I was quoting. But I'm pretty sure they are all from Mark Steyn. Some of the ideas originated with Machiavelli.
Regarding the title of the speech, "Live free or die", Mr. Steyn points out that the phrase, New Hampshire's state motto, is credited to the state's Revolutionary War hero, General John Stark. Surprisingly, General Stark did not use the phrase during a battle or time of intense debate over freedom. He wrote this phrase many years after the war to close a letter. That point struck Mr. Steyn as applicable to our day and age. It is not only during times of crises that one must hold to one's principles. According to Mr. Steyn, the phrase, "live free or die", is a "bald statement of the reality of our lives in the prosperous West. You can live as free men, but if you choose not to, your society will die."
From Machievelli, Steyn writes, "Indolence is the greatest enemy of a republic." Indolence, I had to check, according to the Mirriam Webster Online Dictionary, is "inclination to laziness : sloth."
Regarding the stunning trend toward European style socialism present in President Obama's recent budget, Mr Steyn has this to say. "The problem isn't the cost. These programs would still be wrong even if Bill Gates wrote a check to cover them each month. They're wrong because they deform the relationship between the citizen and the state. Even if there were no financial consequences, the moral and even spiritual consequences would still be fatal."
I like that above one, because it kind of summarizes the ideals behind much of modern conservatism. I've defended myself and conservatism in general many times against the accusation that conservatives, specifically those in the Republican party, are only concerned with the bottom line. With the cost of everything. Or put more blatantly, with MONEY. I dare not speak for the Republican party as a whole, but my conservative views are based upon ideals and principles. Social and humanitarian costs much more so than financial costs. Although certainly not a perfect match, usually the Republican platform most closely embodies these views.
Many were the voices during the cold war promoting the free market and denouncing Soviet style socialism. Forget the fact that this system just didn't work and that most of the citizens of the USSR were living in conditions far worse than what we Americans would consider abject poverty. One of the most compelling criticisms was that it is not healthy for the human spirit if all choices are made for one, for individuals to have access only to those services deemed appropriate by some civic institution, and worse yet, to have the rewards of one's labors confiscated to pay for this controlled (and broken) society.
Now we see many here in America welcoming steps toward this kind of system with open arms. How soon we forget.
Mr. Steyn delineates four stages to the "enervation of free peoples." I had to look up enervation. From the Free Online Dictionary, enervation means "to weaken or destroy the strength or vitality of."
Stage one, "The benign paternalist state promises to make all those worries about mortgages, debt, and health care disappear."
Stage two, "The state as guarantor of all your basic needs becomes increasingly comfortable with regulating your behavior." Here Mr. Steyn continues, "Free peoples who were once willing to give their lives for liberty can be persuaded very quickly to relinquish their liberties for a quiet life." Mr. Steyn expresses well the ludicrousness of this situation, that we want to be able "to choose from hundreds of cereals at the supermarket" or "from millions of songs" for our iPods, but we don't want to hang on to any choice in our health care system. We appear to want it all planned and provided for us.
Stage three, "When the populace has agreed to become wards of the state, it is a mere difference of degree to start regulating their thoughts."
Stage four, "in which dissenting ideas and even words are labeled as hatred."
I am sure we can all think of examles through which we see these stages progressing within American society. Throughout the article, Mr. Steyn cites several examples from policies and events in America, Britain and Canada. He gives statistics to show that although America is several years behind the European nations and Canada, we are well along on this road to the "enervation of a free people."
I encourage you to read the entire article. And give some thought to subscribing to Imprimis. It is a quick read that one can easily fit into a busy life. Although on occasion I am perplexed or even dismayed by something I read in it, I am always challenged to think through and evaluate my own positions.
Most months, the content of Imprimis is an adaptation from a lecture or speech given at the college. In the April edition, the featured speaker was Mark Steyn, who, in the words of Wikipedia, is a "Canadian writer, political commentator and cultural critic." I don't know a whole lot about Mark Steyn, but I've enjoyed listening to him when I catch him periodically on one or another radio show while I'm in the car. He is the author of a book I plan to request from the library, America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It.
I did like the adaptation of Mr. Steyn's speech, "Live Free or Die," in this month's Imprimis. Much of his speech is adapted from the above book, which apparently is based in part upon the ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli. This is kind of statement insurance, since the following quotes are highlights of the adaptation of a speech based on a book based in part upon a fifteenth century Florentine writer and statesman. Kind of hard to tell who or what I was quoting. But I'm pretty sure they are all from Mark Steyn. Some of the ideas originated with Machiavelli.
Regarding the title of the speech, "Live free or die", Mr. Steyn points out that the phrase, New Hampshire's state motto, is credited to the state's Revolutionary War hero, General John Stark. Surprisingly, General Stark did not use the phrase during a battle or time of intense debate over freedom. He wrote this phrase many years after the war to close a letter. That point struck Mr. Steyn as applicable to our day and age. It is not only during times of crises that one must hold to one's principles. According to Mr. Steyn, the phrase, "live free or die", is a "bald statement of the reality of our lives in the prosperous West. You can live as free men, but if you choose not to, your society will die."
From Machievelli, Steyn writes, "Indolence is the greatest enemy of a republic." Indolence, I had to check, according to the Mirriam Webster Online Dictionary, is "inclination to laziness : sloth."
Regarding the stunning trend toward European style socialism present in President Obama's recent budget, Mr Steyn has this to say. "The problem isn't the cost. These programs would still be wrong even if Bill Gates wrote a check to cover them each month. They're wrong because they deform the relationship between the citizen and the state. Even if there were no financial consequences, the moral and even spiritual consequences would still be fatal."
I like that above one, because it kind of summarizes the ideals behind much of modern conservatism. I've defended myself and conservatism in general many times against the accusation that conservatives, specifically those in the Republican party, are only concerned with the bottom line. With the cost of everything. Or put more blatantly, with MONEY. I dare not speak for the Republican party as a whole, but my conservative views are based upon ideals and principles. Social and humanitarian costs much more so than financial costs. Although certainly not a perfect match, usually the Republican platform most closely embodies these views.
Many were the voices during the cold war promoting the free market and denouncing Soviet style socialism. Forget the fact that this system just didn't work and that most of the citizens of the USSR were living in conditions far worse than what we Americans would consider abject poverty. One of the most compelling criticisms was that it is not healthy for the human spirit if all choices are made for one, for individuals to have access only to those services deemed appropriate by some civic institution, and worse yet, to have the rewards of one's labors confiscated to pay for this controlled (and broken) society.
Now we see many here in America welcoming steps toward this kind of system with open arms. How soon we forget.
Mr. Steyn delineates four stages to the "enervation of free peoples." I had to look up enervation. From the Free Online Dictionary, enervation means "to weaken or destroy the strength or vitality of."
Stage one, "The benign paternalist state promises to make all those worries about mortgages, debt, and health care disappear."
Stage two, "The state as guarantor of all your basic needs becomes increasingly comfortable with regulating your behavior." Here Mr. Steyn continues, "Free peoples who were once willing to give their lives for liberty can be persuaded very quickly to relinquish their liberties for a quiet life." Mr. Steyn expresses well the ludicrousness of this situation, that we want to be able "to choose from hundreds of cereals at the supermarket" or "from millions of songs" for our iPods, but we don't want to hang on to any choice in our health care system. We appear to want it all planned and provided for us.
Stage three, "When the populace has agreed to become wards of the state, it is a mere difference of degree to start regulating their thoughts."
Stage four, "in which dissenting ideas and even words are labeled as hatred."
I am sure we can all think of examles through which we see these stages progressing within American society. Throughout the article, Mr. Steyn cites several examples from policies and events in America, Britain and Canada. He gives statistics to show that although America is several years behind the European nations and Canada, we are well along on this road to the "enervation of a free people."
I encourage you to read the entire article. And give some thought to subscribing to Imprimis. It is a quick read that one can easily fit into a busy life. Although on occasion I am perplexed or even dismayed by something I read in it, I am always challenged to think through and evaluate my own positions.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
On Apathy and Big Government
From National Service, Political Socialization, and Citizenship by Eric B. Gorham.
When fewer and fewer citizens care, when progressively more voters feel alienated, when everyday people feel as though their voice can't be heard, big government is the natural outcome. The elected officials who lack the input of their constituents or who only hear the input of a certain segment of their constituency will not make decisions that reflect the desires of those they represent. Only those whose voices are loudest.
An apathetic public also abdicates responsibility for solving problems to representatives and administrators (who in a democracy, are checked by an active public).A good reason to make the effort to learn and be involved in the political process.
When fewer and fewer citizens care, when progressively more voters feel alienated, when everyday people feel as though their voice can't be heard, big government is the natural outcome. The elected officials who lack the input of their constituents or who only hear the input of a certain segment of their constituency will not make decisions that reflect the desires of those they represent. Only those whose voices are loudest.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Founding Principles
In this series on Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin, I'll save Mr. Levin's definition of liberalism for the next post. In his book, he introduces how he will use the term, then segues to a short discussion of various issues the Founding fathers needed to address within the framework of the government they were implementing.
The main issue Levin wants his readers to remember is that the Founders were very careful to protect the populace, the individual citizens and the separate states from an over-reaching national government. A main goal was to give the federal government just enough power to protect the citizenry and to ease some of the interstate difficulties encountered under the Articles of Confederation. These were mainly issues of currency, foreign policy, and trade policy.
The Founders also operated within a world view which presupposed both a set of moral principles and the tendency of human nature to seek power over others.
Through the compromises and protections that are included in the Constitution and the first ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) the Framers strove to balance governmental authority and individual liberty.
The government was to be divided into three separate branches providing the checks and balances we all hopefully learned about in grade school civics lessons. The Framers gave specific powers to the Federal Government. Outside of that each state made its own decisions and provided its own services. And the Bill of Rights was added to protect against specific evils the implementation of which might have been open to interpretation in the body of the Constitution itself. The Founders also made possible a path for future changes by way of amendments. But because they understood how fickle pure democracy can be, even referring to it as mob rule, they made ratification of these amendments challenging.
This basic nature of the constitution was understood and for the most part, operated within for over one hundred years. I am always amazed at how James Madison and the others foresaw so many potential difficulties and put together a document with the tensile strength to withstand each challenge that might arise. A document that still serves other countries as a basis for their own constitutional governments. .
But during the twentieth century the country somehow lost sight of these Founding Principles. There has been one assault after another on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A bloated Executive branch has created layers of regulation without the input of the Legislative branch. The Judiciary has become a forum to reinterpret both the constitution itself and older laws that one judge or another thought ought to mean something new. And the members of Legislative houses have abdicated their constitutional responsibilities in favor of whatever ploys will ensure their re-election.
There is a term from physics that goes along with tensile strength that suits well the current state of our nation. If I remember correctly, tensile strength is the measure of the elasticity of a material, how far it can be twisted, turned, stretched, compressed, or bent before breaking or rupturing. Further, yield strength is the point at which the material is permanently misshapen by the twisting, turning, stretching, compressing, or bending. Because of the constant abuses against our founding document, I fear we might be fast approaching its yield strength?
The main issue Levin wants his readers to remember is that the Founders were very careful to protect the populace, the individual citizens and the separate states from an over-reaching national government. A main goal was to give the federal government just enough power to protect the citizenry and to ease some of the interstate difficulties encountered under the Articles of Confederation. These were mainly issues of currency, foreign policy, and trade policy.
The Founders also operated within a world view which presupposed both a set of moral principles and the tendency of human nature to seek power over others.
Through the compromises and protections that are included in the Constitution and the first ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) the Framers strove to balance governmental authority and individual liberty.
The government was to be divided into three separate branches providing the checks and balances we all hopefully learned about in grade school civics lessons. The Framers gave specific powers to the Federal Government. Outside of that each state made its own decisions and provided its own services. And the Bill of Rights was added to protect against specific evils the implementation of which might have been open to interpretation in the body of the Constitution itself. The Founders also made possible a path for future changes by way of amendments. But because they understood how fickle pure democracy can be, even referring to it as mob rule, they made ratification of these amendments challenging.
This basic nature of the constitution was understood and for the most part, operated within for over one hundred years. I am always amazed at how James Madison and the others foresaw so many potential difficulties and put together a document with the tensile strength to withstand each challenge that might arise. A document that still serves other countries as a basis for their own constitutional governments. .
But during the twentieth century the country somehow lost sight of these Founding Principles. There has been one assault after another on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A bloated Executive branch has created layers of regulation without the input of the Legislative branch. The Judiciary has become a forum to reinterpret both the constitution itself and older laws that one judge or another thought ought to mean something new. And the members of Legislative houses have abdicated their constitutional responsibilities in favor of whatever ploys will ensure their re-election.
There is a term from physics that goes along with tensile strength that suits well the current state of our nation. If I remember correctly, tensile strength is the measure of the elasticity of a material, how far it can be twisted, turned, stretched, compressed, or bent before breaking or rupturing. Further, yield strength is the point at which the material is permanently misshapen by the twisting, turning, stretching, compressing, or bending. Because of the constant abuses against our founding document, I fear we might be fast approaching its yield strength?
New Author I Really Like
He's not really a new author, but new to me. It's Minnesota author, Vince Flynn. He writes political thrillers. He researches his stuff well. Although he began writing them in a pre-9-11 world, so many of the things he addresses ring true to what the world has learned during and since that fateful day.
Except for his first book, the novels revolve around Mitch Rapp, a guy independently contracted by CIA to perform all sorts of amazing feats.
I've read Flynn's first three books. I have another here waiting that I am not letting myself start just yet. And the next one is requested and on it's way through our local library.
Besides the suspenseful plots, Flynn creates memorable, endearing characters. Some really stupid maddening ones, too, but still realistic, multi-faceted personalities.
Flynn's books are somewhat similar to those written by Tom Clancy, with a few points that make them more suitable to my lifestyle.
Except for his first book, the novels revolve around Mitch Rapp, a guy independently contracted by CIA to perform all sorts of amazing feats.
I've read Flynn's first three books. I have another here waiting that I am not letting myself start just yet. And the next one is requested and on it's way through our local library.
Besides the suspenseful plots, Flynn creates memorable, endearing characters. Some really stupid maddening ones, too, but still realistic, multi-faceted personalities.
Flynn's books are somewhat similar to those written by Tom Clancy, with a few points that make them more suitable to my lifestyle.
- Similar to Clancy, Flynn uses lots of detail, but it is not so overwhelming as Clancy's. I never have too much extra concentration, so I've not read many of Clancy's since I started having children.
- Flynn's books are also shorter, so they fit in my discretionary time better. I remember when I used to read Tom Clancy's books, because of the incredibly suspenseful plots, I never dared to start them unless I knew I had the luxury to just sit and finish.
- I think Flynn's books have less foul language and fewer "adult" situations than Clancy's. I don't remember Clancy's earlier books being too "gritty," but the last one I read really turned me off because of the way in which he described his "adult" situations. More like "frat house" descriptions. I think it was The Bear and the Dragon. Getting back to Vince Flynn, his first book I did not let 14 year old son read. Compared to most adult fiction, it was not terrible, but I still didn't want Matt to read it. The second and third, I didlet him read, but I discussed a few of the books' situations with him. Not perfect, but so much better than most adult books and even better than many young adult ones.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)