Showing posts with label nanny state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nanny state. Show all posts

Saturday, October 9, 2010

New York's Teachable Moment

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson
For decades, Progressives have been telling us what they have planned for us, speaking of their intentions to enslave us, but coating the message with alleged compassion and benevolence. Perhaps the message has been too subtle for many. Or perhaps the notion is too horrible to accept, and many have chosen to ignore it.

In his State of the Union speech in 1935, Franklin Roosevelt said, "The lessons of history ... show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit." Roosevelt then proceeded to become one of the most proficient pushers the country has ever known.

As time marches on, that proclivity becomes more boldly and arrogantly pronounced, as if the purveyors no longer are concerned about the exposure of their agenda. Just as the pusher begins as a "friend", giving out the drugs for nothing, once the recipient can no longer do without, the pusher reveals himself as a fiend. By that time the addict no longer cares so long as the medication is still administered, and at any price.

There are far too many people in America today who have been conditioned to accept failure and - subsequently - the assistance "offered" by the government. Worse, they have come to expect and demand it. Free stuff to them has become something to which they have felt entitled. Once the mind set of society was sufficiently numbed to the stigma formerly associated with, say, food stamps, the floodgates opened.

The Progressives of government successfully convinced the masses of their philanthropic intent, somehow managing to leave out of the equation that it was being exercised through theft from those who would not be the recipients. The recipients, meanwhile, were unaware that there would eventually be a price to pay, albeit not monetary, for their care. Until now.

The mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, and the governor of the state, David Paterson, recently sought permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ban sugary drinks from being purchased with food stamps. Their reason was part of an obesity-fighting proposal the pair is working up, claiming the right to decide what people dependent on government assistance may consume.

The notion of limiting food stamp purchases has caused quite an uproar, even from Conservative commentators such as Steve Malzberg of WOR radio in New York. While I can appreciate the knee-jerk reaction from people I normally agree with, Mr. Malzberg and others have missed what Barack Hussein Obama would call a "teachable moment". There are definitely lessons to be learned, here.

To revisit FDR's words, "To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit." Yet in 2008, when Maine attempted what Bloomberg and Paterson are now proposing, the plan was criticized by advocates for the poor because, as they feared, it would scare people into avoiding food stamps. And in 2004, when Minnesota tried to ban junk foods like soda and candy from food stamp purchases, the USDA turned down the state's plan because they said it would violate the Food Stamp Act's definition of food. They were also concerned that it would embarrass food stamp recipients at the checkout line.

There's that whole "removal of the stigma" thing again. The fact is that the Progressives want more people to move toward dependency. That much should be obvious by now. The original concept of assistance was a hand up, not a hand out, but that notion has long been abandoned, as it should be noted that they are trying to not only keep people dependent, but they want to lure more into the trap.

In March I wrote Not Under My Roof to show the attitude being cultivated by the governing elites today. The whole idea is that as long as the government is paying your way, you will do as they say. New York has basically declared that they feel that as long as they are buying your food, they can tell you what to buy and eat. After all, they are trying to control obesity.

The question must then be asked, why? Does the government hate fat people? Of course not, so there must be another reason that they are concerned with the girth of the citizens. That reason is health care costs. Once Universal Health Care kicks in, nutrition won't be the only area the government will seek to control.

While some are outraged by the New York proposal regarding food stamps - and while I share some of that outrage - I am more grateful for the lesson it lends.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Not Under My Roof

Any rebellious teen has certainly heard those words from their parents. When pushing the limits of authority by demanding rights that do not exist, the authoritarian correctly reminds the offending plaintiff that as long as he pays the bills, he makes the rules. The remedy is that of which every soon-to-be adult dreams; leaving the confines of a perceived totalitarianism in pursuit of their own domain, where they make their own rules.

Then it happens, and reality sets in...sure, it's good to be king of your castle, but as every kid eventually learns, adults cannot "do whatever they want". There are stringent responsibilities that require discipline. If managed properly and diligently, life can be good, but if neglected, life has a way of crushing the indecisive.

It is this rite of passage that we have all passed through that has me the most perplexed in light of the masses clamoring for a "nanny state". My only explanation is that our youth has been conditioned to fail and, therefore, beg for the expansive umbrella of "government care", somehow convinced that they can finally both be adults and "do what they want" without the worries of personal responsibility.

What they fail to realize is the simple truth of trading one cage for another. And the irony lies in the fact that the "cage" of their youth was guarded by parents who truly loved them and tried to guide them in the best ways possible and in their best interests, while the newer, larger cage which they willingly enter is administered by people who care not a whit about their well being but only about their votes and their tax dollars.

As the federal government expands its authority, it is already obvious that control of our lives is the ultimate goal. If they are going to pay for our health care, for example, they will tell us how to be healthy. This includes what we eat, drink and smoke. It also includes what we wear in certain weather conditions. As long as they are "paying the bills" we will be compelled to live by their rules.

So soon there will be no escape from an iron grip of any kind, be it the strict rules laid down by parents or the same by the government. We shall remain perpetual children subject to the declarations of others. The dreams of freedom will be shattered and along with them, the hopes we all once cherished and anticipated. Is this what we have fought, struggled and bled for?

The human spirit has historically been strong, and - I personally believe - the American spirit has been exemplary, but one must wonder what the tensile strength is and when it will succumb to the massive weight of the oppressive machinations of those who were once viewed as "public servants". How long can the will of people resist the relentless assault? Every person has his breaking point.

I pray that people wake up soon, and I also pray that they make their children acutely aware of the greatness America once represented. I would also suggest that those with adolescents begin asking their children - who may be on the cusp of rebellion - and their teens who are likely in the throes of the same, how they would like to abide by the same strict regulations for the rest of their lives.

Perhaps that cold "slap" in the face would wake up the youth to the attack currently under way on their desired and deserved freedom. It's an idea. Maybe if they're tired enough of hearing "not under my roof" they will launch a genuine rebellion and save themselves. And all of us.

Sphere: Related Content