Well now, just how many of those nuts would run around saying that is what they want to do to all and sundry? If I were contemplating something drastic, it would be with people I trust and of like mind, not some incredible number of casual associates that I sometimes run with.
Try going to some leftist websites and, if you can stand it, dwell there for a week or so, to pick up on just what these moonbats are contemplating. I can name off-hand about 25 of these by their nicknames, because I have debated them and drawn them out, despite the abuse that goes with that territory. Each of them had their own sites too. It is (or was) quite a network, that I would guess catered to many hundreds or thousands, which was a complete shock to me. Some of the names were: "justinj", "JMF", and "Anonymous"(of course!).
One site of this ilk has shut down, because the owner seems to have run out of juice. This was Warblogging, owned by "George Paine". His daily hits were in the hundreds, and a few allied sites such as "Truthout" hit over a thousand per day. It came out that Paine had a real job writing for the editorial page of the Christian Science Monitor at that time.
Even allowing for the tendency for people to go overboard when they are protected by false names on the web, I still was totally convinced of their dedication to very radical change in the US.
After all, it doesn't take a majority to effect major changes in a society. It doesn't take even 10% if they can worm themselves into key positions while disguising their true intentions, which was the case in Russia.Comment Posted By mannning On 17.02.2009 @ 11:20
Does anyone remember the Democratic outcry for doing away with the Electorial College? I believe it was none other than Hillary Clinton that voiced this challenge to the Constitution, because she wanted direct elections that would favor the Dems.
Does anyone remember Justice Kennedy's remarks about seeking guidance from European legal practices in order to make decisions here in the US? I suppose he is now well-versed in Sharia Law...
Has anyone here read the three Humanist Manifestos and parsed them line by line?
Over 50 Congressmen, apparently all Democrats, have signed up to this Secular Humanism direction that strongly pushes for an international government and the relaxation of our sovereignty in favor of UN rule, among other less-well disguised intentions.
How about reinstalling the so-called Fairness Doctrine to be the law? Feinstein, Pelosi and others have championed that idea in order to shut the rightwing talk shows down. Watch for it!
It was Franklin that said..."you have a Republic, if you can keep it!"
I do not see these ideas, and many more of similar intent from the left, to be simply "different" and acceptable kinds of change.Comment Posted By mannning On 16.02.2009 @ 22:01
Let us separate carefully those leftists that love our nation, however "differently", and want an acceptable range of changes, from those that want to spark a revolution along Marxist lines, or to install socialism as an interim step, either of which is completely unacceptable.
I believe the term anti-American is most correct for those who would destroy our Republic.Comment Posted By mannning On 16.02.2009 @ 20:59
Shall we play patriot games? Was your war worse than mine? I doubt it. Want to have a medal contest, Shaun? You would lose.
What makes one anti-American is not simply differing views, but those differing views that actually harm, or have serious potential for harm to the nation. Views such as making strained imterpretations of the Constitution to achieve some end, such as taking away guns from the public. or to prevent the Ten Commandments from being displayed, or the take "under God" from the Pledge, in order to further secularize the nation and underdcut and marginalize our Christian heritage to suit a few.
Or to spend our tax dollars in wild and unwise ways (see Stumulus), or to influence directly the mortgage industry to go way out on a limb to finance subprime mortgages that has become the trigger for our current financial disaster, or, as Clinton did, to reduce the armed forces by about 40% in order to have money for pork projects, which left us terribly undermanned a few years later when we needed the power.
Or, to diddle as a rank amateur with dangerous regimes such as Iran, even behind the President's back, during tense times that will only grow worse now because of the show of what Islam considers to be weakness.
Or, to furiously write new Executive Orders that are not transparent to the public and that materially change the policies of the nation in serious matters without open discussion as was promised.
It is a long litany, and I have not really gotten started, but it adds up to a transformation of our nation into something other than was intended and fought for by generations of my ancestors and the entire citizenry. That is anti-American!
This I resent deeply.
I draw the line at "anti-American" for the simple reason that it implies a hatred of this country. Very few on the left actually hate America. As I have pointed out on several occassions (find the link around the 4th of July this year) the left loves America in a different way than the right. But America needs both the left's loving America so much they wish to improve her and fix her faults with the right's arguably more unquestioning love. We are two sides of the same coin and I wish more on both sides saw it that way.
ed.Comment Posted By mannning On 16.02.2009 @ 13:43
You appear to have fallen into the trap of ignoring the social and individual changes that have afflicted our society over the past 50 years that are terribly damaging to conservative prospects.
Rather than writing a book to support this thesis, I will cite just a few of the changes:
1) Education has stultified and narrowed its scope drastically at the direction of the Dewey liberals and radical professors. We have not prepared whole generations for effective citizenship in a Republic that is fundamentally conservative in its Constitutional origin.
2) Religion has become less and less influential in the lives of Americans, perhaps as the churches have changed their outlook radically in an effort to stay relevant to new generations of prospective parishioners that appear to be more hedonistic, more undisciplined, and more ignorant, or else, more activist and disruptive non-believers.
3) The electorate has been decidedly augmented with minorities that are gaining significant political power and influence, quite often without a very strong orientation toward American values, language and mores.
4) Liberals have been singing their laissez faire, hedonistic and anti-American song for the same 50 years, raising the ideas of the communist and socialist parties of the past with new verbiage, new financing, and new power. Progressives of today were spawned by those discredited ideologies, and are enchanted by the idea of a new international order. The attack on our moral fiber, the diminution of marriage, the sanctity of life, the explosion of porn, and the fact that 60% of our children are now born into a single-parent household, speaks to the, perhaps unintentional—perhaps not--, net effect of liberal consequences on the public. Look to the program of the ACLU for proof.
5) Our courts have become the legislators of last resort, and have collectively decided to be the writers of the new constitution, word and sentence at a time.
All of the above, and other aspects that I have not included, such as the influence of militant pacifism, leads me to believe that our public is losing its way under the serious challenges we face, so that they easily fall under the progressive spell. This is because of the attraction of a forgiving government—forgiving of taxes, forgiving of sexual mistakes; forgiving of killing babies; forgiving of the need to work; avoidance of war and death; and ever claiming to be the champion of the little man.
Into this environment comes the conservative, who believes in self-reliance, individual responsibility, right-sized and efficient government, maximizing of freedom and liberty, and all the rest of conservative ideology. It is apparent that a large percentage of the citizenry will not be enamored of this litany, no matter how it is promoted. Where is the payoff to them for becoming more civilized and more disciplined? Why should they?
For the conservative movement, does it have to run hard to catch up with this uncivilized crowd in order to lead it? What in the world does that mean? Should the movement throw its principles into the can in order to gain power? If so, the movement is becoming liberal-lite, and therefore irrelevant.
It is very possible that we conservatives are indeed irrelevant to the majority body politic of today, because it isn’t a majority body politic that is amenable to conservatism. Our principles are a very hard sell to them.
The question, then, is what must we do in such a situation?Comment Posted By mannning On 15.02.2009 @ 21:59
oops. nearlyComment Posted By mannning On 14.02.2009 @ 13:18
How is it that we can go further into debt to get out of far, far larger debt that is itself growing at a furious pace? We are indeed in Alice and Wonderland times.
Maybe the psychology is for the government to spend, spend, spend, till the public catches on and says: "What the hell, I will go spend, spend, spend, too? My money will never again be worth neasrly as much as it is right now!"Comment Posted By mannning On 14.02.2009 @ 13:17
OK, but it is not the whole show.Comment Posted By mannning On 14.02.2009 @ 13:05
An excellent post, worthy of being published in all of the media, but I doubt it will go very far there. Liberal editors have the first cut.
Knowing as I do what happens when the government initiates any kind of building project, we can confidently forecast that the current 787 billion dollar authorization will grow by overruns to the tune of at least another 400 billion dollars in the next 4 to 8 years. One could also project that the "tax credit payments" to people that do not pay taxes will grow as well by double in a short time.
The Navy practiced the art for years of selling Congress on their need for a new set of buildings for a base or two, then building them to the halfway point, usually minus the roof, and then going back to Congress for more money in a few years, pleading that the buildings simply had to be finished, or there would be a total waste...
Depression government economics at work!Comment Posted By mannning On 14.02.2009 @ 11:17
The link to the LSU listing of government entities is:
http://www.lib.lsu.edu/gov/index.htmlComment Posted By mannning On 9.02.2009 @ 14:03