Much has been made of the fact that memos that, among other matters, denied requests for additional security for the Benghazi consulate went out over then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s signature. In particular, the Left insists that it’s entirely routine for others to affix the boss’ signature to correspondence which the boss never actually sees, much less reads, before that correspondence goes out.
The Left is correct in this. In large organizations, it is a commonplace practice for subordinates to generate and transmit correspondence that the boss never sees but on which, because of the subject matter involved, the boss’ signature is required in order to give the necessary weight to the correspondence. State is no different in this regard.
The Democrat-controlled Senate Thursday night voted down the House-passed budget that reached zero deficit by 2023. Then they voted up their own budget, which doesn’t even pretend to try to reach balance, instead adding $7 trillion more to our existing debt over those 10 years.
Via Power Line we learn that Senator Jeff Sessions (R, AL) offered an amendment to the Senate Budget Committee’s bill as it was being debated on the Senate floor. Sessions’ amendment, as all of these ought to be, was short, and to the point:
Politico reports, on matters related to President Barack Obama’s claimed agenda, from immigration reform to deficit “pay down” to increasing taxes to… that
after months of buildup and a week since his State of the Union address, key aides on the Hill and at the White House acknowledge that even GOP senators who fit Obama’s vision of bipartisanship—Senators Mark Kirk of Illinois, Rob Portman of Ohio, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma—are all waiting to hear anything from the president.
I wrote yesterday about who a Conservative is; today I’d like to discuss the relationship between conservatism and liberalism, and how the two evolve.
The relationship between the two is fairly stable—conservatism and liberalism have generally oppositional views of how best to support our people and our country—it’s their individual roles in politics that evolve. Indeed, the two have swapped roles since our founding.
In broad, general terms, an 18th Century Conservative holds a fundamental belief about the role of government in men’s lives similar to the more or less enlightened view delineated by Edmund Burke contemporaneously with our Revolution.
This post—a long one, so heads up—borrows heavily from a premise I develop early in my book A Conservative’s Manifesto.
One theme that ran through the English colonies in North America, early on, was the view that some men are better than others, and those others are born to be led—they have no liberty, only those “freedoms” and “rights” handed down from on high by the government that rules over them. The common man is incapable of reason, is unable to decide what is best for himself, and must be led by his betters. Of course, this governance always is for only the best of reasons: “We know better,” and “It’s for your own good.” And it flowed, then, from a pater familias and kindly king.
Not the Obama administration. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lately pressed Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama to make clear what—if anything—would trigger a concrete response to Iranian efforts to obtain nuclear weapons—an effort that is very near to success. Netanyahu also said that the Obama administration and other Western “allies,” by failing to draw a bright red line, lack the moral authority to press Israel not to preemptively attack Iran.
If Iran knows that there’s no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it’s doing: it’s continuing without any interference towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there nuclear bombs[.]
One party trusts Americans to make our own decisions, to see to our own prosperity, to honor our own obligations. This party wants to see a smaller government that is less intrusive into our business’ and our private affairs, wants to reform, and so to preserve the principles underlying, Social Security and Medicare—including privatizing significant portions of them, trusting us to make our own decisions wisely—wants to foster an economic environment that restores our equality of opportunity so that, in the Theodore Roosevelt’s words, each American can “show the best that there is in him.”
Ron Williams, a former Chairman and CEO of Aetna Inc, in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, described his evolution toward opposition of Obamacare’s Individual Mandate, which he had supported initially. He then offered a couple of alternatives to the Individual Mandate; however his alternative solutions are as erroneous as the Individual Mandate is an overreach of Federal government power. The reason for his error is that he’s pursuing the wrong problem.
As a society, we have a moral obligation to ensure everyone has access to affordable health care. We must find a way to cover those who are no longer healthy but need care.
We are at a cross-roads in our country and it’s time to force the issue. We face a generational decision on the kind of economy we want for ourselves—and so the degree of individual freedom we want for ourselves. We made a choice in the 2010 elections, and it’s time to confirm or repudiate that choice this fall and in the election cycles to come.
There are two basic types of economies available to us: wealth redistribution by government fiat or wealth redistribution by individual choice in a free market. In this post, I’ll write a little about each type.
Andrew McCarthy, writing for National Review Online last Friday, described a shocking—and revolting—development in American jurisprudence.
Before I go into that, though, let me digress and provide a couple of quotes from the Pennsylvania Constitution. First is a state judge’s oath of office, from Article VI, Section 3:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.