Search the Web's most comprehensive Political Directory:

Submit a site



Alex Aichinger
Kirsten Andersen
Brent Barksdale
The Cynic
Natalie Farr
Joe Giardiello
Bret Hrbek
Ramesh Ponnuru
Dorothy Seese
Jason Soter

 


THE STAKES IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE - ELECTION 2000
by Dorothy Seese
dottie@politicalusa.com

This is no time for either the Donkeys or the Elephants to take anything for granted, and it seems they aren't.  It isn't time for the American electorate to take anything for granted, either, specifically that lazy attitude "it doesn't matter which party wins, the government just goes on and on."

We're either going to head toward galloping governmental controls under Al Gore and his team, or we're going to head toward more privatization, less government control and more personal responsibility.  One thing the electorate has to realize:  ONCE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS GAIN CONTROL, THEY ARE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO REVERSE OR DISCONTINUE.

During my working lifetime, we always had Social Security and the income tax.  In 1967 the government added an ill-planned Medicare, and from 1967 on we have seen government get into every area of life from seat belts to cholesterol!

Now comes the Al Gore team and wants to take over your life (and your kids) beginning from cradle and going right to the graveyard!  Hey ... what happened to freedom, choice and personal responsibility?  What happened to "we the people?"

Al Gore's idea of government is comprehensive.  The government will insure your kids and you.  It will tell you what to do, eat, say and think.  It will even diagnose your illnesses and provide "medical" care by bureaucrats.  If you think the HMO situation is bad, remember, the HMO situation was made bad by an agency of the federal government called HCFA, or the Health Care Financing Administration.  It put the lid on HMO payments in 1997-98 so that many insurers have had to abandon Medicare HMO's and their senior/disabled patients.  So much for government medical "care."

There's not one new thing about what the Democratic party platform is proposing.  They've been at it for years and it's the same old story!  They're asking for another four to eight years to make sure your guns, your speech and your rights are all controlled, and that the Constitution is "rewritten" by court decisions and interpretations.

Now the government desires to move in and dictate education of kids from pre-school up, take away lawful guns so that only outlaws will have them, defend more abortion rights, continue the policy of allowing "gays" to pervade private thought and behavior, and even snoop your emails via Carnivore or its equal.  (They don't have to bother with my emails, my email is very dull and the objectionable things I write are published on the Internet in my columns.)

We, the people, are supposed to have a government that operates with the consent of the governed.  Most of this "consent" has been obtained by wildly overrated promises that result only in more government, less freedom and galloping socialism. Or, such consent has been obtained by government-approved intimidation, as is the case with the gay rights movement and its destruction of private organizations like the Boy Scouts to suit their own agenda.

A people who are controlled by their government and its protected special interest groups is not what this nation is about!  Our founding fathers envisioned a nation where the people controlled the kind of government they would have by electing representatives to Congress who would carryout the will of their constituents.

Apparently, "constituents" now consist of well-financed special interest groups, including gays, gun control freaks and orphan minds in need of "big brother."  It will be that way as long as there are Democrats in control of public policy.

I am not against all social programs.  It is obvious that most working families cannot save enough without mandatory Social Security deductions from their paychecks because money taken home is money spent.  I venture to say that most people could not own homes without the FHA or the VA housing programs. If Social Security, Medicare and federal housing were the only three social programs in place, the entire face of America would change.

BUT, OVERALL, DURING THE PAST 50 YEARS AMERICANS HAVE ACQUIESCED TOA NATION WHERE GOVERNMENT HAS MORE AUTHORITY AND INDIVIDUALS HAVE LESS CHOICEOR CONTROL OVER THEIR PERSONAL LIVES.

If this trend continues, America will have renounced Constitutional freedoms in favor of federal program controls.  No nation ever reverses such a handover of personal freedom to government without a revolution.  Why?  Because the ballot box becomes meaningless.  Either majority rule is overruled by the courts, or the will of the people never appears on the ballot for a vote.

This November the American electorate will not be voting for one of two individuals as much as it will be making the choice for either more government control or the start of a return to more private and individual responsibility.  The ballots will indicate the candidates as George W. Bush or Al Gore.  The people may want to vote for persona, for speeches or for party loyalty.  But what they are really voting for, or against, is how much government they want in their homes, lives and future.  George W. Bush offers a tighter government with a trend toward less government control.  Al Gore represents totally pervasive government controls.  Which do you really want for the future of America?

Dorothy Seese, 2000

Talk about today's column...

View expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Political USA.


Home | PUSA Columnists | Talking Heads | Directories | News
Chat Boards | Links | Advertise | Submit | Contact

Copyright Political USA, 1999-2000. Unauthorized use of materials is prohibited. If you want something, just ask us!