Next up in the presidential candidate skeet-shoot currently being executed by the liberal "Demediacrat" coalition is former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, whose recent rise in the GOP polls puts him at the top of the heap (along with the major Republican opponent favored by the Demediacrats, Mitt Romney).
When reports come out that a non-Romney Republican has climbed in the "poll," the Demediacrats hear "PULL!" and start blasting away.
After she won the Iowa straw poll this summer, Michele Bachmann was relatively easy to shoot down: she's a "girl," after all. Bachmann's support swooned as Rick Perry entered the race with a great deal of shouting in the polls, but Perry was also an easy mark once Demediacrats cornered him under the bright lights of the debate stage. The next target was the one candidate who doesn't have any political baggage - Herman Cain - but Cain also didn't have enough political savvy to fight off unsubstantiated attacks on his personal life. Bang! Bang! Bang! Never mind the lack of substance - indeed, veracity of any kind - behind the assaults on any of the non-Romneys. The important thing, from the Demediacrat perspective, is that they be taken out of Romney's way. It's not about what's true, it's about what you can make people believe.
And now, it's Newt's turn.
It won't be hard to take Newt out... he has plenty of baggage that can be exhumed and displayed in order to turn off the mostly-conservative, Tea Party-leaning electorate. Conservatives don't like Newt's stance on illegal immigration, recoil at his willingness to leap onto the global warming bandwagon, and - though he did provide some leadership in the "conservative revolution" that reformed welfare and finally balanced the budget a couple of decades ago - contemporary conservatives don't dig Newt's comfort with such entitlement expansions as the prescription drug "benefit."
But the main objection to Newt is that, despite his association with the Reagan revolution, he apparently didn't learn enough about the dangers of statism. Though he's far from the worst example among presidential candidates (that would be the incumbent), Newt is, in too many ways, just another big-government progressive.
Today, in a radio interview, Newt made his progressive leanings clear, especially when he reaffirmed his support for the drug benefit. His point - that it doesn't make sense to refuse to pay for a patient's insulin but then to subsidize her resulting expensive dialysis treatments - seems sound. But conservatives know the way to help the patient best is to get the government out of the way and let America solve the problem the American way - through free-market innovation and production. Newt, on the other hand, is basically just another voice in the chorus that sings from the progressive hymnal, proclaiming that the government is the solution. More redistribution. More entitlement. More government.
Reagan knew better - and so should Newt. Government isn't the solution to our problems, including the problem of getting insulin to patients. Government IS the problem.
But that's progressivism. At bottom, the "progressives" want to undo the real progress that began in this nation with the adoption of its limited-government Constitutional republic more than 200 years ago. Conservatives - true Constitutionalists - want less government. Progressives want more.
I have to disagree with Newt, and with the radio host who interviewed him today - both have described a sort of "progressivism of the Right." There is no such thing. All progressivism marches Leftward - away from the Constitution, which sought a sovereign (in a worldly sense) free people; and toward the sort of collectivism, socialism, even communism which has squashed real human progress in every other major nation in history.
Let me quickly add that Newt Gingrich, as president, would be a VAST improvement over Barack Obama. So would Mitt Romney, though both men are far too friendly with progressive ideals. Obama, whose actions in office could only be described as those of a committed collectivist/statist, is the most egregious example of progressivism in power we've ever seen. At least, under ANY of the Republicans seeking to replace him, the sprint toward socialism launched by Obama would be seriously slowed. And maybe we, the people, would be able to buy enough time to figure out how to actually halt progressivism and reverse our nation's course. To save the world from utter collapse and pervasive misery in the decades to come, that's exactly what we must somehow do.
If you own a business, or seek to build wealth through investing, watch out. Beware the march toward big-government tyranny euphemistically labeled "progressivism" these days. Things will get much worse before they get better, no matter what we do now... but if we're committed to real American ideals, business (and the people) will return one day to prosperity. The first step, though arduous, is clear: halt progressivism, wherever you find it, in order to return to progress.
A person who believes in real prosperity is not wrong to eschew the streak of progressivism in the candidates being systematically shot down by the Demediacrats, whether it's the non-Romneys being fired at now, or Romney himself, who is evidently being saved for Obama to shoot at. But conservatives should much more fear those holding the skeet-shooting guns. They mean to continue building a government big enough to give you everything you think you want... and big enough to take everything you have.
Your "Choices" Are Intentionally Illusory
by Michael D. Hume, M.S.
Michael Hume is a speaker, writer, and consultant specializing in helping people maximize their potential and enjoy inspiring lives. As part of his inspirational leadership mission, he coaches executives and leaders in growing their personal sense of well-being through wealth creation and management, along with personal vitality.
Michael and his wife, Kathryn, divide their time between homes in California and Colorado. They are very proud of their offspring, who grew up to include a homemaker, a rock star, a service talent, and a television expert. Two grandchildren also warm their hearts! Visit Michael's web site at http://michaelhume.net
Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_Hume
Did you find this article helpful?00
Get Involved0 commentsSuggest a topicArticle ToolsPrint this articleE-mail to a friendEzinePublisherReport this articleCite this articleStay InformedGet notified by email when new articles are added to this category or written by this author.Subscribe to New Article Alerts: News and Society: Economics
Michael Hume
Economics Article FeedFind More ArticlesSearchSimilar Articles, VII, VIII, VI, V - IIThe Academic Roots Of Progressivism, IVRenewing Limited Government: Term LimitsRenewing Limited GovernmentRenewing Limited Government IIRecent ArticlesHow To Solve The Homeless Situation, VIIIHow Secure Is Your "Secure" Job?A True Comparison Of Increasing Debt Between Bush And Obama AdministrationsHow To Compete With ChinaWould Einstein Think Us Insane?What Will Happen If Greece Defaults?A Cluster of (Minor) ErrorsThe US Recovery Is Producing SurprisesA Sigh Of Relief For The Economic Status Of The USSubmitted On December 06, 2011. Viewed 14 times. Word count: 914.MLA Style Citation:Hume, Michael".".6 Dec. 2011EzineArticles.com.26 Jan. 2012
Hume, M. (2011, December 6). . Retrieved January 26, 2012, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Progressivism-Isnt-Progress&id=6739432Chicago Style Citation:
Hume, Michael "." EzineArticles.com. http://ezinearticles.com/?Progressivism-Isnt-Progress&id=6739432
EzineArticles.com© 2012 EzineArticles.comAll Rights Reserved WorldwideAbout UsFAQContact UsMember BenefitsPrivacy PolicyShopSite MapBlogTrainingVideo ArchiveAdvertisingAffiliatesCartoonsAuthorsSubmit ArticlesMembers LoginPremium MembershipExpert AuthorsEndorsementsEditorial GuidelinesTerms of ServicePublishersFollow UsTerms Of ServiceEzines / Email AlertsManage SubscriptionsEzineArticles RSS
View the Original article
No comments:
Post a Comment