by Brent Smith for World Net Daily:
What do you do if you want to create a new dependency class in America?
Well, you can do what the leftist progressives have done since the “Great Society” of Lyndon Johnson and his “War on Poverty.”
You simply pay people not to work. You offer up assistance programs that, over the years, grow into entitlement programs.
The people then get conditioned not to work while still collecting a check, so they begin to feel “entitled,” rather than thankful to receive the “free” money.
by: the Common Constitutionalist
No Audio Version today
Oh Colin. Do we have to keep talking about Colin Kapernick, the bench-warming back-up Quarterback of the hapless San Francisco 49ers? I guess it’s this or the most momentous debate in the history of humanity, or any species – terrestrial or otherwise.
As I’m writing this on Monday evening for publication on Tuesday, I really can’t comment on the debate, as it hasn’t happened yet. Short of Hillary collapsing on stage or having some sort of seizure, I don’t predict anything too momentous coming out of it anyway. I will predict that both Hillary and The Donald clearly won the debate, according to CNN (Hillary) and Fox News (Trump). That’s a pretty safe prediction.
Back to Kapernick. According to the American Spectator, we are once again a nation divided along racial lines and Kapernick appears to be the new poster boy for this apparent black-separatist movement. The Spectator cites a poll conducted recently by E-Poll Market Research, which showed that Kapernick was liked “a lot” by only 16 percent of blacks just two years ago, but that it has rocketed to 42%.
Blacks are angry and evidently see him as a beacon, shining a light (but not a white light) on American institutional racism, of which we know there is none. Actually, that’s not entirely true and I’ll get to that in a moment.
Lesson 10: “The Recovery of the Constitution”
Statesmanship, for Franklin D. Roosevelt, entailed the “redefinition” of “rights in terms of a changing and growing social order.” Fulfilling the promise of Progressivism, President Roosevelt’s New Deal gave rise to unlimited government. In contrast to Franklin D. Roosevelt and his ideological successors, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan sought the restoration of limited government. Today, our choice is clear: Will we live by the principles of the American Founding, or by the values of the Progressives?
Franklin D. Roosevelt announced his campaign for the presidency in 1932 by emphasizing the Progressive understanding of history and by calling for the “redefinition” of the old idea of rights. His “New Deal,” a series of economic programs ostensibly aimed at extricating America from the Great Depression, vastly enlarged the size and scope of the federal government. Unelected bureaucratic agencies—“the administrative state”—became a fact of American life.
Roosevelt’s call for a “Second Bill of Rights” sought to add “security” to the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Describing the “old rights” of life and liberty as “inadequate” without underlying economic security, Roosevelt called for new economic rights for all, including the right to a job, a home, a fair wage, education, and medical care. With these rights guaranteed, Roosevelt argued, real political equality finally could be achieved.
Following President Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy’s “New Frontier” and Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” continued the transformation of the relationship between the American people and their government. President Johnson redefined the government’s role by redefining equality itself: equality must be a “result” rather than a “right.” Expanded federal control over education, transportation, welfare, and medical care soon followed.
Announcing that “with the present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,” Ronald Reagan appealed to the principles of the American Founding in seeking to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. Maintaining that Progressivism and the consent of the governed are incompatible, Reagan called for a return to individual self-rule and national self-government.