Isn't the greatest threat to American freedom, our government?

There is, of course, plenty of room to debate how great a threat our government is to our freedom, but it seems clear that it is the greatest threat.

Bill Clinton wrote:

''They took to the ultimate extreme an idea advocated in the months and years before the bombing by an increasingly vocal minority: the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government and that public servants do not protect our freedoms but abuse them.''

http://www.smh.com.au/world/clinton-warns-of-unhinged-extremists-on-home-soil-20100420-srof.html

I suppose it won't do much good, but still I would like to ask that if you think this question implies approval of the Oklahoma City bombing, you post your belief only once and then move on.

There is, of course, plenty of room to debate how great a threat our government is to our freedom, but it seems clear that it is the greatest threat.

We don't have enemy armies lined up along our borders poised to invade.

Terrorists are a real threat to our peace and way of life, but to our freedom?

No matter what you may think about large corporations, it's hard to see how they threaten our freedom or, in the alternative, how any such threat from them can be greater than that presented by our government.

Clinton's speech was simply another example of the Left trying to demonize the Right by associating it with violence and, ironically, bemoaning its demonization of the current government. If he was really concerned about the impact of inflammatory political rhetoric we would have heard him give a similar speech when Bush was president and left-wing protestors were dissenting vociferously or smashing windows in Seattle.

Nevertheless, even if we assume sincerity in the purpose of his speech, his premise is off the mark.

Nothing poses a greater threat, at this time in American history, to our freedom than our government, and this was the case when Bush was president and Clinton before him.

It the magnitude of this threat that drove the Founders to design the system of checks and balances that continue to protect our freedom.

That an American government, anytime soon, will make a full out run on depriving us of our freedom is, I believe, unlikely but certainly not out of the realm of possibilities. There are numerous examples throughout our history of our government crossing the line in this regard: beginning right out of the box with the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798, and continuing through Lincolns suspension of habeas corpus, Wilson’s Espionage and Sedition Acts, to perhaps the most flagrant example, FDR's internment of Japanese-American citizens.

Not surprisingly, at least two (that by Adams and Wilson) were clearly designed to stifle criticism of the government.

We should concern ourselves with the danger of violent extremists from both sides of the spectrum and from other lands, but they do not represent anything close to the threat to our freedom posed by our own government.

This is by no means a call for revolution or armed resistance, but a warning that the larger and more expansive our government, the larger the magnitude of the single greatest threat to our freedom.

The Greatest threat to American freedom is our crushing debts, the oppression of government comes second. Dealing with government is easier though, a simple revolution will do the job, quickly. Dealing with the debt problem will be much more difficult.

Do you not understand that a government revolution would involve an invalidation of previously held debt? And that our standing as the leader of the world would evaporate, along with about 4/5ths of the wealth of our nation?

Quote:

Do you not understand that a government revolution would involve an invalidation of previously held debt? And that our standing as the leader of the world would evaporate, along with about 4/5ths of the wealth of our nation?

Maybe "citizen revolt" would fit my meaning better. I am speaking of us raising up and yelling "ENOUGH!" at the polls and in public demonstration. I think it is time for those on the left like me to join the Tea Partiers on the right in concluding that overly big and overly coercive Government has become a problem more than a means to solutions.

I think it is time for those on the left like me to join the Tea Partiers on the right in concluding that overly big and overly coercive Government has become a problem more than a means to solutions.

If only the government hadn't stepped in when the banks were failing, we would all be free or at least have a lot more free time with 20-30% unemployment.

There is a hell of a good argument that by bailing out the banks this time (and not fixing the problems) that we have predetermined that we will in short order have an even more ruinous failure of the financial system.

It is highly unlikely that government has acted in our best long term interests, given that nothing was fixed, we loaded up on debt, and we have further weakened morale hazard.

There is a hell of a good argument that by bailing out the banks this time (and not fixing the problems) that we have predetermined that we will in short order have an even more ruinous failure of the financial system.

"If a single Republican is not willing to join with us,
there will be no Wall Street reform. The Republicans will have
killed Wall Street reform. I'm confident that's not what's
going to happen," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid

There is a hell of a good argument that by bailing out the banks this time (and not fixing the problems) that we have predetermined that we will in short order have an even more ruinous failure of the financial system.

Quote:

There is a hell of a good argument that by bailing out the banks this time (and not fixing the problems) that we have predetermined that we will in short order have an even more ruinous failure of the financial system.

There is currently legislation that will work to fix the problem.

There is currently legislation that will work to fix the problem