Winter of Discontent--- Victory or Death?

Somehow I was misled into thinking this meant George Washington at Valley Forge.  It must have come from some television program, which makes sense to me now.  I have learned to despise TV.  It could have been a medium of enlightenment, but has become the opposite.

But not to knock all video.  It can serve that purpose, but unfortunately, it is also abused ignobly.  I am thinking of the use of Gingrich's video about judges.  I don't know how the majority can watch the entire series of videos and not feel sympathy for the view that Gingrich is expressing.   Perhaps we are all too much in a hurry.  It would appear that collectively, we have the attention span of a two year old.  Consequently, it probably got sound bited into a distortion of what it really meant.  All for a political effect that was completely in opposition to the whole point he was attempting to make.  If you get manipulated into just watching the sound bite, shame on you.

People who decry the low level of our discourse should make it a point to watch those videos.  If you won't, you can't be serious about your words.

It seems to be the winter of discontent alright, in terms of our politics.  Not too many like the current state of affairs, nor does anybody seem to like the choices being put in front of us.  Yet if you won't go around the media's manipulation of the news, plus anybody else's who may have a "dog in the hunt", then why should you expect any better?

Something is being lost in the process.  Thus the use of the term "victory or death".  What is dying?  I think it must mean our freedom.  With freedom must come responsibility.  In a sense, Obama said it himself.  The Republicans want to leave you to yourselves.  As if that were a bad thing.   Of course we should be left to ourselves.  We are then free to make what we will of our own lives.  We will be responsible for ourselves, good or bad.  But if we give that up to the government, we lose not only that responsibility, but our freedom as well.  Hence the death of freedom.

Obama and his ilk want what they are pleased to call "positive" freedoms.  But we have all the freedom we need in the Constitution.  Let's review briefly a bit of the Constitution.  It is said to be about checks and balances.  By why do you need these checks and balances?  You need them to check and balance the ambitions of politicians.  Not only the ones you disagree with, but the ones you agree with.  Because at the heart of limited government is implied the need to limit the power of government, and hence the politicians who are drawn to it.  There's a Bill of Rights, which has an interesting amendment as follows:

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The left will view that as permission to expand the role of government.  But how does that jibe with checks and balances?  It doesn't.

Rick Perry likes to talk about the tenth, so what about it?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Looks like more checks and balances, doesn't it?

If the government isn't going to take care of you, then you must do that for yourself.  The government can take of you, but should it?   What can be wrong with that?

Nothing if that is what you want.  But know this first: that everything comes at a price.  This may be the missing part of too many discussions.  Too many people seem to think there's something that can be gotten for nothing.  But if you allow the government to take responsibility for those things that you could do for yourself, you lose your right to object.  That will be the price to be paid for having the freedom to be irresponsible.  There's no such thing as a free lunch.  Somebody has to pay.  If you allow the government to put you on a leash, you can hardly complain about the leash when it starts to chafe.

Should they tell you what to think?  That may already be the case if you won't go and see things for yourself. But that would take some responsibility on your part to find out what the truth is about a subject.  If you allow the media to treat you as a two year old and sound bite everything, why should you expect any better from yourself?   Why should you expect any better from your government?  A two year old needs a good leash.