AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Your response to me, Foxfyre, was excellent and quite helpful! I'll think some more about the approach you recommend for saving our Constitutional Republic from Obama's abandonment of the rule of law. In particular, I want to understand the set and sequence of objectives (i.e., the step by step process) you have in mind for how to convince Americans there is a way other than impeachment to defeat Obama's abandonment of the rule of law.

I fear that if we focus on defeating Obama and the rest of the MALs in the 2010 and 2012 elections--instead of impeachment-- our attempted rescue will be too little and too late, even assuming a Reagan-like election victory margin. Too much of the opposition to Obama and the MALs is composed of people like the MALs seeking power instead of seeking justice.through the rule of law.

I quoted Cyclo exactly, so how can you or anyone think that I am making a leap in logic?

Does it bother you that I used his own words against him?

And if it does, why?
You arent involved, his words werent directed at you, and you are reacting over somethting that doesnt concern you.

Quote:

I did. Once again, you are Appealing to Extremes, MM. I didn't say the Constitution wasn't important, I said that the attitudes of those who wrote it really aren't that important.

It was those attitudes that determined how the constitution was written and WHY it was written.
If those arent important, then you fail to understand the significance of the constitution and how it affected the lives of the very men that wrote it.

I've been watching the polls and I believe it is having an effect because I do believe public support for universal health care, at least as the President proposes it, is steadily eroding.

High Public Support & A Sense of Urgency for Health Care Reform

The Diageo/Hotline Poll finds that 62% of voters support "the President enacting a major overhaul of the U.S. health care system," with 38% of voters strongly supporting a major overhaul.

For the most part, support for major reform is strong across the board, though there are differences in support based on partisan affiliation, age, and income levels.

Specifically, one-third (35%) of Republican voters, 64% of Independent voters, and 87% of Democratic voters support a major overhaul of health care.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,

We can find a cure for liberaltardation - yes me can.

Debra Law wrote:

President Obama is the president of the United States. Are you telling us that your theories, i.e. what produces a ruthless dictator, do not apply to the president of the United States? Are you now modifying your thesis and declaring that all your comparisons of Obama to Hitler were absolutely pointless?

I think okie's point is that Obama has all the makings of a dictator, but he won't become one because he is constrained by the American political system. In other words, okie contends that Obama won't be another Hitler, but that he'd like to be another Hitler.

spendius wrote:

Raking over old coals is nothing stuff. Mr Obama is no inchoate dictator. The future is more important than the past.

People that can think critically will make a correlation, spendius, and just alerting or changing the mind of one person might lead to more, so I think history is worth raking around in. I agree it seems like a fruitless pursuit, but at least it beats wasting time in other ways.

:"I'd like you, JM, to provide straightforward answers to two simple questions. Do you agree with Okie that all dictatorships are left-wing governments? More specifically, do you agree with Okie that Hitler and the NSDAP were left-wing? "

Re: okie(Post 1757659)
Thanks for your work on the subject. Your efforts are to be commended.
Quote:
I think such potential dictators with their inherent politics can only gain traction in a society that also has more of a preponderence of the mindset similar to that of the potential dictator. This mindset would include a general feeling of failure and personal feeling of powerlessness, unfairness, and resentment, coupled with an increased lack of faith in God or religion. This certainly matches up the situation in Germany in the early thirties. One of the realities that enabled Hitler was the terrible inflation that racked the country. The powers that be and, by political osmosis, the general public felt they were being royally abused by those countries that forced Germany to sign the Treaty of Versailles whereas Germany had to pay reparations to the winners. But the German leaders felt that the best way to get out from under this was to pay this "debt" with Deutsch Marks that were greatly devalued by inflation which they then arranged to do. The inflation greatly increased popular resentment, this was then coupled with the generally held believe that an unpatriotic public contributed to Germany's defeat in WW I. This, of course, is where the Jews come in. When times are tough blame the Jews! It was everybody but the Germans' fault. It was an atmosphere that allowed Hitler to gain power legitimately.

However, your point of a public ripe for the plucking is right on. Stalin's case, I think is somewhat different. The Russian people knew nothing but this type of leader, whether Czar or General Secretary of the Communist Party, both resulted in the same thing when it came to political realities for the Russian serfs, uh, citizens. I see Saddam in the same light. Both subscribed to the concept that might is right (Same thing for Iran's leaders but that is another subject). Castro, Pol Pot, and Mao may have started out thinking that their ideas were exceptionally insightful and right but they then found that in order to carry out these insights to fruition they must stay in power but in order to stay in power...well you know that story.

Generally, one could say that a complacent public is necessary for a dictatorship to survive but, arguably, the most interesting exception to most modern dictator ships is not Hitler but that of the Neo-Dictator Hugo Chavez. We see a South American democracy deteriorating into dictatorship why? Fareed Zakaria in his book "The Future of Freedom" makes an excellent case for a wealthy and propertied middle class as opposed to a rent seeking populace. The reason is simple and extremely relevant to, I think, what may be your implied concern regarding what is happening to America presently. You make an argument for stable and traditional families and I agree this is certainly a big part of it. But, without detracting from that importance, Zakaria points to the juxtaposition of the overall economic situation in the Oil rich Middle Eastern states and that of Western Democracies. Simply put, such Middle Eastern citizens find their sustenance from the state (oil revenues). In the Western Democracies the state gets its sustenance from the people in the middle class via taxes. Indeed, from those people in the middle class that are making and selling stuff. Their 'Industry' (to use the Founder's term) supports the state. This is why our American founders emphasized free commerce for the people and on that basis that the government stems from and is subserviant to the people. [In Hamilton's words: "... If he federal government ...[oversteps its authority] ...the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution... "(FED Papers No.33)] Overall, when these economics are viewed globally those in the Middle Eastern Oil states, overall, get their sustenance from the middle class of the Western Democracies plus, now, that of China and India that purchase such resources from the those Middle Eastern states.

This is the inherent danger to America today. When us conservatives use the term "The American Way" it is a code word for personal hard work, intellectual excellence, saving, accumulation of wealth, and the freedom to do so within the law. The current President has raised concerns of those who cherish such American values. He is one who wants the state to have more power over individuals, that much is clear from his statements and actions. It remains to be seen whether he has the complacent public that allows such goals to come to fruition. I feel the mid terms in 2010 will reveal this. But if the American government gains more power to provide for its charges, those citizens lose an equal amount of freedom in the bargain.

As for yourQuote:
:"One final observation. I would assert here that when people vote for a candidate, a look at their "personal" lives, their family relationships, their moral beliefs, is not only good and proper, but it is paramount to making good choices in our leaders. It is at least as important as their public stances on issues, probably more so. Usually one follows the other, but not always. The troubling part to this subject is when cultural morality is on the downward slide and families are increasingly dysfunctional, the risk of electing dysfunctional and dangerous personalities increases accordingly. "

Implicit in this is a method for the people to get such information. Many assert that there was little of this in our last presidential election RE Obama. Was there a concerted effort on the part of the press to not jeopardize Obama's chances? Perhaps, but there were many situations in Chicago real estate, church pastors, U.S. Senate votes and speeches and encounters with "Joe the Plumber" plus his campaign rhetoric that gave information to the populace.

But remember, 50% of those that work in the U.S. don’t pay any Federal Income Taxes and many of those qualify for the EIC (Earned Income Credit) which actually gives them money (from other taxpayers). This doesn't even account for those generations of American citizens that don't work at all and receive welfare payments and medical benefits which many, who do work, don’t. This demonstrates that a significant proportion of the populace is rent seeking and depend on the state for their very existence. More citizens receive payouts from the state then pay into such funds. Sound familiar?

Thanks for your invitation.

JM

"What we were doing in this country were some of the things that were being done in Russia and even some of the things that were being done under Hitler in Germany, But we were doing them in an orderly way". There was an enormous bipartisan consensus that the Depression required dictatorial and fascistic policies to defeat it."

"But leaving that aside, what kind of idiocy leads you to suggest that one would say that two people pursue identical political policies and have identical political goals, but one does not mean that the result would be identical fanatical actions?"

Please educate me about when not holding perpetrators of crimes accountable, nonetheless accomplished the end, or even diminishment, of those crimes.

So, now that it's pretty clear that torture was authorized at the highest levels and it was more than a few bad apples, and since we've prosecuted some of those "bad apples" for essentially following orders, should we now prosecute the people who authorized torture?

Cycloptichorn asked:"Are you afraid to simply answer the question? You spent 10 times the amount of time it would have taken, avoiding doing so."

I must apologize I missed the question you asked and I did search for it. Would you please be so kind as to repost? Optional question: What metrics did you use to so determine the time factor you refer to?

JM

:"I used to think James Morrison had half a brain....he removed all doubt. "