We cannot be free if we choose to support a government that takes from us the fruits of our labors and presumes to know better than we do how those resources should be spent.
Americans have elected a President who by his own terms is “audacious,” to wit his book, The Audacity of Hope. The likely definition of the term audacious that he would have us accept is “intrepid boldness.” There is, however, a more appropriate definition consistent with his practice as president. That definition is insolence heedless of restraint.
There is no line created by the Founders of the American Constitution that President Obama seems unwilling to cross. In his world view, governments lead and people follow. The state is sovereign; the citizen is not.
His book, the “Audacity of Hope” was a modest political piece designed to familiarize America with a friendly face of a candidate who would be president. It is long on platitudes and short on substantive answers to real world problems. At the end of his presidency, there needs to be a sequel to this book—written not by President Obama but by a critical historian. The title of that volume should be the “The Audacity of Power,” meaning the exercise of power heedless of restraint. The term audacity has very much consumed all hope in the America Obama is fashioning.
Another occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, indeed the greatest to occupy the presidency in modern time, was utterly void of that kind of audacity. His soul was humble. He proved that might is most effectively exercised with quiet application against external foes, not with clever artifice against internal foes. He placed his trust in the American people, not in the federal bureaucrat. That President, Ronald Wilson Reagan, spoke words of respect for individualism that made him a natural fit within the mosaic of America, which is a mosaic of liberty. “Nations crumble from within when the citizenry asks of government those things which the citizenry might better provide for itself,” said Reagan, “I hope we have once again reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”