Boston Baloney

Forty three years ago, a young man from Massachusetts, a war hero and, late, a United States Senator, approached the podium to deliver his first inaugural address as President of the United States.

To this observer, the text and delivery of that inaugural – and many of Kennedy’s speeches – still raise goose bumps. Exhorting the people – explicitly and unabashedly invoking the name of God – not only of the country, but of the world, to engage in the struggle for human freedom and against tyranny, he challenged us to make the world a better place. It’s stirring, invigorating oratory.

Of course, Kennedy’s most memorable expression runs:

“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.”

Comes now another Massachusetts senator, seeking the nomination of Kennedy’s Party. And how do his supporters seek the support of the American people?

With bribes.

Blair MacInnes – a Kerry supporter and convention delegate – exemplifies this tactic. Whatever your particular desire, Kerry will spend more on it. And he’ll send the bill to your neighbor.

A trip to the Kerry website is truly depressing. Repeatedly, the campaign promises to increase goodies to a particular segment of the population at the expense of another, pitting one group against another. The recurring theme is that spending is too low because those horrible, awful “rich” folks got to keep more of the money which rightfully belongs to government.

Can you IMAGINE John Kennedy running on a platform like that? Can you IMAGINE that the present Kennedy iteration – Teddy – giving that same speech? His tongue would turn to stone.

Kerry turns the famous quote precisely around: “My fellow Americans, ask not what you can do for your county, ask, instead, ‘what’s in it for me?’”

Whereas Kennedy understood that a rising tide lifts all boats – he supported huge tax cuts for those evil rich folks – Kerry believes that the only way the middle class can prosper is by beggaring “the wealthy”, precisely the folks who create jobs and invest. Whereas Kennedy created government programs like the Peace Corps, to encourage volunteers, Kerry would create programs which foster a sense of entitlement.

It’s infuriating to hear such silliness passed off as serious policy. And, from the perspective of a New Jersey resident, it’s downright scary. We, after all, are precisely those “rich” people Kerry loves to hate; we’ll take a huge tax hit to pay for these new programs, and the benefits will flow to people in Mississippi. Already, each and every New Jersey resident pays $2500 more per year than we get back in federal services. Kerry expressly promises to make things worse.

Any New Jersey resident who votes for Kerry qualifies as an economic masochist.

But, much more pernicious, the message of the campaign is profoundly corrupting to the very spirit of America. It encourages the people to view government as nothing more than an engine through which they can expropriate their neighbor’s money. (Paging Governor McGreevey) Kerry’s entire campaign can be summarized very simply as follows:

“If you vote for me, I’ll take your neighbor’s money, and give it to you.”

(All the more interesting is that his family, with a few billion in assets, paid only about $5 million in taxes, indicating either a miserable rate of return – unlikely – or the fact that this champion of higher taxes on “the rich” is in no hurry to pay them himself)

Benjamin Franklin once wrote that: “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” He’s right. Government does not exist to rob Peter to pay Paul, even if there are considerably more Pauls who vote. A virtuous people does not approach government with its collective hand out. A virtuous political party does not base it’s entire political philosophy upon envy.

A virtuous people, worthy of freedom and capable of sustaining a republic, asks not, “where’s mine?, but “how can I help?” Virtuous people take responsibility for their own actions and don’t believe that their neighbor owes them a living, a house, a college education, subsidized child care, or the like. A virtuous electorate cannot be tempted with bribes; it understands that the government large enough and powerful enough to give them everything they want is also large and powerful enough to take it all away. All it needs to do is declare them “rich”.

Kennedy’s rhetoric exhorted us to greatness, challenging us to work for greater freedom, urging that we are part of an enterprise far greater than ourselves. Kerry challenges us, in effect, to look out for Number One, to do unto others “because we can”. Kennedy understood that we’re all in this together and must work as one. Kerry divides us into discrete groups, pitting one against another, hoping to benefit a few more people than he shafts and, thereby, win an election. Kennedy appealed to the better angels of our nature; Kerry appeals to our avarice. Kennedy united; Kerry divides.

The stirring rhetoric we’ll hear this week is that we would be collectively doing a lot better if some of us were governmentally compelled to do a bit worse. That’s baloney. It’s degrading. It’s destructive of freedom. It’s corrupting. A virtuous people would reject it categorically.