|
|
|
November 06, 2007
the offensive nature of limited powers
Dick Polman has an interesting piece in today's Philadelphia Inquirer which argues that Fred Thompson's federalism is offensive to religious conservatives: Here's Fred: "I think people ought to be free at state and local levels to make decisions that even Fred Thompson disagrees with. That's what freedom is all about. And I think the diversity we have among the states, the system of federalism we have where power is divided between the state and the federal government, serves us very, very well." (Why do these politicians constantly refer to themselves in the third person?)At the risk of horrifying the entire national political spectrum (as well as offending my own principles and voiding the various political litmus tests I have taken), I'll top Fred Thompson: I think people ought to be free at state and local levels to make decisions that even Eric Scheie disagrees with! The point is, federalism is fair. Everybody wins, because everybody loses. UPDATE: My thanks to Clayton Cramer for the link. posted by Eric on 11.06.07 at 11:39 AM
Comments
Then there is the individual level--which should be able to tell all the government levels to go hang most of the time. Brett · November 7, 2007 07:39 AM Who is Dick Polman? I'm a "religious conservative" and he doesn't speak for me. The national government should be ruthlessly restricted to the powers it's granted by the Constitution. All else should be dealt with at the state/county/town levels. And people wonder why Ron Paul and Fred! seem to get an unusual amount of support. Uncle Fester · November 7, 2007 12:06 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
November 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
November 2007
October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSALLAMERICANGOP See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Santa is Satan! (And other lessons for small children....)
• Hard Rock • When too much responsibility means no responsibility • A note of thanks.... • Putting France in the doghouse with Bush? • I Find Your Lack Of Faith Disturbing • Fame and shame in Las Vegas • Hillary Scores • High School Irish spoken here! • Decency is not hypocrisy. But what is decency?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Freedom of state governments to make their own decisions (unless clearly contrary to the state or federal constitution) is a fundamental conservative principle. Sometimes the results are unfortunate (Oregon's euthanasia law, California's medical marijuana law). But I would rather have 50 laboratories conducting their own experiments than have the federal government impose its will. A government strong enough to impose one morality is strong enough to impose one immorality.