By Selwyn Duke
In all my life I have never seen such intense emotion surrounding a leader as that evoked by Barack Obama. Even Ronald Reagan, the Gipper himself, didn’t enjoy the kind of prostration of the will offered to the president-elect by hordes of followers. Yet, while people the world over are imbued with “hope” and chant Obama’s slogan “Yes, we can!” – for instance, the French are using their translation of it, “Oui, nous pouvons!” – some of the intense emotion is of a very different species.
It is fear.
In all my life I have never seen an American politician who could make so many Americans’ blood run cold. Some may mention the left’s feelings regarding Reagan or President Bush, but there is no equivalency. For all of leftists’ bluster and melodrama, they weren’t afraid of those men as much as they, well, just hated them. Sure, leftist ideologues said those two Republicans were scary, but the same people also said that each one was both dumb and Machiavellian. Hatred is an emotion, and emotion isn’t logical; it just conjures up whatever feels right at the moment.
In Obama’s case, however, I sense a real, palpable, go-white-in-the-face fear akin to what might be evident in someone who has a gun put to his head or believes he has seen a demon. I know for instance, a stout-hearted man of rough-hewn breeding and my political persuasion who has said about the impending changing of the guard, “I’m afraid.”
However, he is a right-winger like me, and just as with the leftist ideologues who “feared” Reagan and Bush, we aren’t exactly a representative sample of America.
But this is what is truly, well, scary. I have seen this fear not just in rightist politics wonks but also in people who are not in the habit of troubling much over politics at all. For example, I was surprised recently when a woman I know – someone who could easily abide by the injunction, “Never discuss religion or politics” – said in a most sober fashion that she was thinking of leaving the country. Then there is an elderly Jewish gentleman of my acquaintance who lived through WWII; this man could be described as almost apolitical, was probably more apt to vote Democrat than Republican and isn’t given to issuing political opinion, let alone hyperbole. Yet when someone else broached the subject of Obama’s legions of fawning admirers, he broke his pattern and interjected, “This is like what happened with Hitler. . . .”
Then consider this statement printed a couple of months ago:
“Big Brother had nothing on the Obamas. They plan to herd American youth into government-funded reeducation camps where they'll be brainwashed into thinking America is a racist, oppressive place in need of ‘social change.’”
Is this the rambling of some right-wing site occupying the dark recesses of the Web or a radical on a soapbox? I mean, after all, it’s not the kind of thing you read in the New York Times. Actually, it’s excerpted from a September 4 piece in Investor’s Business Daily (IBD), a mainstream paper of great repute.
Are all these people delusional? Are they simply stuck in time and afraid of change?
Maybe it’s that they have some idea what that change will be.
Fear can certainly be and often is irrational. Yet, generally speaking, the most real fear comes from real threats. A ghost story may scare a child, but not nearly as much as if he actually sees a ghost. Imagining what it’s like to have a gun to your head may be scary, but not as much so as if you feel cold, blued steel pressed against your temple. And I sense real fear.
What is there to be afraid of? A good place to start is with the content of the IBD story cited earlier.
Most of us have heard Obama state that “We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the military. This alone is enough to send shivers up an informed spine, but it gets even worse when you hear the specifics. Obama intends to use a radical activist group he helped found called “Public Allies” as the model for, as IBD puts it, “. . . his Orwellian program, ‘Universal Voluntary Public Service.’”
IBD reports on the inducements used to entice young people into this national service corps and its true aim:
. . . they'll get a monthly stipend of up to $1,800, plus paid health and child care. They also get a post-service education award of $4,725 that can be used to pay off past student loans or fund future education.
But its real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about ‘social change’ through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation — the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul "The Red" Alinsky.
As bad as this sounds, I believe the reality will be far worse. I’ll explain where I think this will lead, but first we must understand a collective psychological phenomenon that is now apparent.
When Abraham in the Bible was prepared to obey God’s command and sacrifice his son Isaac on Mount Moriah, it was, and this may shock some, understandable. God is perfect and the author of morality, and while we may not always understand His ways, the Divine Mind always knows what is best. So the story is a lesson of faith and trust in God. God cannot be wrong. You don’t question God.
Whether you have faith or not, it’s easy enough to grasp that such deference is understandable when talking about a perfect, divine being. But it’s downright dangerous when applied to a human being. Any human being.
Unfortunately, while the deific monikers applied to Obama such as “The One” or “The Messiah” have become grist for comedians, humorists and just plain old wise-guys, they’re no laughing matter. They reflect a real spirit that has imbued millions, and this is why far scarier than Obama are his followers. They have deified the man, and you don’t question your god. I truly believe that just as many Germans followed Hitler over the precipice during WWII, there are many Americans today who would follow Obama unquestioningly, unthinkingly, unknowingly – into the fires of Hell.
If this sounds as laughable as deific labels, know that it isn’t radical to claim that a continually-recycling historical pattern will manifest itself again and can do so here; radical is to imply that within American borders the laws of man’s nature are somehow suspended. In nature (not culture), Americans are no different from the people who followed Hitler, Mussolini, Ayatollah Khomeini, Pol Pot or Lenin. The tendency to deify leaders is universal.
With this understanding, I’ll now give you my prediction as to how Obama’s Universal Voluntary Public Service program will evolve.
With his oratorical skills and a complicit media, the president-elect will be able to sell this scheme with talk about security, equality and liberating the downtrodden. “It’s the best way to combat crime, hopelessness and a lack of opportunity in the inner city,” he will say. “And I know this well from my days as a community organizer on Chicago’s mean streets.” He will tout how it provides health care, education and skills to the have-nots, and his media-oiled silver tongue’s salesmanship will prevail. It will be sold with a low-end price tag, and his fellow-traveler controlled Houses will echo the message and deliver the votes. Of course, just like Social Security and a trove of other government programs, its cost will make a mockery of predictions. But Uncle Sam’s budget projections aren’t designed for budgets, but for marketing.
As always happens with such groups, program members will eventually be identified with some colloquial and catchy label. I can’t tell you what it will be, only that it won’t be Brownshirts or Blackshirts. And the official name of the program itself may even be changed a few years hence.
As with the Public Allies program, members will have to attend seminars and “retreats” where they will be indoctrinated with leftist ideology. Aside from learning how America is a “racist and “sexist” country, they will be taught that she is also ridden with “heterosexism,” which, IBD writes, “. . . a Public Allies training seminar in Chicago describes as a negative byproduct of ‘capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy and male-dominated privilege.’” They will be taught that these evils can never be vanquished until every last vestige of traditional America is utterly destroyed.
The pressure to conform will be immense, as it always is in politically-correct entities. The corps will have a huge core of true believers, who will act as ideological hammers. They will preach diversity but practice conformity.
Just like Public Allies, this program may be birthed primarily in the inner cities. That is where Obama’s main support is, and, as stated before, he will claim this is where the corps’ help is needed most. It will then be empowered to do “social good,” which could mean anything from helping at soup kitchens to recruiting those ripe for indoctrination to forming some kind of neighborhood crime watch. As for the last task, though, given the corps’ ideology and the fact that it will be drawing members from high-crime areas initially, I expect it to contain a not insignificant criminal element. It will be corrupt from the get-go and may even assume the character of an organized crime syndicate.
But its “security” mandate will be chilling. In the name of combating garden-variety crime and, more specifically, terrorism, who knows what powers the corps will be granted? Will they one day help enforce an order to seize firearms, if not via direct action then through information gathering? I can’t know exactly, but I do know the powers will be misused.
Over time, the program may be expanded to include a corps for even younger adolescents, perhaps starting at age 13 or 14. As before, I can’t tell you exactly what it will be called, but it won’t be “The Obama Youth” – not officially, anyway. And, certainly by this time, joining it will be the thing the “cool” kids do, sort of like the Boy Scouts’ evil twin.
Then, the result may be that we will have, to use John Edwards’ terminology, “two Americas”: Those who belong to the corps and those who don’t. But I think I know which of the two will be more formidable. Remember when the student thugs at Columbia University stormed a stage to stop Minutemen representatives from speaking? Similar things have happened at colleges throughout the country, and they give us a glimpse into the character of the corps. Just picture the same fascist-minded bullies, only more organized, more numerous, even more ideological and far, far bolder. And many authorities in the nation may tolerate their intimidation with a wink and a nod.
We should also take note of the program’s name, Universal Voluntary Public Service. One of the definitions of “universal” is, “affecting, concerning, or involving all [emphasis mine].” And I suspect the word most likely to be dropped from the name eventually is not “universal” but “voluntary.”
Of course, they don’t call me the Amazing Kreskin. I’m no soothsayer and I could be wrong about many of the details I provided. But the fear is real and the historical allusions are valid.
Speaking of which, Georgia Congressman Paul Broun recently addressed the program and exhibited both fear and a grasp of history, saying:
"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did. When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."
Of course, many will nevertheless say that such concerns are but the musings of the tin-foil hat crowd. But such scoffing is par for the course. As Professor Manfred Weidhorn of Yeshiva University wrote:
. . . even if you are prescient enough to observe oncoming evils, you are prevented from acting precisely because other people, being normal, lack your prescience. They therefore see you, rather than the evil person, as the deluded or warmongering malevolent soul. When Churchill warned about Hitler in the 1930s, many people became more upset with Churchill than with Hitler. The anomaly is that the prophet has therefore to wait for the evil to manifest itself and thereby to make everyone else see things the prophet’s way. But by then the chance to do anything may be gone.
So there is an answer for those who would say “You’ve thoroughly Godwinned yourself, Duke.” If you bristle at the comparison and don’t want to wear the shoe, then the onus is on you to be vigilant, to make sure it never, ever fits.
© 2008 Selwyn Duke -- All Rights Reserved
There's not more coming; that last part should've been deleted.
Posted by: Jason | November 19, 2008 at 09:48 AM
Martin, is absolutely right and I agree with him wholeheartedly. First off Jason, this is a representative Republic NOT a democracy. We vote for stooges to represent us and deal with the minutia of legislation. We don’t personally vote on every bill ourselves. Guess they didn’t explain that in school. Abe Lincoln said ‘voting should be reserved for those who bear the government’s burden’ (loose quote, couldn’t find the exact more eloquent one but if necessary I will). He also said “the constitution is not a suicide pact”. What burden to those welfare queens and entitlements leeches bear? How hard is it to go to the welfare office fill up papers, stay home, birth more dependant to increase their free ride, live in squalor and be happy like a pig rolling in its own s**t. Why should those people be allowed to continually vote for the party that will reward their laziness with a new entitlement that’s piggybacked off people who actually made the effort to earn a living? They shouldn’t vote themselves a raise off my back and yours. That’s not charity that’s a crime to lock them into state of dependency and laziness for their lifetime. Do you enjoy paying 35-55% of your income to your government and have them smack you in the face and say ‘gimme more sucka!
From my cold dead hand Obama. FROM MY COLD DEAD HAND.
Posted by: HC | November 19, 2008 at 11:59 AM
One more thing I missed Jason, did you really lament the fact that we complain islamic terrorists were given due process by the Supreme schmucks? Due process in America is for Americans pal, not for islamic terrorists from Afghanistan & Iraq that want to kill you or convert you, cut your throat and chant to alla. With today's mentality we would have lost WWII. Wake up for crying out loud. Watch the Nick Berg beheading again in case you're confused about our enemy.
Posted by: HC | November 19, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Yes, we vote for people to represent US, the constituents. You may also be familiar, however with state and local issues which are on the ballot for the voting public. So, both things exist. Again, you with the smarmy "Guess they didn't explain that in school" comment. In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative. We're not in Lincoln's era anymore. Hence the oft repeated phrase "we're spreading democracy" in different areas of the world! When it comes to voting, let's take the other end of the spectrum view. If ONLY rich landowners were allowed to vote, for example, how many new taxes, or tax increases do you really think would ever become reality. Taxes are necessary. Unpleasant, perhaps, but necessary. Our huge infrastructure in this country needs rebuilding, just as one example. I'm not suggesting a welfare state, or perpetuating that type of system. Welfare has been greatly reduced in recent years, and that's okay. However, if you want to reduce crime and reduce dependence on ANY assistance programs, one has to reduce the poverty rate and provide EDUCATIONAL access. Many people in these low income areas see nothing but misery and drugs and death all around them. Put anyone in that environment, and it's not likely nor easy for them to break out of that cycle. There must be opportunities, and I'm not talking about McDonald's, at a wage which you might be able to survive on, but certainly can't thrive on (you try it -- work up a budget).
Criminals of any type (terrorists or otherwise), should most definitely be dealt with severely and I'm not saying otherwise. What I am saying is, that the evidence needs to be there, and no one should be railroaded in any type of kangaroo court. What if you were on vacation, and were unjustly, accused of some crime? Would you just want them to throw you in jail and throw away the key with no proper evidence, no trial, etc? I'm not saying it's a nice world out there. I'm not saying everyone is our friend. Clearly this is not the case. I'm all for aggressive attacks and/or wars when and where necessary. Now, having said that, I have a question: Do you think we made the right decision in the FIRST place to go into Iraq, or do you think that was the wrong decision and the wrong country? I'm not suggesting a quick pull out, because now that we're there, we need to plan and really think things through so that it's not an even bigger mess. However, do you think that we went into the right country, or the wrong one? Do you think it was based on limited, or poor intelligence at the time? Sometimes call for swift and drastic and severe actions, and others don't. I think we've squandered an INCREDIBLE amount of people AND resources in Iraq. And tell me, what EXACTLY did WE get out of it? Did we apprehend large numbers of important terrorists? Did we thwart and destroy weapons of mass destruction? What was our purpose and did we achieve it? I support continuing now, because it's too late, but I think a HUGE ERROR was committed by going there in the first place.
I truly do think you're freaked out because a black man was elected, and you're going to fixate on anything and everything negative you can possibly find, whether it's the truth or not; whether it's one line, taken out of context, or something entirely made up.
You seem pretty xenophobic to me. Have you had some bad experiences personally with people with different backgrounds, and now you are feeling particularly threatened? I'm just curious. I could be way off base.
We have different beliefs (clearly), but that doesn't mean I don't love my country, and it doesn't mean I'm not patriotic, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm unintelligent or didn't go to school. You may want to believe that, but trust me, it's not the case. What I'm saying is, just because I think or believe differently, it does NOT make me a dolt, anymore than it makes you one. We're passionate, and view different facets of things, and from different angles due to background, upbringing, experience, and environment.
Posted by: Jason | November 19, 2008 at 01:56 PM
When all else fails just whip out the ol’ race card and insinuate the other side is racist. How convenient, typical, and predicable. It’s not a black and white thing, it’s a right and wrong thing. The old line of accusing the other side of being racist when they disagree is getting tired and people are not going to fall for it forever. Abe Lincoln said “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” His words and wisdom are timeless and can be applied to all generations. I have no problems with blacks and actually wish Alan Keyes was President. The problems of the inner city are perpetuated by the inner city i.e. cultural suicide, broken family structure, and corrupt demagogues like sharkton and jessie “shake em’ down” hijackson, as beautifully articulated by Booker T. Washington in 1911: “There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do do not want to lose their jobs.” How else do you explain the phenomenal academic achievement by Asians in America from the inner city other than by cultural upbringing, strong family structure, and emphasis on discipline? Don’t see too many Asians loitering the streets looking to swipe ipods from other kids while their pants hang around their ankles, with underwear sticking out, red/blue handkerchiefs/bandannas, and gangsta music pumping. Regarding terrorists, there’s lovely places vacation spots all over the middle east that you can go sunbathing with your AK 47 like Syria or Beirut. Don’t feel too bad for them we have a new AG that already has a record of giving amnesty to terrorists. I respectfully disagree with you but what’s great about this county is that I will always defend your right to speak your mind to the bitter end, as long as you help defend mine. Though, that doesn’t look promising with the so-called Fairness doctrine waiting right around the corner to muzzle the Right and free speech.
Do not go silent into that good night rage rage against the dying of the light. From my cold dead hand Obama. From my cold dead hand.
Posted by: HC | November 19, 2008 at 11:45 PM
Just so you know, I wasn't trying to play a race card, as you seem to think. I even said "I could be way off base."
I totally agree that the the loss of family structure has added to the many problems citizens in low income areas have. Yes, Asians have an entirely different culture, and also have a lower percentage of single parent homes. I think that even when you have a single parent who's a good parent, it's still very difficult. You might have someone struggling to "make it" working at a job, maybe even going to school, and also trying to be a parent. However, without HELP, it may be difficult to impossible to provide the necessary structure and discipline for their children. If they're working, they can't be there all the time to provide these needed things. This is where assistance with daycare, or after school programs, or mentoring programs come into play (or rather, often they don't, and that's part of the problem). If a single parent gains employment, and gets off of public assistance, then they should somehow be able to come out ahead, both when it comes to family and also finances. If not, the motivation to do so is low.
I suggest the following: reduce poverty; increase early childhood education (headstart for example--get them EARLY and increase parent involvement); provide either daycare or vouchers to help single parents in particular; have drug treatment programs more widely available, particularly in drug ridden areas; teach sex education and provide birth control (teaching abstinence will not work, whether in the ghetto or in suburbia); improve schools (this is a tough one, and applies nationwide--I don't simply mean throw money at them either--REALLY FIX THEM, and I don't have the solution); provide more and better opportunities for higher education to those who want them; provide REAL opportunities for rehabilitation and education in prisons (no, prison shouldn't be a country club, but it shouldn't be a warehouse either, with people coming out the same or worse then when they went in). These are a few ideas. The last one is important, as the vast majority of people in jails and prisons WILL be released at some point. How do you feel about the drug war and the prison industrial complex in general? I feel that again, much of it is a HUGE waste of money. Yes, people commit crimes and yes we need prisons; do you think it's out of control as I do, or not? Just curious.
Education, education, education. Well, and a few other things. Can we agree at least that poverty, drugs and crime are still huge problems in this country that we would both like to see lessened?
Thank you and please don't worry about your gun(s) as much as you are; nobody wants your hand to be dead or cold. :-)
Posted by: Jason | November 20, 2008 at 10:04 AM
Jason, I don't mean this in a bad way, but how old are you? You just sound like a starry eyed kid who still believes in the tooth fairy or at least the government fairy. It seems like you take everything at face value because you believe what you've been told. Obama isn't honest. Some of the dems have said straight out that they'd like to seize all guns. If you don't think Obama feels the same I have a bridge to sell you.
Posted by: Martin | November 20, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Jason,
When reading your post I was going to ask the same question as Martin. You appear to be intelligent which is different than intellectual or articulate (not saying you are not those either). I have a hunch you are in your late 20s and have no, or very young kids. If I was a betting man I would say by the time you are 30 you will consider yourself a conservative. You have a grasp on personal responsibility and the value of family so I believe you will come around.
We older folks have perhaps a bit more life experience to build the skepticism we often display fervently. We are very critical of any government growth. Almost every government agency with exception of the military (that one is debatable) could be better served by the private sector...ESPECIALY EDUCATION! I will skip the rant on the daily conditioning camps we call public schools for now. Those of use who, for decades, have watched increased government involvement lead to greater system failure are at a minimum of the belief that the "Obama civilian security force" will be another tape worm on the gut of the taxpayer, at best. And at worst such an organization could morph itself into an American SS. Even recent history gives us reason to be on guard. Even if Obama is a harmless little fuzz ball that just wants to buy the world a Coke, do not be fooled! There are people that will see this infant SS as an opportunity to promote an agenda far outside the designs of our Constitution.
Ayn Rand gave us a warning, "Every major horror of history was committed in the name of an altruistic motive." Think about it...take inventory of the genesis of all of the inhumanities.
We do not need a Civilian force of any kind...we can’t afford it and it impedes freedom...at best.
If you haven't read any Ayn Rand I would strongly encourage. Anthem is short and sweet, Fountain Head is long and sweet, Atlas Shrugged is long...even longer than it looks because she packs so much into every sentance, but a timeless classic.
Posted by: Walt | November 20, 2008 at 03:58 PM
A lot was said on the trail during the campaign. It's true that Obama's "civilian NS force" was his silver-tongued articulation of the support services that have been proposed and/or implemented by the U.S. Government, or at least those services not contracted out to Halliburton and Blackwater.. things like schools and infrastructure which should be the goals of any postwar efforts, so that we don't have the same vaccuum of power like when the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan.
Obama also said it would be better if wealth was "spread around". And his Veep nominee told us that we would need to "gird our loins".
But as it is now, our NATION doesn't have the finances to be able to afford any sort of civilian force, and there's less and less wealth out there everyday.. and i have no idea what to do about my loins...........
Posted by: W. Tieff | November 20, 2008 at 05:49 PM
To Martin & HC:
Great arguments, guys, but they're falling on deaf ears. By responding to people like Jason, you're accepting the premise that these issues can be resolved by reasoning with or showing Jason the truth. You CANNOT persuade these people. They're our enemies. We should SHUN these people. Turn our backs to them and castrate them from our society. They're absolutely hopeless people looking for hope in all the wrong places. You'll never convince them. The truth doesn't matter to these people. They will continue to spew forth their ignorance and foolishness for all to see at every opportunity. Don't give it them. Tune them out. They're not worth even a moment's thought. You're just handing the microphone to Jason and allowing him to dominant an otherwise great website. Direct your ideas and thoughts to people like me -- people just like yourself -- patriotic Americans who love their country and don't want to see it CHANGE into anything Obama has in mind. Sometimes listening to two or three intelligent people discussing ideas is the best way to learn and make up your own mind about things. You can't force the truth on these people, but maybe if they hear it from a tiny corner of the room, a light-bulb might go off. Let's go shoulder-to-shoulder, isolate people like Jason, and move forward. Soldiers unite!
Posted by: sondra | November 20, 2008 at 07:18 PM
That’s a little too harsh for a conservative Sondra and even too much for an acerbic crude guy like me. I don’t think he deserves that. He’s sensible articulate and seems to be genuinely looking for another perspective. Maybe he was just never exposed to this side of the fence and never received a conservative viewpoint. There’s a reason he’s interested in this site. He’s not one of those totally lost cause rabid libs who don’t even engage in discourse and try to shout you out. We need to face up to the reasonable ones and let them hear us out so that we can win over their hearts. With a little more brainwashing from us =) he might come around. Besides, I too was once a Clinton Kool-aid drinker myself living in a fog of myths & lies until talk radio brought me around to common sense and made me realize I’ve been lied to by a lot of people my whole life. As the famous quote goes “if you’re young and not liberal you don’t have a heart but if you're older and not conservative you don’t have a brain”.
And don’t forget…From my cold dead hand Obama. From my cold dead hand.
Posted by: HC | November 20, 2008 at 09:35 PM
Since it was brought up, I'm 46, and I don't see myself changing anytime soon (sondra's right at least on that one point). Yes, McCain and Obama both lie; isn't that what politicians do? They are professional speakers and spinners, among other things. Positions on issues morph, and often compromises have to me made in order to accomplish small changes, incrementally.
Guys, this type of corps already exists, as I've already stated. The truth matters very much to me. I find http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/ and http://factcheck.org/ to be useful for cutting through some of the BS. For example, to rest some of your minds http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/709/
I don't care who "isolates" me; however, sondra, you may find it difficult in your daily life to isolate almost 67 million people. That just might not work.
Frankly, I've enjoyed the discussion, and have even learned a few things. Have I changed into a conservative, no. You CAN fault me for thinking there would be more of an attitude of cooperation, or at least working towards compromises which both sides can live with; at least I hope for some of this in Washington in the next months and years. That's the hope and naivety coming out in me. *shrug*
Posted by: Jason | November 20, 2008 at 09:45 PM
Jason said,"You CAN fault me for thinking there would be more of an attitude of cooperation, or at least working towards compromises which both sides can live with;..."
I would not count on too much cooperation since many of us, finaly recognize that is what got us to this point both economicaly and socialy. Cooperating with wrongness for the sake of good will is national suicide. President Bush bent over backwards to play nice with the super libs like Suds Kenedy. He bent over for good will and in return was butchered. Now he has the libs calling him an idiot and the conservitives calling him a lib. Our country has "changed" in a big way over the last 70 years...way left of its origin. Yes we need change!!!! A sharp right turn! That would make me a liberal in classical terms. This country is in trouble but not yet in pain...the pain will not be healed by BHO. Many will cry out, "John Galt for President! its our nations only hope." Others will ask, "Who is John Galt?"
Posted by: Walt | November 21, 2008 at 02:23 PM
Well, you have to remember, Walt, not everyone feels as you do. I daresay that not even every single commentator in this venue agrees with every detail of your beliefs. We're complex individuals, as are many of the important issues facing us today. Everything is not always black and white, but filled with many shades of grey -- to make things even more difficult, it seems that this country continues to be factionalized. It's sad, because in my heart I think that there are things to be agreed on, and that the MAJORITY of the people in this country actually want many of the SAME things. I'm sure you feel otherwise. If there wasn't cooperation of any sort, Walt, we'd be gridlocked and nothing would get done... so I still say there will be compromising.
If you have any clear, succinct examples of Bush bending over backwards I'd love to hear them. Butchered? I don't know about that, but the DIS approval ratings speak for themselves. It may just have been the timing of some things, but the people weren't happy with him, and with ratings that low, certainly a large number of Republicans don't have many positive warm and fuzzy feeling for Bush. :-( I'm not trying to work you into a frenzy, but I do think it's a valid observation.
Posted by: Jason | November 21, 2008 at 02:41 PM
Jason, I believe you're a man of good will. But there's a problem. When did the left have an attitude of cooperation with Bush? He was called a liar and an idiot from the word go and was never given time to breathe. He was called a right wing fascist even though he's very liberal. For the side that specialized in division to ask for cooperation is something that takes a lot of gall. I'm not saying that you were part of that vicious group. But it is how the left in general behaved. Also, compromising on what? You should read Duke's article on how conservatism is dead. It helped me realize what's going on. Every time we compromise with the left they come back for more the next year. They want laws against sodomy repealed. So we repeal them. Then they want special protections for homosexuals. So we give them special protections. Then they want domestic partnership benefits. So we give them that. Then they want gay marriage. Enough is enough! We've been compromising for at least half a century. Maybe it's time for us to tell you what WE want and you to compromise a bit.
Posted by: Martin | November 21, 2008 at 02:43 PM
Jason, a valid observation is that when the media is telling everyone for 8 years you're the worst president in history, of course people will dislike you. I'm not crazy about Bush. But give me a break. The media can make you or break you. If you don't understand that then you're smoking too much of that wacky tobacky.
Posted by: Martin | November 21, 2008 at 02:48 PM
Compromises are made by both sides all the time. It's necessary. There's always a bit of well we'll do this, or we'll modify this bill and pass it, if you include this bit of what we want. It's been that way for some time. Both sides get aggressive and passionate. I really don't feel that the left or the right are more or less vicious. They fight with each other to a fault at times. But, neither you nor I can control every move that our elected officials make, no matter how much we might want to.
I totally agree that it's a nasty arena. That doesn't mean I like it or you like it -- it's just reality. I'm only saying that it SEEMS this COUNTRY could accomplish so much more if there were LESS of this going on. This country has been asleep in some ways for too many years. We're falling behind -- economically, educationally, even structurally. We are now at the point where we need to make some of this up. Just as one (GIANT) example, our interstate system is nearing the end of it's useful life. It needs to be rebuilt. There's really no way around it. Our highways used to be the envy of the world, but they're well on their way to crumbling. It's time for us to take action -- we've been lazy and have let things slide to long. I'm not blaming anyone, but I want to see this country be more forward-thinking. I'm tired of band-aid solutions for gigantic, festering problems which do, sadly, exist. Let's take pride in what this country is, and what we can be and get up off our asses and make it happen. We're no longer the best in too many areas, and I want us to be the best again in the areas in which we're able.
Posted by: Jason | November 21, 2008 at 03:15 PM
I don't understand why you think that it's always the right giving in to the left. The left also gives in to the right. The pendulum swings back and forth...
Posted by: Jason | November 21, 2008 at 03:18 PM
Jason, read the article I mentioned. I found it for you. It explains things better than I can. No one really understands what is happening.
http://selwynduke.typepad.com/selwyndukecom/2008/02/conservatism-is.html
Posted by: Martin | November 21, 2008 at 03:24 PM
Jason,
Help me out here. Give me an example of anything in the past 50 years of compromise by the left that has inched the nation back towards its traditional foundations. We have been in a giant tug of war for the nation but many on my side of the rope have been sleeping or talking on their cell phone with one hand and pulling a bit with the other. You should hope we in unison do not let go of the rope. The pendulum has not swung both ways yet. America is far from home.
Posted by: Walt | November 21, 2008 at 03:37 PM