Posted on 02/04/2013 12:06:13 PM PST by Olog-hai
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor apparently wants his Republican colleagues to pursue a “government can be good” approach to their politics rather than focusing so much on the size and voracious spending appetite of Washington. …
Citing an unidentified congressional aide as its source, the (Wall Street) Journal said Cantor plans to touch on a host of existing policies and initiatives, from school choice to tax reform, to show how families nationwide would benefit more from Republican ideas rather than those offered by Democrats. …
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Government will be “good” when man is good. The Founders knew better and carefully crafted a brilliant division of power to the end that government would be limited to a size where it could be carefully watched.
Cantor is just voicing his “Inner Libtard”.
It is getting to the point that I think voting for craziest most incompetent Democrats (Cynthia McKinney type) is the best way to bring this all to a head and get on with the collapse.
I think the Republicans should push the concept that government should be receptive, responsible, and humble and not preach to the citizens who give it life, that as elected officials they are the employees of the citizenry, and that they have the responsibility to be careful and thoughtful caretakers.
It's much easier to make arguments for fiscal responsibility when you are doing it from the perspective of the thoughtful caretakers trying to prevent devaluation of the savings of grandma and grandpa. The GOP has been really horrible with PR.
Judenrats.
That’s what the GOP is become officially.
They know where the power is going to lie in a MarxoFascist State - and they want to be sure to be able to share in it.
Is this a joke?
The GI Bill and the interstate highway system number among the finest of government achievements.
He's a little faster than the others, but not much. At least he's a Republican. Now, to turn him into a Conservative we probably need to redistrict him so he finds out there's no 10% of a moderate undecided middle who are going to hep' him out in a 'lection!
That Constitution was intended limit the government and leave the people free to the pursuit of their own happiness. In that sense, the Framers believe, self-government to be a "good" concept.
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington
That's why America's Founders placed the "chains of the Constitution" (Jefferson) upon the three branches of government.
By the Founders' formula, "the People's" written Constitution was the anchor of our liberties, binding government to the "People's" limitations on its power.
The current philosophy of so-called "progressives," in effect, undoes all the monumental work accomplished by the Founders on behalf of liberty and leaves the law afloat and without anchor, relying, as of old, on mere men and women.
From Page xv of "Our Ageless Constitution," allow me to include here excerpted words from President Andrew Jackson's Proclamation of December 10, 1832:
"We have received it [the Constitution] as the work of the assembled wisdom of the nation. We have trusted to it as to the sheet anchor of our safety in the stormy times of conflict with a foreign or domestic foe. We have looked to it with sacred awe as the palladium of our liberties, and with all the solemnities of religion have pledged to each other our lives and fortunes here and our hopes of happiness hereafter in its defense and support. Were we mistaken, my countrymen, in attaching this importance to the Constitution . . .? No. We were not mistaken. The letter of this great instrument is free from this radical fault. . . . No, we did not err! . . . The sages . . . have given us a practical and, as they hoped, a permanent* Constitutional compact. . . . The Constitution is still the object of our reverence, the bond of our Union, our defense in danger, the source of our prosperity in peace: it shall descend, as we have received it, uncorrupted by sophistical construction, to our posterity. . . ."
*Underlining added for emphasis
And, it was Thomas Jefferson who used another metaphor with reference to the Constitution when he indicated that "the People" must "bind them (government) by the chains of the Constitution." In another instance, he declared: "It was intended to lace them up straitly within the enumerated powers. . . ."
Sure it can but only if it’s about 5% the size it is now.
That’s a good comment
Send that one to Cantor!
Apparently, Mr. Cantor is thinking of all his own salary and benefits in saying that government “can be good”. He, like his colleagues, has too much vested in big government ever to shrink it.
Sometimes, I get to thinking Cantor’s acceptable... then he blurts out crap like this.
Actually, government can be good... when it stays within its Constitutional functions.
However, I don’t think that’s what Eric has in mind.
Amen to that. The GOP has lost its way completely.
This leaves no doubt, if any remained, that Cantor is NOT a conservative. A conservative would know that President Reagan said “government is not the solution to the problem. Government IS the problem”. Someone grounded in that philosophy could never make the comment Cantor made.
How in the world can he think that this is the strategy? What should be the strategy is to fan the flames against a govt that is out of control. Poll after poll shows a plurality of average Americans believes govt spending is out of control. This is a strategy to fail. Cantor is being an idiot on this.
This is like a Dr. tell a diabetic “Sugar can be good too”. If not having enough sugar or govt was the problem then maybe it would make sense. That isn’t the case. I’ve met Eric and he’s just wrong on this. This is a recipe to fail. Why is it the GOP types like Cantor always get the wrong message from election failures? The only great successes the GOP have had is when they had a believable clarity on the role of government and ran against its largess and over reach like in 1994 and 2010. Why they would think running soft on the anti spending message would be a winner is beyond me. They aren’t going to out big govt Democrats. There is nothing they can offer that will ever be so big that the left can not top on spending.
Maybe I should send Eric a letter on the matter ~ he didn’t do it (lost the election), they did ~ the Democrats got out more voters!
Water can be good too, but I didn’t hear the people of New Jersey asking for more water as Sandy’s tidal surge came ashore. Government can be good, as he says, but only when it is less than half the size of the current federal behemoth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.