America’s Success Requires Obama’s Failure

“So this is how liberty dies – to thunderous applause.” – Padme Amidala, Star Wars III

Weeks after cheering throngs wept in jubilation over the election of Barack Obama, dissenters are now being urged to support the president-elect and come together as one.

This is a splendid idea if you want higher taxes and more regulations to further damage our economy, a weakened military, rationed healthcare (some call it “universal”), and a myriad of other disastrous policies that trample our freedoms.

Pray for Obama’s success if you want him to “fundamentally change America” into a place where you exist to fund the government’s every whim. Instead, legitimate government exists to protect our rights to life, liberty, and property so that we can pursue happiness.

That’s what our Declaration of Independence articulates, and what our Constitution guarantees. But the First Lady in waiting said that we need to change our tradition and our history. With what would she propose to replace our two sacred documents?

But as long as the majority wants to transform America, perhaps we should also change our name while we’re at it. The United Sates of America is so yesterday, and the name itself carries terrible baggage. I suggest we make a subtle name change. How about O-merica instead?

Imagine classrooms across the country singing, “O-merica, O-merica, Obama shed his grace on thee …”

And speaking of brotherhood, it’s interesting that even with the collective loss of our minds, from sea to shining sea, voters rejected same-sex marriage. Evidently, Americans didn’t want the fruited plains to be too fruity.

But I digress. Back to the name change.

You: “O-merica is better off under Obama.”
Friend: “Did you say, ‘O-merica’?”
You: (Plausible deniability): “Huh?”

Here’s the problem: Too many Americans don’t understand that we did not vote for a benevolent dictator, we voted for a president. And presidents don’t have the constitutional authority to issue commands from on high. They don’t “run the country”; they preside as the head of government and head of state with powers limited by the Constitution.

Or, at least it’s supposed to work that way. But ever since FDR, presidents have put government ahead of people. The current president Bush has been a colossal offender. Under this administration, the federal government has grown 40 percent. Congress has a $3.1 trillion annual budget.

To put that in perspective, you’d have to stack $1,000 bills 68.9 miles high to reach $1 trillion. And we’re told they don’t have enough of our money. The future vice president says we’re not patriotic if we don’t yearn to be taxed even more. Doesn’t Washington have enough? Wouldn’t it be patriotic for Congress to thank us and curtail its runaway spending?

Obama says he wants to spread the wealth around so everybody has a chance to succeed. But by what ethical code is it OK to plunder people of their earnings and wealth in order to give it to others? After government overhead costs and special interest payoffs, it’s more like spreading the crumbs. Dollars are taken out of the economy, confiscated and chopped up. It’s a terrible misdirection of resources – it will cause less employment and raise costs for everyone.

This is evident to anyone who understands that benefits come with costs. Government doesn’t create wealth, it takes it away. A government job is paid for with chopped up dollars that could have created more jobs in the real economy. Obama will injure the goose that lays the golden egg – American enterprise.

That’s why I hope Obama fails. But with the unchecked power of a liberal Democratic Congress and future leftist Supreme Court justices, he will probably succeed. Thunderous applause will become a smattering of claps. More jobs will be outsourced to countries that respect private property.

I don’t know how we got here. But I’ll resist a government that insists free people exist for its purposes. I’ll remind people that legitimate government exists to protect our rights so that we can pursue happiness the way we see fit.

Barry Goldwater echoed our Founding Fathers when he said, “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.” In the same spirit, supporting a president who seeks to subvert the Constitution in pursuit of socialism is no virtue.

Florida Highway Patrol: Your Papers, Please!

Twice recently the Florida Highway Patrol asked me to show my driver license. Well, they didn’t exactly ask me. They seized me.

Not just me — they’re setting up roadblocks all over Florida and demanding you show your papers. They call them driver license and vehicle inspection checkpoints. They say it keeps us safer. It’s for our own good.

Here’s how it went Aug. 2 on Lisenby Avenue near Grace Presbyterian Church at 3:30 p.m. I’m on my way to get groceries when a trooper standing in the road directs me to stop and tells me to show my license.

Sure, I say, but first I ask if he’s familiar with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. He looks perplexed. I tell him it protects us from unreasonable seizures of our persons. He tells me I haven’t been seized.

Really? I ask, “If I prefer not to show my driver license, am I free to go?”

His demeanor changes. He’s no longer waving at children in the backseat as he did to the car ahead of me. Instead, he says, “Absolutely not. You will relinquish your driver license right now!”

He’s clearly ticked.

I hand him my license. He walks to the front of my car and tells me to honk my horn. He says, “I know my rights very well.”

I reply, “It’s not yours I’m talking about; it’s ours.”

He walks to the back of my car and eyes my license plate. When he returns he slaps my driver license on my car door for me to pick up, and says, “Remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.”

Actually, that’s up for debate. After we’ve demonstrated our competence to drive, we’ve earned a state-granted right, which can’t be revoked unless we do something wrong. A privilege can be given or taken on a whim.

After a couple minutes, I was a free man again. But why was I seized in the first place? Just governments exist to protect our God-given rights to life, liberty and property so we can pursue happiness.

If our Creator grants us freedom – as our Declaration of Independence insists – then nobody has the just power to make us unfree even for a few moments. Troopers who take an oath to support and defend the Constitution should protect and serve within constitutional guidelines.

It’s always wrong to begin a dialogue with someone who has done nothing wrong by initiating force against them. And let’s be honest: Preventing people from making their way around public roads they supposedly own is an initiation of force.

The Fourth Amendment protects our right from unreasonable searches and seizures; it specifically requires “probable cause.”

Think about it: If seizing us for doing nothing wrong (no probable cause) is reasonable, what would be an unreasonable seizure?

The FHP says it can “temporarily detain” us in order to keep the roads safer. They say there are nearly 8,000 out of almost 153,000 drivers in Bay County with suspended or revoked driver licenses. Why do the irresponsible 5 percent justify creating a police state for the rest of us?

The FHP claims it has state statute and case law on its side. But since when did lawmakers in Tallahassee and Florida judges supersede the U.S. Constitution?

Ben Franklin warned that those who would trade essential liberties for temporary security deserve neither. I argue those who make that trade will end up with neither.

I wonder how much safer we would be if those three highway patrolmen standing around Lisenby Avenue were out catching red-light runners and reckless drivers rather than detaining people for no probable cause.

The trooper was angry that I questioned his authority. He was close to showing me who was boss. I may have been moments away from being arrested for failure to exhibit my license even though I showed it to him within a few seconds. I was presumed guilty until I proved my innocence.

Many argue it’s a minor inconvenience for the public good. But doesn’t the Constitution already settle the matter? Perhaps government is conditioning us to be good subjects rather than empowered citizens.

If you find yourself ensnared in an FHP roadblock, you can show your papers without question and the trooper might smile and wave at your children. Or you can read him the Fourth Amendment as I did before relinquishing your license.

Even troopers need to be reminded of our liberty and the supreme law of the land.

John McCain And The Crist Tryst

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is on John McCain’s vice-presidential short list. Talk-radio host Glenn Beck has predicted that Mr. McCain would tap Mr. Crist.

Mr. McCain would be hard pressed to make a worse choice.

True, Mr. McCain won Florida’s primary on the wave of Mr. Crist’s late endorsement, which Mr. McCain rode to shore as the Republican presidential candidate. The Florida governor is especially popular in the state’s liberal precincts, and he likely would deliver the Sunshine State in November.

But this would spell victory for big-government Republicanism, and a definitive departure from the virtues of small government and personal responsibility. Mr. Crist and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are the bookend faces of the new Republican Party. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater’s pictures on the grand old mantle have been turned to the wall.

Mr. Crist is the RINO poster boy. He’s a Republican in name only. He’s as politically calculating as the Clintons, and equally enamored of power. That explains why he’s been flying around the country on the Arizona senator’s left wing, vying for the vice presidency as his state’s economy sinks.

Rumors about Mr. Crist’s vice-presidential aspirations emerged quickly after he moved into the governor’s mansion only 17 months ago. He promptly signed a bill requiring paper receipts on electronic voting machines that included a provision permitting state officeholders to run for federal office without resigning. So, now, Mr. Crist does not have to step down to join a McCain ticket. How’s that for planning ahead? After Florida said goodbye to former Gov. Jeb Bush because of term limits, Mr. Crist campaigned to lower property taxes and property insurance rates, and to stimulate the economy.

But consider what Mr. Crist has done in Tallahassee.

He called global warming the definitive issue of our time, and he’s determined to save the world, starting with Florida. He signed aggressive executive orders last summer to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This would slash CO2 emissions to 1902 levels, according to Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute.

Mr. Crist neglects to tell people how much this measure will cost while he exaggerates the benefits. These regulations will boost utility costs, trigger job cuts, and chase away employers. The Florida Chamber of Commerce warns, “Florida will lose 251,000 jobs if we don’t change course.” Mr. Crist also supports America’s Climate Security Act, which more accurately should be dubbed the Cost of Living Increase Act. The Heritage Foundation points out the hidden tax on nearly every facet of American life: a cumulative GDP loss of $4.8 trillion in inflation-adjusted dollars by 2030.

He rushed to socialize Florida’s insurance market by making the government-run Citizens Property and Insurance Corporation the largest insurer in the state and the fourth-largest in the nation.

Former Gov. Bush was disappointed that the new Republican governor would promote “Cuban economics,” as the Wall Street Journal editorial board called it. Mr. Bush explained, “When the government assumes the risk of these catastrophic events, they are putting at risk the livelihoods and quality of life of the taxpayers and citizens they serve.” The WSJ editorial board argued that Mr. Crist put Florida on the path to financial ruin just three months after taking office. “His campaign to socialize Florida’s insurance market has placed the Sunshine State one big hurricane away from financial disaster.” Mr. Crist has been trying to push his hurricane politics onto America with a national catastrophic insurance fund designed to make premiums more affordable in high-risk states at the expense of others. That’s unfair, and it encourages risky property development in disaster-prone areas.

He declared, “Lawyers are back,” soon after taking office. The trial bar pumped millions into his campaign and its investment paid off handsomely, scoring multiple victories during this year’s legislative session. The Senate already has killed one effort to cap contingency fees.

An overly litigious Florida already has sent doctors fleeing. The state estimated that 50,000 physicians practiced here, but a study last year found the number closer to 34,000. A 13 percent drop is expected over the next five years. You still can move to Florida to ease your arthritis, but you may need to travel to another state to see a doctor.

And he proposes to spur economic growth through public works projects by speeding construction of highways, ports, homes, and schools. Florida is suffering from a housing bust, a retail slump, high property taxes and insurance premiums. So the governor turns to Keynesian economics: government spending to create consumer demand. History has shown it’s hard to spend your way into prosperity.

In less than 18 months, Mr. Crist has socialized Florida’s insurance market, hamstrung businesses with climate regulations, invigorated trial lawyers, and launched costly public-works projects to stimulate the economy.

With a record like that, could a New York Times endorsement of Charlie Crist for VP be far behind?

This op-ed appeared in The Washington Times.