Daddy State

For years, conservatives have railed against liberals making America into a nanny state. And I've mostly agreed with them. I think the federal government is just too big and awkward to be used as a charity organization.

People measure charities by what percentage of each dollar actually gets used for the charity's projects and not for fundraising and overhead. I'd be interested in seeing what those percentages look like for programs the feds administer.

Good intentions don't mean good results.

But for the past few years, I've noticed that conservatives might still rail against the nanny state but many are embracing the daddy state.

I see the daddy state as a direct result of fear. So many people are so scared of the terrorists, crime and/or immigration that they are willing (almost anxious) to throw the constitution under the bus. They don't mind giving the executive branch the power to eavesdrop at will, arrest whomever they declare the enemy, detain without trial, torture, refuse accountability to congress. All for the illusion of security.

They are scared little children who are running to their daddy to protect them.

They just want the president to pat them on the head, tell them not too worry their little heads about it while the president just takes care of everything for them.

You can read the rationalizations these cowards use to feel good about trashing the constitution on sites like The Corner, Powerlineblog, Redstate and such. They like to portray themselves as gritty realist in the fight against global terror, but they are not.

The terrorists are a real threat to Americans, but not to America. We've taken on bigger and badder than these Islamic fools and we have won without scrapping the constitution or treating it as an anachronism that can only be brought out in good times.

I don't need a nanny state nor do I need a daddy state.