Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
John Stossel :: Townhall.com Columnist
Anything That's Peaceful
by John Stossel
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


This week the Left arrived in Washington, excited about the wonderful things it will do to us -- I mean, for us. They always do it for us.

Liberals say that they, unlike those reactionaries who've held power for too long, want to give us more choices. Abortion-rights advocates and want women to have the "right to choose." Gay-rights advocates want the choice of marrying someone of the same sex and serving in the military.

Choice is good. As a libertarian, I'm all over choice. But strangely, today, liberals are mostly about what Americans should not be allowed to choose.

AFL-CIO boss John Sweeney says, "[O]ur top priority is passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, legislation that will restore workers' freedom to bargain for a better life".

That sounds nice. But it really means that workers will no longer have the privacy and safety of a secret ballot when voting on a union. If a union can round up signatures from more than half the employees at a plant, other workers will be forced to unionize, too.

Unorganized labor -- better known as most of us, or free people making our own way -- won't be helped by this coercive limiting of choice.

Parents have little choice when they send their children to school. Government forces everyone to pay into a system that locks most kids into a unionized monopoly.

If low-income parents were allowed $11,000 vouchers (that's about how much government spends per student), that would give poor parents a choice. But liberals don't want that.

If you take risks with your own money to build a business, liberals want to limit your choice as to what you can say, how much you pay, and whom you can hire or fire. Freedom of association? Fugeddabout it. You cannot choose to offer newcomers on-the-job training at less than $7.25 per hour. You can't choose to pay older people or pregnant women less because their medical costs may be higher. So newcomers, older people and pregnant women can't choose those jobs. Liberals don't want to liberalize that.

In a job interview, you better not ask about age, citizenship status, disability, or whether the person goes by "Mr." "Mrs." "Miss" or "Ms." Those questions are forbidden (http://tinyurl.com/9jpf4w).

Liberal litigators have essentially outlawed racial and sexual comments in schools and workplaces. A cashier at the Senate coffee shop was threatened with firing for addressing customers as "honey" and "baby" because one man complained it was "sexual harassment.".

Liberal senators like Dick Durbin, John Kerry and Charles Schumer want speech limited further by the "fairness doctrine." Fairness here means depriving people of the choice of all-conservative radio.

And what's more liberal than voluntary exchange between consenting adults? Free trade lets everyone in the world find the best buys, no matter where they are. It gives us more things for less money. Even Paul Krugman supports free trade. But liberals don't want to allow buyers and sellers to make their own choices. Liberals want trade curtailed.

Even life-saving trade: 95,000 Americans are waiting for organ transplants. Thousands die while waiting. Legalizing the sale of organs would give people the choice of life, while allowing sellers to choose cash over an extra kidney.

But liberals don't want to let willing buyers and sellers have that choice.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decides what you may put in your own body. A truly liberal FDA would acknowledge that adults own their bodies and can decide for themselves what risks are appropriate. That would give consumers more choice. But liberals want the FDA to be tougher.

Liberals don't want you to have the choice of owning a handgun, a big car or keeping your own money so you can use it as you see fit. Liberals want to restrict our choices.

I'm a classical liberal. I believe people should have the freedom to do anything that is peaceful. That's truly liberal.

I want the word back.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Stossel blogs at http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel/ is an award-winning news correspondent and author of Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel--Why Everything You Know is Wrong.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read John Stossel's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Pat from TX irt Continuum
P: "The real continuum is collectivism/individualism. If we can realign the political parties along this continuum, there may be a chance to reverse the quickening slide toward total government control."

No.

What you'd have is the Demopublican Party on side, which would switch its name every four years to the Republicrat Party, then the Libertarian Party on the other side.

It would work pretty much as it does today, with the Demopublican/Republicrats winning every election with 98% of the vote.

Lets Get real on Employee Free Choice
Current law allows for the foregoing of an election if both the employer and the majority of the workforce so agree. In reality, unions are not asking for anything dramatically different from established law with the exception of foregoing an election outright. This is in effect an emergency measure that is required due to the systematic subversion of national labor laws that have been on the books since 1935. Conservatives see in the card check an abrogation of the basic democratic principle of the secret ballot but they don’t want to acknowledge the very real and vicious campaign to deprive workers of their democratic rights that has been underway since the 1970s and which is a major contributing factor in the decline of unionization in the private sector. While peer pressure in the card check process is real, the need to redress the very serious shortcomings which now beset union efforts to represent workers make it the lesser of two evils. In an environment where workers have no reasonable expectation of having their rights protected there is no other choice.

What a ridiculous notion it is to say
that an employer doesn't have the right to fire any employee, on the spot, for whatever reason.

The PRIVATE affairs of business owners/employees are in now way, shape, or form the business of govt.

Spot on, Justin
I consider myself an "American-English Nationalist Libertarian". Like you said, libertarians are the only folks who are consistent in their views, probably because we have an underlying principle that guides us: non-coercion and voluntary alliances.

I would probably differ w/Stossel on the idea of "free trade". I believe we must maintain a border, and tariffs are an essential part of that demarcation line. In fact, I think tariffs should be one of the only federal taxing powers (a nat'l lotto would be the other). I would favor a uniform tariff rate on all imports, however, in order to avoid favoritism.


Good stuff from Stossel, as usual
One of the few at TH worth reading.

I'll note that when Republicans were in power they didn't do a single thing to institute any real reforms in govt.

reba
i was in a union shop.the grievance procedure was interesting.you'd file a grievance and the company would deny it in steps 1 and 2.then it went to binding arbitration.the company would win about 90% of the decisions.if they lost they could appeal which the union could not do.if the company won the decision was final.if they lost the appeal they could appeal again.usually what happened was the company dragged it for years waiting for the employee to quit,get fired or die.whatever came first lol.

reba
thats not what he said.he said they couldn't even ask those questions.i'm well aware of the documentation they use to fire people.but thats usually not really necessary since you sign a paper at your hiring saying that the company is hiring you "at will" which means they can fire you for anything they want.but nowadays they get the "documentation" needed to prove in court that it wasn't age discrimination or some other sort of discrimination.i have never filed a lawsuit of any kind so keeping an attorney on retainer would put me in the poorhouse eventually.winning those types of suits are very rare since the burden of proof is so high and the courts are slanted toward the corporations.

Roy
Did you ever consider if you were asked all of those questions and were not offer the job you applied for, you should consult your attorney?

Before I retired I managed a department of 17 people and if any one them was not performing their job and missing too much work, we had a check list of all the things that needed to be done before they could be terminated. Can't do it the Donald Trump way and just say "Your're Fired"!

stossel
dude-where have you been applying for jobs at?every job i have ever applied for they ask you all the questions you said they couldn't ask.date of birth,citizen status,marital status,social security number,education record,previous work history,do you have any disabilities that would keep you from performing your duties-most require physicals/drug tests.criminal backround tests/mvr checks.some do a credit check.had a couple that wanted to know what organizations i belonged to.so your absurd assertion basically renders the rest of your column moot.

Jones, Bushman & Porretto
Some of us have been doing this since before Y2K. I thought it was overboard then, but now I'm glad that we have been moving toward self-sufficiency. We moved out to the country and are growing most of our food. We barter and trade services and are converting much of our money to gold and silver.

It's hard to believe the government could regulate the internet--I mean practically how could it be done? It would involve cooperation of all the ISP's to track us down, but I guesss it's possible. Should we be buying our own servers?

Reba TX
It sounds as though ur intent is good so maybe U worry too much.. I'm probably older than U and I've just about concluded that if I TRY to be Politically CORRECT I will probably wind up as MORALLY WRONG..
I don't necessarily like or dislike anyone because of Race, Politics, Gender. Conversely, I Don't accept/like anyone based on any of those factors.. I agree with the poster who says 'LEAVE ME ALONE AND I'LL RECIPROCATE' ..
works for me!! CHEERS

POLITICAL CORRECT

Thank goodness I grew up in a simpler age. I have a real problem trying to always remember what is political correct now. When I was young I believed that liberalism was a philosophy of profound thought written by our great thinkers of yesteryear. Where did I go wrong?

Why?
Why don't they criticize Mr. Obama for smoking??

Why don't they reveal the inconvenient truth that nobel laureate and world class carnivore, Al Gore, eats big, juicy steaks from methane producing cattle?

Why don't liberals have to abide by the the rules they're trying to impose on everyone else??

Mr. Obama and Al Gore say they can't quit, but really it's a choice.

alopekos teumesios
Oh yes it will be resurrected in my lifetime. Just watch it happen when people finally revolt. It's comin'

collectivism vs individualism...
same as authoritarianism vs libertarianism? I think so. Given human nature, you won't get collectivism without government enforcement and individuals will have trouble succeeding without liberty to be free actors. The key, is the simple word near the end of Mr Stossel's column... "anything that's PEACEFUL". Voluntary behavior is more self-regulating and enriching than government regulation ever could be.

I often wonder
if John Stossel is the only sane media source. I've yet to find another with the moral & ethical views of his. Thank you for all of your insightful and informative articles. I only wish more of your colleagues shared your view. Pro Choice should be part of every aspect of our lives.

Spot On Pat
You got it 100% right Pat.

Disguised
A fine article by Mr. Stossel - Democrats promote compulsion disguised as compassion.

Pat, nice continuum!
If we used the collectivism/individualism one, both our parties would be on the same end and demonstrate how similar they are in the goals of the party. We need a new party of Individualists.

liberals are like diapers

It's funny ya know. When conservatives complain about the smut and filth on the airwaves that inundate our children at all hours, liberals are always quick to stand up and tell us that we should just change the channel.

But when it comes to anything to do with conservative opinion like Rush, Fox News, et al, rather than following their own advice and simply changing the channel, they want to legislate it out of existence. The Founders would be rolling in their graves.

Remember politicians and TV channels are like diapers - they should be changed often and for the same reason.


Common Thread
We Want OUR FREEDOMS!!!! America has allowed itself to be conned into a false sense of reality; and those who foisted this upon us want the power over our lives at every waking hour. (See my comments in Morris threads). By economically controling us they have the upper hand, and sustanciating that control by making us/ forcing us to accept their choices for us, or allowing us to do without has /will create a slavery in this nation seen only by those who are living third world lives. Ruby Ridge was only a tiny preview to the coiercion that will be used; although a hungry man is a willing slave. Food for thought for a future that those in power have planned for us. That old saying comes back hauntingly to be more than from a movie, " Im from the Government, Im here to help you" But in the bigger picture my friends, those in power are the pawns themselves to an authority who has just want he wants, their souls. Yes we must think, plan and act; but more so than that, we must allow ourselves to find the freedom of the first kingdom. All that is gold and silver will turn to rust in that day, but freedom from evil will last for eternity.

Wrong Continuum
When we talk about liberals and conservatives, we're really dealing with a false continuum. What is conservative about supporting the war on drugs? What is liberal about supporting partial birth abortion?

The real continuum is collectivism/individualism. If we can realign the political parties along this continuum, there may be a chance to reverse the quickening slide toward total government control.

InsightingTruth
Seriously, are leftists commenters here so dumb they don't understand what a straw man argument is?

Read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

This is particularly confusing as John is unquestionably NOT a member of the religious right nor is he a neo-con. Meaning? The very argument you attempted to bring up against Mr. Stossel not only does not apply, he would actually agree with you that not being able to sell beer on Sundays before noon near a church has no business in the hands of legislature.

John's views are the enemy of both the contemporary American Conservative and American Liberal because both of them favor heavy government control over your lives, just from different perspectives. I follow the same persuasion and as libertarians, we're the only real consistent people when it comes to government. When we say no government control, we mean it. Liberals, despite the name being taken from "liberated" or to free from control, do nothing of the sort, they don't provide freedoms, they just take them away while pretending they're preserving and providing.

Bushman & Porretto
Pardon the 'Hitleryspeak' but let's start a dialog lol.

I'm at http://www.jonesfamily.us

John slips a little.
He fails to point out the choice deprivers among conservatives. In Sarasota County, Florida I cannot buy a beer before noon on Sunday. If my restaurant is within 1000 feet of a Church I cannot serve alcohol. In Venice, Florida I cannot operate an arcade within 1000 feet of a school. In Blairsville, Georgia I cannot sell a patron a beer with his slice of pizza. In many places I am forced to pay higher taxes to support infrastructure for Churches which I do not attend. Every time I venture out with a sizable amount of cash, I must worry about it being discovered and confiscated by the local police. The list is nearly endless. All of these onerous, and unconstitutional statutes are favored by conservatives.

As conservatives we cannot expect liberals to give liberty a chance so long as what we favor is merely a different set of restrictions. We must all choose liberty over tyranny. Then we can present a non-hypocritical argument in favor of individual freedom.

Liberalism

If this word means to be free of government intrusion into my life then I am a liberal. If it means the liberalism of the Kennedy's, Kerry's, Pelosi's, Obama's then I am a slave. I have limited choice. I work the fields they want me to work, I work the hours they want me to work, and they can put chains around my neck if I don't do as they say.

Ron Jones and Francis Poretto
I agree. Also open to discussion, if you'll have me.




Ron Jones in Tennessee
Excellent ideas Ron. The country is going down the tubes quickly and in four years won't be the same ever again. We need leaders who are smart planners and thinkers (such as the Townhall contributors) and those who are will to take action to back it up. Read Dick Morris' column for a real look at what's to come. Unfortunately it's a real downer.

Francis W. Porretto
"There's no longer much hope of "working within the system" to restore Americans' freedom. It's time to explore alternatives the statists can't reach. Black markets. Barter. Exceedingly private, membership-only businesses. Leagues of mutual support that function like the Underground Railroads of old. VPN communications protected by heavy encryption.

Think hard. Plan well. Then act."

I fear that far too many who are anti-war & anti-state are merely pontificating from a theoretical perspective (though they might harrumph and call it "scholarly").

However, I'm with you: I think we should first plan for secure communications and plan for the worst...the obamanation in which all liberties are curtailed, & freedom of association is limited. In that eventuality, communications channels between dissenting parties will be hard to initiate.

Open to discussion.

When anybody tells me
that they favor "universal health care", or "single payer health care" or any of the other euphemisms for socialized medicine, I ask if they are pro-choice. Invariably they answer yes. I then tell them that many people, myself included, if given the choice, would choose medical care in which government has no involvement, and that we are willing to pay for it. I then ask, "Would you deny us that choice?" They don't like that question.

Freedom didn't end with Jefferson et al
it moved west. Manifest destiny was the title and untamed, underpopulated land was man's hope. Where can we migrate to now?? Even here in Nevada, we got so many California transplants that they've banned smoking in bars!!! (Except for the casinos, for now) Randy Weaver tried to escape. Remember what happened to him on Ruby Ridge? More government promotions! Oh happy day, BHO is here at last!

Hope is gone with "liberal."
"I believe people should have the freedom to do anything that is peaceful. That's truly liberal.

"I want the word back."

We will wait a long time for that.

The linguistic hijacking of "liberal" is one of the great crimes of America's Twentieth Century. Indeed, it made possible virtually all the others. But reversing it is a century-long project...and during that time, they who perpetrated it will be at work flensing us of what remains of our de-jure liberties.

There's no longer much hope of "working within the system" to restore Americans' freedom. It's time to explore alternatives the statists can't reach. Black markets. Barter. Exceedingly private, membership-only businesses. Leagues of mutual support that function like the Underground Railroads of old. VPN communications protected by heavy encryption.

Think hard. Plan well. Then act.


When you gonna revolt, America?
"Even life-saving trade: 95,000 Americans are waiting for organ transplants. Thousands die while waiting. Legalizing the sale of organs would give people the choice of life, while allowing sellers to choose cash over an extra kidney."

--Soon they will be using affirmative action to ration these scarce resources.

Thanks John
"the Left arrived in Washington, excited about the wonderful things it will do to us"

All too true...


Liberals oppose choice i.e. Freedoms

As John Stossel points out Liberals have a long list of items that confict with choice and freedom.

It goes beyound school choice to healthcare choices and retirment and beyond.

As noted there is one area where liberals support unconditional choice. It involves the killing of unborn babies.

Thanks again, Mr. Stossel
This was a great article. I whole-heartedly agree. I just want to be let alone to live my life as I see fit. I want to be able to have dealings with people who also want to have dealings with me. I hate it when people act like they have a right to a certain job. I believe that an employer has the right to fire you for ANY reason, even if that reason is despicable. When I state this belief to some of my co-workers, I often get the response that the government has the right to stop an employer from discriminating against someone. I always say, 'by what authority?' Government does not have the moral authority to do anything that I as an individual do not have the right to do. I do not have the right to force anyone to hire someone, anyone, therefore my agent, the government, does not have this right. All collective rights, including government rights, derive from individual rights. You can not delegate a right which you do not have. If it is wrong for 1 person to do it, it is wrong for a bunch of people to do it. Until people stop thinking that force is an option to get their way, like a bunch of spoiled brats, this country will continue to decline into totalitarianism.

Just in Dusty Old Books
There is precious little liberty remaining in America, just varying degrees of statism. Classical Liberalism fell comatose during the French Revolution and died soon after Jefferson and Madison passed. It will not be resurrected in our lifetimes.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.