Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Right on, Rafe | Main | Even where al Qaeda is concerned, Communist propaganda can trip an analyst up »

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

The Role of the Legislature

Senator Thune (R-SD) recently commented, on the floor on the United States Senate, that he can not believe that the Democrat Party actually wants the congress to micromanage the war in Iraq.

Why not?

What about this is so hard to believe?

Liberal politicians have spent a century telling civilians that they are incapable of managing their lives by themselves, and that they need pointy-headed bureaucrats to make decisions for them. Indeed, the laws and regulations everywhere grow by a countless number of volumes every year.

The big shock thus seems to be that the Democrat party has waited until now (with the exception of Vietnam) to attempt to micromanage the armed forces; not that they are trying to do it now.

The solution is not simply to maintain the status quo, and to keep the military free of burdensome nanny-state regulations. It is to make all of our society free of burdensome nanny-state regulations.

Posted by Jonathan Goldfarb on February 27, 2007 in International Politics | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Role of the Legislature:


Social Democracy replaced lassaiz faire Capitalist Democracy in most of Europe and North America after WWII. After capitalism failed to bring prosperity and growth after WWI resulting in the Depression, most people were disillusioned with free market capitalism and wanted more State control in the economy. Hence the rise of Hitler and the State managed German economy which greatly outpaced Great Britain and the United States recovery. It was the German racial Imperialism that didn't work and ultimately destroyed them. (Ironically the US and Britain sent racially segregated troops to fight against racial genocide in Europe.)

Many countries were moving towards a state managed economic system at the same time as Germany. (Sweden, France, Italy)

Even the USSR was admired by the West for it's apparent economic success at rebuilding and modernizing the country. That's where ideas like the New Deal in the US during the 30's came from.

19th Century capitalism couldn't provide the capital or satisfy the Nationalist ideals that people believed in.

The population of most countries is quite comfortable with being told what do by the government and wouldn't have it any other way as long as it means social security and social justice.

As we all know the socialist governments just keep growing and growing and taking on more of the responsibilities of individuals.

Who knows where it ends? The story is still unfolding and I think those expecting a return to 19th Century lassaiz faire individualism will be disappointed in the outcome.

Posted by: David | 2007-02-27 10:56:40 PM

It is unbelievable, but it is still what democrats and liberals do best. They micro-manage military.

Who would like to swing from a helicopter, at 60 km/h, by a line that has been purchased at the lowest bid, and then sat around in an unheated, unventilated warehouse, since before the average recruit was born?

That is what you get when dems and libs do their micro-management.

Having said that, they are incapable of macro-manageing, so what can you expect?

Posted by: Lady | 2007-02-28 1:18:04 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.