> But now the government has become a vehicle for social change. Instead of individuals using education, the free market, and dialogue to elevate people from poverty and correct injustice, the government was now viewed as the instrument of change, whether it was addressing racial injustice, saving the whales, stopping global warming, access to abortion, fighting AIDS, or the war on drugs.
Yeah, what was that old nonsense again? "Government of the people, by the people, for the people"... it's as if some people were saying that the raison d'etre of governments was to serve people. Good grief, I believe I've stuck a gold vein here!
Aaaah! My eyes! Damn, this was blindingly obvious.
What the heck is the government supposed to do if not be an organised way for people to change the societal structure for the demands of the day?
And when was the last time you saw "individuals" using "education, the free market, and dialogue to elevate people from poverty and correct injustice"? I'm taking a not-so-huge leap of logic and guess that what you witnessed was not exactly a common occurrence. Individuals are lazy greedy bastards who get nothing done.
> Today America is at a political cross-roads as unlike any time since the election of 1860. We can choose to follow the liberals into a totally socialistic state like those found in Europe or we can fight for the conservative values of individual freedom and liberty with less government interference in our lives.
Yet, for some reason we Europeans are doing mighty fine, thank you for asking, and we generally don't need to ask each other whether we need to start up a frigging civil war or not. If there's a problem, we usually recognise there's a democratic process to solve that problem, and there's no need to lynch the politicians responsible and demand the problems fixed at gunpoint - you know, like how certain people are advocating the problems to be solved like, in allegedly democratic countries, not naming any names here.
