If some of the greats from American history, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and Abraham Lincoln, were to magically appear before us today, I think they would be shocked at how the country they fought to shape and mold as a beacon of freedom and hope has turned out.Actually I think they would be amazed at electric lights and would be contantly flipping them on and off.

This all boils down to two issues – trust and control. Liberals just don’t trust people, in any way, and have some deep penchant to control everyone but themselves. Ov course, this is perfectly understandable, since liberals tend to be guilt-ridden, self-haters who don’t trust themselves (as we all see everytime a liberal wants to force us all to pay higher taxes, but never voluntarily pays the higher taxes himself) and losers who used to get picked last for teams on the playground, who want nothing less than to dictate the actions of all those around him (which we see in the insane smoking bans). It is a toxic combination that will kill all of us and destroy this country – which is the ultimate goal of the self-hating left.

Bogus, sir? The commissars in NYC who actually shoved through the trans-fat ban might not have been directly elected, but their biggest cheerleader — namely Hizzoner Bloomberg — surely was. (That is, when he can spare a moment from chasing down smokers and other misguided souls.) Last I checked New Yorkers love him.

My larger point was that identifying a government’s nannying idiocies is fine as far as it goes — but let’s both find out why this is going on (I’m rather skeptical that “cultural encouragement” does the trick) and better do something about it, e.g., at least vote the SOBs out.

On that score, your sadness that “those people are allowed to vote” strikes a rather authoritarian note. Can we not agree that convincing them to vote along more libertarian lines might be preferable?

Yet here is a paradox for you. If you conduct a poll, most people will claim to agree with you in this personal choice. And yet the years go in, the years go out, and off to the nanny state we keep drifting…each generation more like veal calves than the generation that came before.

It’s like all the nobodies all not reading the National Enquirer, except to take a peek at the cover when the groceries are being rung-up. SOMEBODY is buying the damn things. And SOMEBODY is wanting to be fed and clothed and sheltered like a veal calf. They never get called out (unless a camera happens to capture their face in the crowd at an Obama rally).

So if no one has the balls to admit that YES, they want rules rules and more rules until life is nothing but an endless guarantee…then what invisible force keeps pushing us off in this direction?

I think it’s that people who manage their own lives have no ill will to bear against people who want to be suckled. But people who want to be suckled, have this unexplainable anger toward people who manage their own lives. So the folks in the middle, who don’t really care that much one way or t’other, tend to do whatever won’t tick off anyone else, so they just become veal-calfish in order to get along with everybody.

Pam, this is a great, wonderful article. Congratulations.

The closer we get to 2009, the more worried I am for what remains of the America I remember. It’s hard for me to believe how many fellow citizens swallow fascistic doctrine and the promise of something for nothing (well, something at taxpayer expense).

If I didn’t know better, I’d say that George Orwell was writing the screenplay for our modern politics.

The proper motive of obesity…

So being fat is a choice? Isn’t that counter to nearly everything liberals believe in — that we are too stupid to help ourselves or make our own decisions?

Anyway, I think the Founders stopped rolling a long time ago. They’ve been spinning like dervishes for about seventy years (thank you FDR).

I have a theory as to why there are so many liberals in the government, and it’s directly related to the “nanny-state” mentality. The whole reason that mentality exists is that liberals like to control others, often (apparently) for the sole purpose of control. Conservatives, though, believe in leaving people to their own devices, and generally aren’t desirous of vast amounts of control over others. Unfortunately, changing the nanny state means getting involved in it, which means to some extent controlling people. This is why liberals are attracted to these jobs and conservatives aren’t.

Maybe I’m just regurgitating common sense here, but that’s the conclusion I came to while I was reading this article. Thanks Pam!

Now, the truth in what you say is this: That more and more people want someone to mother them; the poor fatty who says “Gosh, I don’t have any will power… if only someone would stop me from eating too much.” The broke senior who says “Gosh… I can’t control my spending and I have no retirement savings; somebody should pay for me.”

Sadly, those people are allowed to vote, and sadly, this culture, embodied in the leftist-dominated media and Hollywood, encourages them to think this way.

It will ruin the country.

Remember that we elect these government babysitters. Millions of Americans want this nannying, want a “government big enough to supply everything you need”. You finger the practitioners, but really need to ask why we want this, where this instinct comes from.

It’s a huge question, but I’ve gotten plenty of mileage out of digesting historical milestones like, for example, FDR’s “Economic Bill of Rights” speech from 1944, in which the esteemed president calls for the right to a job, health care, housing, protection for businessmen from “unfair” competition, farmer subsidies, the whole liberal nine yards. Remember that this was a hugely popular president giving a major speech after nearly twelve years in office (that of course included the Great Depression and WW2). And consider that millions of adoring Americans nodded and agreed with these sentiments.

The nanny state has a long, ugly history that seeps back into its early socialist roots and long predates current advocates like Mrs. Clinton. Again, thanks for showing us the weed, but next time please make reference to its very thick and deep roots. After all, we planted it.