Let it die. Just let it die. As difficult as this may sound, letting the American car industry just die would be better than what our radical president has done. I was very concerned today when I heard that President Obama had fired the chairman of General Motors. The most distressing thing about this is that I was not surprised at all when I heard the news. What is really happening and what kind of a statement is the president really making when he fires a chief executive. I think it is several fold.
First I think it is a gesture of no confidence in the ability of American’s to fix their own problems. The CEO may have been corrupt, he may have been unwise, it may be a good thing to have him gone from the company but it is not the federal government’s job to remove him. Why, you may ask, is it not within the realm of the government to do this? It’s quite simple actually. If you or I do not like the owner of the local grocery store because he sells things at an inflated cost and simply doesn’t do business as well as the new store down the street, we have no right to march down to the store and force him to leave his job. That would be preposterous. We simply would never do that. Why then do we feel that it is our job to fix the auto industry. If they can’t compete, let them die.
Second, I think it shows arrogance on the part of the government–the entire government. Not only the president is to blame, nor can we pin the blame on one party or the other. Why does the government assume that simply because they are in a position of power that they have the ability to direct the affairs of industry. They may think that they have good ideas and their rhetoric may sound good on television and in the news, but that does not qualify them to spend our money because we want to avoid the penalties of our own actions.
As I’ve written before, this whole thing smacks of extreme socialism leading toward the moster of comunism. This administration ran on a platform of change. Well that is not a new thing. Others have run on that platform before and society has been damaged greatly by the radical changes misguided leaders have made.
I’ve been looking for some audio of this quote for a while. A friend sent this to me yesterday and I wanted to share it with you. The audio comes from Glen Beck who plays a quote from Ezra Taft Benson about how communism will gradually take over the United States. It is a very telling quote.
“I have talked face to face with the godless communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Kruschev for a half day when he visited the United States, not that I’m proud of it. I opposed his coming then, and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But, according to President Eisenhower, Kruschev had expressed a desire to learn something of American Agriculture and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why. As we talked face to face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under communism. After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his and all other grandchildren will live under freedom he arrogantly declared in substance:
‘You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.'”
— Ezra T Benson,Our Immediate Responsibility. BYU Devotional, October 25, 1966.
This week the California Supreme Court is hearing arguments regarding overturning Proposition 8. As you remember this was the initiative on the ballot in November 2008 that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. There hasn’t been nearly as much publicity about these hearings as there was in November regarding the vote. As you remember the vote then was very polarizing for Californians with the proposition passing with only 52% of the vote. With this in mind I would like to briefly discuss one of the major arguments that is used by the gay and lesbian community to claim their supposed rights to marriage. They claim that the denial of “rights” to them is a form of prejudice. This morning the New York Times reported that “Opponents of Proposition 8 argued that the voters had gone too far in taking away the right to marry from gay men and lesbians, who had been identified by the court in May’s ruling as being historically subjected to prejudice.”
In America we have come to think of the word prejudice as an evil word. We think that because society is prejudiced against someone that that person is by definition being wronged. This is a flawed view. For example, it could be said that I am prejudiced against murderers. I feel it is just for society to take from them their God-given rights to life, liberty, and property. I feel the same way about those who steal, are dishonest in business dealings, etc. Why am I prejudiced against these types of people? Because their choices harm the public good and can harm me personally. The same principle applies to the issues of providing marriage to gay and lesbian couples. Society can rightfully be prejudiced against these people in depriving them of the privilege to marry because in so doing society protects its own good and its own strength. The argument that we are prejudiced against a particular demographic is not sufficient reason to grant them rights or to forbear taking those rights and privileges from them.
The Times further reported that “The lawyer, Shannon Minter, the legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, argued that if the court upheld Proposition 8, same-sex couples would have ‘our outsider status enshrined in our Constitution.’ The right to marry, he said, was inalienable.”
This is simply not true. In simple fact, there is no inalienable “right to marry” given to any citizen of the United States. Marriage is rather a privilege that can be attained by citizens who are willing to live up to the social responsibility and obligations that come along with marriage.
OK… So I usually don’t like people that simply rant and yell and scream on YouTube or on their blogs but I saw this and I think it reflects the sentiment of the overwhelming majority of Americans today regarding the financial recession and the supposed “help” that President Obama has decided to give.
I feel like Rick has some valid points. I think that these points are valid for perhaps a deeper reason that he realizes. I agree with Rick that the government is rewarding irresponsibility and bad behavior in many of its moves lately. I do not think that it is right for us to be bailing out anyone who has been hurt by the economy because of their own bad decisions. My basis for this decision is as follows. The role of government, in its very basic form, is to protect the life, liberty and property of its citizens. In doing this, it is only authorized to exercise power that the people themselves already possess individually. Similarly, it should only obligated to do things that individual citizens also are obligated to do. If my neighbor has purchased a house which he knows he can not reasonably pay for and then has added to that debt by living further beyond his means, I do not have the responsibility to help him out of that predicament. I may, if I wish, but I do not have a social obligation to help him. Likewise, he has no right to expect that myself and his other neighbors should bail him out from his bad decisions. This is the essence of responsibility and capitalism. When we make bad or unwise decisions, we are responsible to deal with and respond to the consequences of those actions. We have no right to go weeping and wailing to the government, and thereby to our fellow citizens, to save us from the consequences of our unwise decisions.
So there you have it folks. I fear that this kind of action on the part of the government is only the first step on a slippery slope that will lead our country into the kind of social decay that we have tried for decades to avoid. I’m afraid that this kind of action is a harbinger of an accelerating decay into socialism, the very evil that the last great wars of our time have fought to push back.