We see the problem with Obama’s presidency. Can we come up with a solution? *UPDATED*

Yesterday, weary and depressed, I linked to Charles Krauthammer’s most recent post, one that has him posit a Machiavellian Obama who has succeeded in laying the groundwork, not only for the transformation and, inevitably destruction of America, but also for his own reelection, so that he can cement his gains irrevocably.  A youthful reader, Zurvan, was appalled by the pessimism we old folks showed, both in my post and in the comments to my post:

…. I would like to say no, all is not lost.  Unless you let it go.

The attitude I see among conservatives is frankly astounding; never have I encountered a group more eager to surrender.  Forget fighting the good fight.  Forget the American Dream.  Just lie down and rot.  THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE TELLING YOURSELVES AND ANYONE LISTENING.

I’m not even twenty years old yet, my country is in the worst shape it’s been in since the Depression, and all you can say is “sorry kids, we didn’t feel like standing up to the bullies”?  That’s it!?

I never fully understood the saying “civilizations don’t die, they commit suicide” until now.  Some conservatives almost sound like they’re looking forward to oblivion!

Do you know why the progressives have taken over the country?  It’s because they fight.  They fight, and they never give up.  They can wait decades and still have the passion to fight till the end of time, because they BELIEVE IN THEIR CAUSE.

Conservatives, on the other hand, just glower and moan and play Cassandra while never lifting a finger to defend themselves.  Newsflash, guys:  You can’t win an ideological battle if the extent of your philosophy is a death-knell!

So, it looks like the younger generation can expect no help from our elders.  You want to abandon us, fine.  We want your support, and all you can do is tell us how horrible our lives will be.  While the rest of you hobble off to the crypts, we’ll be on the battlefield.  I had hoped you’d have the decency to aid us, but who needs you?  You work for the enemy!  You fall over yourselves to let them win!

So go on, curse the darkness.  I WILL LIGHT CANDLES.

I love Zurvan’s enthusiasm, and I should add here that not all are as gloomy as Krauthammer. Jonah Goldberg, for example, who is one of my most favorite writers and thinkers, believes that we’re witnessing a pivotal moment, and one that is good for conservative ideology, as opposed to continued progressive domination.

As it is, I agree with Goldberg that, at the grassroots level, the tide has changed.  My concern is that I agree with Krauthammer that, at the political level, Obama may have irrevocably changed the playing field.

If I may make a complete hash of metaphors, by changing the playing field, Obama has made it so that the grass roots can’t take root, if you know what I mean.  For example, nothing that happens in November will give conservatives a veto proof majority.  More than that, we already know that too many of the so-called “conservative” politicians in D.C. are either true RINOs or just so desperate to be loved by the liberal establishment that dominates the media and D.C. that they’ll abandon principles in an instant.

Sure, even a slight majority of conservatives in Congress can stop some funding for some things for the next two years, but that’s not going to be the same as repealing ObamaCare or the recent financial “reform” bill.  If Obama manages to hold office in 2012, nothing can stem the tide of these economy destroying initiatives.  (And yes, there’s that pessimism creeping in again, Zurvan.  I’m sorry.  It’s cause I’m old.)

The brilliant (and yes, I mean brilliant) Wolf Howling thinks that a Newt Gringrich candidacy might make a difference, but I wonder if he can overcome almost 20 years of demonization by a Leftist media.

So, I’ve laid out the problems; Zurvan has laid out the challenge:  Can Obama be defeated?  And by that, I’m not just asking if we limit him to a one term presidency.  Instead, I’d like to hear from you whether you believe that that there are specific things that can happen that will significantly reverse the harm Obama and the Democratic Congress have done to our economy, foreign policy, energy ability and independence, national security, military strength, immigration positions, support of our allies abroad (especially Israel), etc.?  In other words, even if we take over Washington, can we actually win?

UPDATEOthers have used Krauthammer’s article as the jumping off point for a conversation.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Pingback: » Links To Visit – 07/16/2010 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter()

  • SADIE

    We’re going to have to define ‘win’. Do we win another chance for conservatives the next round does this hopeful win include, a list of to-do’s?  If yes, then my first TO DO would have to be legislation that Congress enacts no laws that they, their families, staff and their families and any and all affiliates that exempt them from said legislation.

    Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle took Rand Paul to task when he suggested earlier this year that Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act shouldn’t apply to private businesses.
    But a new report from Congress’s Office of Compliance notes that Congress has never applied the provision to itself.
    http://sweetness-light.com/archive/hill-exempts-itself-from-civil-rights-act

  • Wolf Howling

    Book: 

    Thank you very much for the link and overly kind words.  Your point about 20 years of MSM demonization of Gingrich is certainly correct.  That said, how much trust lies in the MSM now days?  The MSM gave us Obama, and it would seem from the polls today, much of America realizes they have been had – and know where that responsiblity lies.  Could this be an example of Goldberg’s thesis – that the rules have changed and the MSM hatred of Gingrich is a plus?  I don’t think that is beyond the realm of possiblity..  At any rate, I think Gingrich quite capable of running against Obama and a corrupt MSM, pointing out the follies and biases of both.
    Whomever Republicans run, they must not adhere to the McCain line of treating Obama with the utmost respect.  If you recall the “debates,” the low point of Obama’s performance came when he was getting directly challenged.  For example, he was extremely uncomfortable – indeed, near petulant – when having to explain his way around his “bitter clingers” statement and challenges to his honesty.  We need a highly aggressive debater who is going to use the word “bullshit” – or one of its synonyms – every time its appropriate and challenge Obama, for Obama is nothing if not petty and clearly he does not like to be challenged.  That is one of the reasons I think Gingrich would be the perfect candidate to go against Obama.  Every sentence would be a knife.  And we need Obama fileted in 2012.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    1)In political dialogue, both on-line and in-person, think *marketing*. The purpose is not to make yourself feel better; it is to change opinions, however marginally. One rarely gets customers by insulting them.
    For example: it is extremely dumb of Republicans to use “liberal” as a simple term of demonization, viz referring to an opposition candidate as “this liberal wants (to do some bad thing)”. Much more intelligent to show the *illiberal* aspects of current Democratic thinking.
    2)Contribute money directly to candidates you like; avoid giving to large-scale Republican organizations that have proven themselves unworthy of support.
    3)Before contributing money to any university, research it (the FIRE website is a good place to start) to see how supportive it is of genuine intellectual debate & diversity. If you find them unworthy, let them know.
    Just for starters..
     

  • SADIE

    We need a highly aggressive debater who is going to use the word…..
     
    When candidates have lawyers drawing up the rules of engagement before the first question is asked and answered, along with another list of do’s and don’ts [i.e., time constraints on rebuttals] the debates have been reduced to preening for 2 minutes. I agree the a good debater can shine, but the rules and regulations will have to be addressed first and preferably without lawyers.
     
    circa 2004
    It began like this:

    When President Bush and John Kerry face off at the University of Miami Thursday, they’ll be operating under a set of rules so restrictive they even dictate where the candidates’ families sit – “front row, diagonally across from the candidate directly in his line of sight.”
    “It’s written by lawyers,” University of Miami communications professor David Steinberg said of the 32-page contract that advisors for both campaigns agreed to last week.
     
    http://www.theconglomerate.org/2004/09/presidential_de.html

  • suek

    I hate to sound like a broken record – especially considering how the birther issue is frequently considered – but I’d suggest that step one would be to do a _proper_ and _thorough_ investigation of Obama’s eligibility.  I don’t know what the outcome would be.  It could be a waste of time.  But.  Just suppose he was never eligible to run??  Oh my.  Wouldn’t that be sweet??  Of course, the mess would be about the worst mess in history – but it would be sweet!
     
    Ok.  Assume that he was eligible.  Then about all you’ve got for 2 years is the purse strings.  Obama can veto, but he can’t do anything about the money available – that’s up to the House.  If the GOP has control of the purse strings – and it’s members – it can control where the spending goes.  And…they don’t even have to worry about a veto … they can just “deem” their budget passed.
     
    Then they  have to get united in proclaiming that “We’re not the party of ‘no”…we’re the party of “HELL NO!”…and get people who can clearly state _why_ they’re the party of “HELL NO”

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    Damn lawyers!  They muck everything up.  There’s a wonderful cartoon from the 18th century, which shows a plaintiff holding grimly onto a cow’s tail, the defendant tugging at its front halter, the judge laughing uselessly in the background, and the lawyer merrily milking away.  Some things never change.

  • Wolf Howling

    My use of the word “debater” in my comment above was perhaps inappropriate.  By the use of that term, what I meant to indicate was that we need a person who is quite willing to be both aggressive and frank throughout the campaign.  That in comparison to McCain and virtually the entire bunch of Congressional republicans throughout the 2008 campaign.  

    (/rant on) For exampe, today, most Americans still blame Bush for our economic mess.  Indeed, Obama just sold the 2000 plus page monstrosity that is the Dodd-Frank regulation of our financial sector on the bald faced lie that it would correct the problems that led to our economic mess.  And it was a monstrosity that includes no new regulations on Fannie and Freddie.  This despite the fact that they, coupled with race based lending standards, were at the heart of our meltdown. 

    When was the last time you heard a Republican take the Democrats to task for these falsehoods.  I just cringe at the lack of emotion, lack of fire, and the lack of dedication to the truth that our Congressional Republicans seem to display at all times. Many of them seem to be retired in office.  It is horrendous.  When Karl Rove wrote the other day that his greatest failing was not aggressive responding to the half truths and false hoods of the attacks on Bush – he was stating the obvious.  Bottom line, the general rule of thumb is that you don’t win a fight by refusing to fight back.  We need a person at the helm who will fight continuously and who will fully channel the rage that is at the base of the Tea Party movement. (/rant off)
     

       

  • suek

    GW…
     
    I second that!!

  • who me

    I’m no political genius but I think what we are seeing are the loopholes in the Constitution that the left are taking full advantage of. This is why it is imperitive that we not only learn, but know our history and why the Founders did what they did.
    Re: Obama’s elegibility – he was not elegible. His father was not a citizen of the United States and his mother had not lived in the United States for 5 consecutive years after having attained her 16th birthday. Why does no one remember these were the criteria for a ‘natural born citizen’?

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2539663/posts

    What is actually needed are Representative in both Houses who have the guts to take on the Constitution and affirm its meaning into todays language. And the first act must be to neuter an over-reaching Supreme Court. They have continually stepped over the bounds of their Constitutional responsibility. No one will ever convince me that our Founding Father gave the SCOTUS authority to enact laws. Deciding a law ‘unconstitutional’ does not mean an opposing law takes affect. Yet this is what our most left Congresses have allowed for. Judicial fiat is not Constitutional.

    Quote: “James Madison viewed the idea of judicial review, stemming from the Madison v. Marbury case, as a departure from the intended constitutional structure. “As the courts are generally the last in making the decision, it results to them, by refusing or not refusing to execute a law, to stamp it with its final character. This makes the Judiciary department paramount in fact to the Legislature, which was never intended, and can never be proper.” Madison had written in the Federalist Papers that the courts would be the weakest branch of government, because their powers were limited to applying the test of constitutional principles to the cases before them. He realized this new power might tempt them into a quasi-legislative role.
    http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/meyer/040321

    Next would be strengthening the limits not only on the exectutive branch, but on the Congress. What we need are Conservatives with guts and honor to represent us.

    Know our history folks. Know the intention of our Founding Fathers. Draw your strength from them. Then elect those who have just as much love and devotion to what they have created.

  • expat

    I think we need to keep the heat on at the local level by finding articulate “debaters” who will take on representatives on their home turf. We have to make anyone hiding behind Pelosi’s skirt look like a real wimp. Hard questions at the townhall meetings last year damaged some of the old hacks. We have to keep throwing those hard questions until Washington learns to pay attention.  We need to make sure that local politicians and activists know the issues and know how to bring them to the people. It is certainly necessary to understand issues in terms of polical principles and philosophy, but you won’t catch the voter’s attention without showing how the issue affects him. Take FinReg, it is probably over most people’s heads, but ask them how much of an interest hike they are will to pay for a new diversity corps. Push for cleaner legislation: no more student loan programs muddled with health care. Clean up existing laws by taking out elements irrelevant to the main law and subjecting these elements to a separate run through congress.

  • Danny Lemieux

    What has taken place is no less than a “coup” by the Left that began back in the 19th Century when they began to take over academia, the education system and other core foundations of society. This was a very long-term strategy. We can howl and we can bleat about winning this or that election or how to march in opposition to what is happening but these are simply tactics that prick at the edges of the enemy. Unfortunately, we talk amongst ourselves while the real problem is the mass of a distracted, American Idol-worshipping citizenry that has no concept of freedom versus fascism, human responsibility versus self-gratification, socialism versus capitalism or, most importantly, that freedom is earned, not free. To respond, we too need a long-term strategy to awaken our fellow citizen to the dangers we face and it must begin with education. Unfortunately, we two minutes to midnight.
     
    There are many ways to undermine regimes such as this – use humor, find short-pithy ways to expose them for what they are. Pamphleteer. Educate the children. Explain to them (as Zurvan as already discerned) that life will never be as good for them as they have already experienced it. Win local elections. Defund the universities. At some point the pain will be great enough that people will listen and only then will they react.
     
    Unfortunately, I suspect that for most people the implications of the Obama fascist regime (and I use this term in its full historical sense, because that’s what this is). Next year promises to be a nightmare as the full implications of the Obama regime sink in with huge tax increases  camouflaged in the smoke of demagoguery and perhaps an international crisis thrown in. Society’s golden geese will be sacrificed to cheers and only much later will people miss the golden eggs. Perhaps then people will wake up. If not, God help us all because it will be a long, lonely fight that must be waged.

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    “Unfortunately, we talk amongst ourselves while the real problem is the mass of a distracted, American Idol-worshipping citizenry that has no concept of freedom versus fascism, human responsibility versus self-gratification, socialism versus capitalism or, most importantly, that freedom is earned, not free.”

    When you wrote the above, Danny, I suddenly flashed to Orwell’s 1984, and the fact that the non-party people, the people who live unknowingly in Big Brother’s state, are constantly listening to terrible pop tunes that the party cranked out to opiate the masses.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    Danny is 100% right about the importance of humor. “The devil…the prowde spirite…cannot endure to be mocked,” as Thomas More said. And many if not most of our opponents are exceptionally humorless and intellectually-cumbersome people who make excellent targets for mockery.
    It is also necessary to begin talking more about the fascist elements in the Obama/Pelosi/Reid worldview. I haven’t seen any survey results on this, but I would bet that the % of people who reflexively consider “fascism” as very bad is much higher than the % who consider “socialism” bad, and very much higher than the % who consider “liberalism” bad. And while the Obamian worldview is indeed influenced by socialist and specifically Marxist thinking, a little thought will clearly demonstrate that it has a large fascist component as well.
    It’s necessary to be very careful in doing this and not overstate the case:  the typical “progressive” is not a clone of Hitler or Mussolini, but that person does share certain important characteristics with these men, most notably the obsessive focus on race/ethnicity.

  • SADIE

    The confluence of the following: progressives, the age of idol worship [sports figures and bad music], the global goals of Islam, the decline [make that the dissolution of journalism asking the hard questions and demanding answers] the lack of belief in leadership, the aimless wandering the past 40 years to name a few and it’s beginning to feel biblical or in the 21st century the 100 Year Flood Plan kicking in.
     
     
     
    Since we are in an age, when there are fewer believers, church attendance is down, the new gods are wearing gold in their mouth and around their neck, the sheeple are unaware that they are being lulled into living on beach front with a tsunami headed towards them. I was thinking about this and past summers of storms, hurricanes and floods.The 100 year flood plan is statistically a 1% chance that your property will flood once. Even a flood needs an unforeseen series of events to occur.
     
     
     
    An unhealthy percentage of the electorate are reading only the first paragraph or listening to the first 5 minutes of news. Seems to me, they only react when there is something catastrophic [September 11th, Katrina] and then it’s short lived. The mid-West lives with sirens during tornado season and it has reduced deaths and injuries. What they don’t do is forget the threat in subsequent summers and ignore the sirens.
     
     
     
    I am not sure how we ring the siren, send the alert if so many are hearing and politically impaired. It may be that visuals are the way to go via you tube or some such media. We have all seen how it helps, hinders and even entertains. Surely there must be dozens of creative videographers that could do one minute films linking all the events of the past 100 years with a clever tag line that would stick. The Indonesian tsunami would be an excellent visual starting with the fault line shifting (see first paragraph for faults) and the wave eventually building towards all the shore lines in each state and with those states that had adequate warning suffering fewer casualties. The series of 1-minute films would show a  tsunami wave taking out Detroit economically, buildings and houses disintegrating in other cities from another wave ..you get the idea.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    I love Zurvan’s enthusiasm, and I should add here that not all are as gloomy as Krauthammer.

    And some of us were at the forefront of analyzing the Left’s future threat to the US while people like Krau was citing the wonders of McCain.

    The Left has more than just enthusiasm and bloodlust. I have as much bloodlust as any 10 normal people put together, yet that is not enough to win a war or any long term conflict between people. You need resources, planning, preparation, a logistical supply route, and a good idea of the enemy’s capabilities and psychology. But more than anything else, you need to want to win badly enough to risk much.

     
    <B>Can Obama be defeated?</b>

    Even if Obama could be defeated, he’s too lazy to put much work into legislation. The real question is, can you defeat the Left?

    Not simply push the Left back in an election, but defeat it on a set battle space, in a decisive victory for the greater war. The Supreme Court decisions for 2nd Amendment is a victory, but it was not a victory won by normal Americans but specialized judges and NRA advocates.

    Can the grassroots defeat the Left without the full resources of the Republican party? And how can America gain the full resources of the Republican party without first stamping out the parasitic influences of the Left. These questions are intertangled, because the issues are tangled up together in a Gordian Knot. Alexander had his solution to the problem, but what is ours?

    Stall, neuter, and get rid of Obama, and you will have the same situation, except magnified 10x, that you had before he was even elected.

    For the Left to be defeated, their power base must be broken. Anything else is a temporary respite at best.

    <B>For example: it is extremely dumb of Republicans to use “liberal” as a simple term of demonization,</b>

    Liberal became a bad word because the Left made it one by their behavior. Republicans do not have the foresight to label the Democrats anything other than what the Democrats currently call themselves. Which is “progressive”. In 30 years, “progressive” will become like the F word. And it won’t be because of Republicans.
     
    Traitors they were called by us in 2004-6 and traitors they remain. Just prosperous traitors.

    <B>When was the last time you heard a Republican take the Democrats to task for these falsehoods. </b>

    You don’t hear it on the media because I surmise that JournoList and other agencies like it make sure it isn’t heard for more than 5s.

    When Congressman take Democrats to task for this in session, it is either private or it is youtubed. The thing is, the very type of personality that takes serious issues like these to Congress, aren’t the ones most suited to thinking of broadcasting viral messages via youtube. Andrew Breitbart, is an anomaly. A hollywood film director’s anomaly even. This tends to handicap Republican politicians, because they are outmatched in the Byzantine game of the Left and the Constitution is slowly but surely losing its power.

    <B>Many of them seem to be retired in office.  It is horrendous.  </b>

    They have been well trained. Not only does the Left have a propaganda arm designed expressly to silence the non-party line but they also have goons and dogs ready to demonize those who do speak out. Which tends to impress the less courageous on what not to do. In a sense, the MSM seeks out any gaffes by Republicans, not because those gaffes are important, but because it trains Republicans to keep their mouth shut on even more controversial topics that could get them into trouble.
     
    So far, the power of the Left has only grown with the decades. They have suffered temporary setbacks, but in the end, they had a far longer and well planned end game. For they believed in something special. That the system by which America was born, can be replaced with a system of partial birth abortion, so that no new life may exist that poses a threat to the greed of a few. All nations die but they are also forever renewed through new life and new birth. Most Americans thought that if they held to tradition and political compromise, working within the system to uphold the system, that the system would continue as it is for the benefit of all. The Left knew that this wasn’t the case. Or rather, they knew where the gaps were through chaos and revolution could flew. The system has been transformed into something that they cannot recognize.  

    Dancing in the wind, with the music in her heart. America can fall in an eyeblink, but so can the Left. People simply need to want it badly enough. It will be interesting to see who wants to survive and prosper more. Which side will have the benefit of divine intervention.

    http://wp.me/p2tX8-sl

    Much of the fruits of the Left’s planning, so to speak, of their planning has been presented here. Along with my comments. Notice the time line involved to have gotten these things accomplished. Not simply the immediate action before the result, but the preparation for it.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I don’t see Gingrich as a leader in the presidential sense. He certainly has the intellectual authority but he does not project command power. I can see him as a major consigliere and intellectual leader of an American Reformation, however. Gingrich is not the tip of spear but its shaft.
     
    What we need is a Charles Martel or a Churchill: Someone blooded by command experience with a command presence.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    Petraeus is on the lips of a few, though what makes him good also means he won’t run against his former Commander in Chief, especially since Petraeus will likely seek to fight in Iraq until at least 2011, leaving no real time to campaign.
    If, however, Petraeus wins in the next few months and everything turns back in Afghanistan, and he allows himself to run against the President he once took orders from, then there is a chance. But it’s a thin one, for the war in Afghanistan simply lacks the components for such a reversal. There is no logistical background to support each. Not enough troops, US or local, and not enough time. Obama made sure of that.
     
    Essentially, America has been brought up by the Ruling Class to be their slaves. They have taught boys how not to fight and compete against other men, but to take orders and lay down. They have taught women that they should expend their resources in careers and for the replacement of men in fields. By shoving women into a place that they feel insecure in, they forever command their loyalty through fear. Fear that they will be abandoned by the government guarantees that they used to ascend in the marketplace. Fear that without the subsidies that they will be proven false in a head on comparison with a man.
     
    How easy is it to shed the blood of tyrants or to offer the blood of patriots when all around you, you see men and women that were purposefully weakened, set against one another, and taught to never be capable of physically or mentally defeating powerful individuals.
    It is easy to convince the foolish of the worth of fool’s gold. It is not as easy to convince them to risk much for no short term rewards, only long term promises. Even ponzi schemes depend upon some short term lubrication to seal the deal.
     
    The counter-culture push from males is lead by these organizations.
    http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2010/07/roissy_vs_mcard.html
    If you are wondering at why that matters to us, on the political scene, realize that the lawyers and others that pushed Clinton successfully to throw Elian Gonzalez to Cuba, were of this particular male rights camp. They thought they were doing well by pushing the father’s rights in Cuba. They thought they were fighting the good fight by fighting the Left and feminists. Well, the feminists didn’t give a damn about Elian Gonzalez, now did they. They made little complaint that he was sent back to his father. Why? Cause it was Cuba. It was the Cause. It was Paradise.
    Thus the “counter-culture” push against feminism, is its male version, that does exactly the same to empower the Left. Like fascism and communism, they claim to be opposites, yet they work together in the shadows to ensure each other’s success. The Russians had German panzer tanks training and doing exercises on Russian soil, to avoid the eyes of the Treaty of Versailles. Nobody even knew they were in league until the von Ribbentrop pack. In the years before, they were crying out that they were the answer to Communism. They were the Hope and the Change to a new future.
     
    It was all an illusion. And people bought it. So can we expect those of today, less versed in strength of character and more susceptible to visual propaganda, to know the difference between fake and reality?
    Unlikely. They have not the experience to tell the difference. And they won’t be allowed the time to acquire it, for they are slated to be crushed underneath the heels of those born to rule: the ruling class run by the Demon Rats.
     

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    I hate to sound like a broken record – especially considering how the birther issue is frequently considered – but I’d suggest that step one would be to do a _proper_ and _thorough_ investigation of Obama’s eligibility.
     
    I always like to investigate my enemies. Background information is often crucial for profiling. But it has to be done in secret, for an enemy that knows of what you are doing will be far less surprised. He will also take pains to alleviate the weakness of the knowledge being made known to his enemies, thus lessening the damage that can be inflicted.
     
    Afghanistan to 2011, correction.
     
    I have a whole list of solutions for Book and company, but I won’t write them all down now. Instead, continuing to study the past is good preparation for the times. I found two links which are rather good lessons for us to learn. The lesson of Carthage and the lesson of the War of Secession.
     
    http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/good-stuff/
     
    For those that do not know the reasons why the Southern States chose secession out of all available options, you will be intrigued by the historical documents and well done by them.
     
    For those that wish to know more of Carthage, then by all means read on at the link.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    Anthony Codevilla has an article in American Spectator on what he refers to as “America’s Ruling Class.” It is very long, but deserves to be read. Link at my Chicago Boyz post; hope some of the people here will come by and join the discussion.
     
    http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/14193.html

  • Bill Smith

    About Gingrich, I must agree with Danny. As a friend of mine used to say, “He is not a leader of men.” We must also recognize a reality of human nature: Weird names almost always work against you. If you’re too young to remember the Edsel, there is a reason you’ve never heard of it. It had a weird name, and people didn’t buy it in droves. Newt is unquestionably brilliant, but he’s a professor, not a fighter.
     
    Let’s face it, most Americans don’t even know what a fascist or a [insert other label ] is. Not in ways that relate to voters’ immediate, day-to-day lives. Besides, it smacks of name calling, which is weak. Just call them Democrats, because they are.
     
    So, let’s not waste time trying to convince people that the libs are some label like fascist, or socialist. Instead, we SHOW people what the Deems have DONE, and what they WANT to do in simple, understandable terms.
     
    Don’t tell me, SHOW me.
     
    What isn’t weak is showing, and reminding what WE plan to DO about what the Democrats have DONE. People will follow a strong leader with clear goals. “Here’s what we need to do, and here’s how we’re going to do it.”
     
    David Foster is right. Confront them at every turn with POSITIVE energy, strength, and humor. Reagan: “Heh, there you go again…”  Expose them. Don’t call them names/labels — EXPOSE what they have DONE, and will DO.
     
    ["Deems" was a typo, but I decided to leave it!]

  • Bill Smith

    Oh, and, the major problem we have, IMO, is not a loophole in The Constitution but this:
     
    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

    –John Adams

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    Chris Christie is a leader, a splendid communicator, a happy warrior and something of a visionary.  He says that he won’t run in 2012 but, with few exceptions, they all say that.  In other words, that disclaimer means nothing.  My only thought is that, unlike the days of Taft, Americans won’t vote for someone who has too much avoirdupois.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    David Brin said…
    Good lord, Randy, you are really buying into the Fox News line that we can go back a DECADE and blame the Clintons for everything?

    Again, look up the phrase “regulatory capture.” It has happened off and on, in all administrations. Indeed, the fact that the ICC and CAB were captured by the rail and air indistries provoked the DEMOCRATS to eliminate those agencies altogether.

    But the Busites entered office with regulatory capture as their top and principal aim. ALL agencies were stocked and stuffed with cronies of the oligopolies. The Mineral Management Service guys who snorted coke and whored with oilco execs weren’t appointed by Clinton.

    They were appointed by George W. Bush
     
    People want to know the problem? This is the problem. People like Brin are everywhere talking up a storm about their dumb conspiracy theories. And I mean dumb. This is the Obama voter. This is the person that can be convinced to what… change his mind? Total waste of time.
    The only thing they are good for is a source of taxation and a place to put the boot when the time comes around to it.
     
    Smith,
     
    In the days that have gone since we enunciated these statements so confidently I have had many occasions to see that this cataloging of people as either “right” or “left” has led to more confusion in American life than perhaps any other false concept. It sounds so simple and so right. By using this schematic device one puts the communists on the left and then one regards them as advanced liberals -after which it is easy to regard them as the enzyme necessary for progress.

    Communists usurp the position of the left, but when one examines them in the light of what they really stand for, one sees them as the rankest kind of reactionaries and communism as the most reactionary backward leap in the long history of social movements. It is one which seeks to obliterate in one revolutionary wave two thousand years of man’s progress.


    During my thirteen years of teaching at Hunter I was to repeat this semantic falsehood many times. I did not see the truth that people are not born “right” or “left” nor can they become “right” or “left” unless educated on the basis of a philosophy which is as carefully organized and as all-inclusive as communism.


    I was among the first of a new kind of teacher who was to come in great numbers to the city colleges. The mark of the decade was on us. We were sophisticated, intellectually snobbish, but usually fetishly “democratic” with the students. It is true that we understood them better than did many of the older teachers; our sympathy with them was a part of ourselves.


    Since 1932 the Communist Party had publicized itself as the leading opponent of fascism. It had used the emotional appeal of anti-fascism to bring many people to the acceptance of communism, by posing communism and fascism as alternatives. Its propaganda machine ground out an endless stream of words, pictures, and cartoons. It played on intellectual, humanitarian, racial, and religious sensibilities until it succeeded to an amazing degree in conditioning America to recoil at the word fascist even when people did not know its meaning.

    Today I marvel that the world communist movement was able to beat the drums against Germany and never once betray what the inner group knew well: that some of the same forces which gave Hitler his start had also started Lenin and his staff of revolutionists from Switzerland to St. Petersburg to begin the revolution which was to result in the Soviet totalitarian state.


    There was not a hint that despite the propaganda of hate unleashed against Germany and Italy, communist representatives were meeting behind the scenes to do business with Italian and German fascists to whom they sold materiel and oil. There was not a hint that Soviet brass was meeting with German brass to redraw the map of Europe. There was no betrayal of these facts until one day they met openly to sign a contract for a new map of Europe — a treaty made by Molotov and Von Ribbentrop.

    Don’t tell me, SHOW me.
     
    That’s what they did. They showed America that liberal was for change and on the left with Communists, while Nazis were on the right. They also told Americans, multiple generations of Americans. Your father’s generation and his father’s generation, should they have been in the US while living.
     
    Without an understanding of how we got here, all people can do is to repeat their failures against the Left. As it was the case decades ago. As it is today. And as it will be tomorrow should people use seemingly good ideas of like demonstration and shows, without properly understanding what is in the Left’s arsenal.
     
    The point is, it doesn’t matter if people are told or if they see things. What matters is that they believe. The Left has had decades to make people believe. Conservatives are only playing catch up and slow catch up at that. Thus, it is pointless to reject how Republicans use liberal and people take it to mean bad things. Thus it is pointless to reject fascism and how people don’t understand it. People don’t understand it and recoil from it in fright because of the Left. Until you know why, you can’t do anything about it. No matter how many good ideas we have, we are still fighting a very real enemy, a human enemy. They will adapt. They will switch things up. They will try to ride the tide of chaos and do unexpected things to us.
     
    In the end of all things, no matter how good the plan is, it all rests upon how well we know and anticipate the actions and psychology of the Left, the enemy.
     
    Confront them at every turn with POSITIVE energy, strength, and humor.
     
    Sarah Palin did that and she failed to defeat the propaganda assault. How many people can you still get to quote all the lies they spread about her, eh? And do you know why that is so. Not because she had negative energy, was lacking in strength, or had ill humor. It was because she did not understand the true evil behind the facade of Gibbs and Katie Couric. She thought the interview with Couric was going to be about family and girl issues.
     
    It is Not Enough to have positive energy, strength, and humor against the Left.

  • garyp

    The young man (Zurvan) makes many good points.  However, he must remember some thngs about his older allies: 

    We older people were raised in a time when the president symbolized our nation (a remote, but important figure.) 

    National governement did big things (setting tax rates, fighting the Cold War, and building the interstate highways), but seldom intruded into our everyday lives.

    We obeyed our leaders dictates and sacrificed, even our lives, when our nation called.  The few that placed self before country were dispised by most Americans.

    We had a sense that our system of government was the best in the world.  We felt that Americans were unique, blessed with a constitution that would always protect our liberties.  We thought we had nothing to fear but the Soviets, and a few communist spys masquerading as Americans, that were seeking to over destroy our nation and our way of life.

    Democrats and Republicans might be bitter partisans (my material relatives would have voted for Satan, if he ran on the Democratic ticket), but politics “stopped at the nation’s borders.”  Remember, this was a time when “borders” and their protection meant something to both parties.

    Many Americans now feel that the second biggest threat (after Islamic terrorists) to our lives, our possessions, and our liberties is our national government.

    Many of us see “progressives” as working to destroy the America we were raised to love.

    Many of us, especially the most patriotic of us, feel that we are dispised for respecting the Constitution and the liberties it was intended to protect.

    Many of us see the federal government as acting in such a way (from malice or incompetence?) certain to destroy our economy, our freedoms, and our nation.

    Many of us see the corruption in our nation’s capital, our statehouses and our local governments as so widespread that we are unsure how to correct it.  Some have begun to fear that elections are so dishonest that our votes will be ignored, as our voices are ignored and our concerns misrepresented by our nation’s leaders. 

    Many of us realize that some Americans, not so long ago were denied the right to vote because of their skin color by corrupt local governments and, in some cases, by States.  Finally, the federal government, with the support of a majority of Americans, acted to stop these abuses.  We now see that some of the  highest officials of our land, charged with protecting our voting rights, are intent on again preventing some Americans from voting because of the color of their skin. 

    Many of us see the current administration (and their allies) as being willing to stoop to any statagem, legal or otherwise, to pass unconstitutional laws, at the same time ignoring their duties (such as passing a budget), and using violence, or treats of violence, against people peacefully expressing their political views.  

    Will we fight beside you, Zurvan?  Yes, I believe we shall.  However, we cannot turn our full attention to the battles of the future until we have spent some time mourning what we have lost already.

    The certainty of youth often cuts the Gordian knot but caution, learned through experience and the study of history, makes your older compatriots slow to act.  We are hesitant to cast off the habits of a lifetime and do the hard things necessary to revitalize our nation.  

    We acknowledge that the system of government we have believed in and, in many cases, defended with our lives, has so departed from its founding principles as to be unrecognizable.  How we right these wrongs and return America to its place as the greatest Republic ever to exist on this Earth is a question fraught with implications that many of us (rightly) fear and shrink from. 

    Give us time to adjust to our new circumstances.  We grey headed patriots are slow to rouse but we are patriots none the less.  We may fear the price imposed by our duty but it is right that we should pay it.  Evil has triumphed in our nation because too many good people did nothing.   Others may have sown the wind but all of us will reap it.  Make ready, it is almost upon us. 

     

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    We are hesitant to cast off the habits of a lifetime and do the hard things necessary to revitalize our nation.

    People should also be hesitant because when the tree of liberty needs to be renewed, blood will be spilled. While most people don’t quite understand what that means, my training has always focused on when lethal force is justified and not justified.

    Studying war, also provides a reserve resource for predicting how infrastructure will collapse in one. It is a longer view and a broader view than simply the immediate tactical situation. People learn how to win 1v1 fights on the tactical battle plane first, so that they can learn how to win 50 1v1 fights, including those they can’t participate in directly. Thus is strategy born. After one has learned how a set of tactics combined together to create a long term gain can be setup even against adapting enemy forces, then one can graduate to logistics, where you don’t even have much fighting just a lot of bean counting. But bean counting can kill a lot of people with the right tactics and strategies.

    People don’t like thinking about civil war so they either believe their “trusted experts” or they simply deny the possibility. The South, specifically Georgia, denied that anything worse would happen should they leave instead of deal with the Northern states. The South thought the NOrth didn’t have the guts for a war. Well, they must not have asked Sherman that.

    The point is, Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance. Those that don’t plan for a war, won’t be winning one. Currently the US Constitution is still in force, mostly, and Constitutional methods like the Constitutional Convention is still feasible. Obama hasn’t stopped the 2010 elections or rigged the 2012 elections, yet. That remains to be seen.

    Yet in the meantime, people prepare. And I’m not particularly worried about the older generation not picking sides at the moment. They don’t want to fight and that’s a good sentiment. They’ll fight when the time comes to unload the weapons and start up the bomb making: not a moment sooner. Until then, logistical preparation is the only legitimate exercise at the moment. No attacks, no use of violence, no extra-legal or unconstitutional methods.

    Patience and preparation are not natural instincts for the young. And that’s usually a good thing. You don’t develop into someone that can stand the shield wall if you don’t want to fight while young.

    Don Quixote called places like here “echo chambers”, implying that one sentiment is monotonously repeated by everyone marching in zombie lockstep. I knew instinctively that it was not the case. That it was so far from the truth it might as well have been the anti-truth.

    What people see on the internet is what I call freedom of association. Otherwise known as true freedom of association, not simply associating with your social circle because that’s who you have to meet with. You have a limited option to choose from in your social network, mostly limited to those you can physically meet. On the internet, you are free to connect with anyone you wish and you can, mostly, avoid anyone you wish. That is real freedom, backed not by government feat or authority, but by your own freedom of movement and power.

    The idea of an echo chamber contains many implied meanings. Partially, it evokes the image of a prison or enclosed chamber that one cannot escape. An empty room, absent color or personality, with a hollow sound reverberating without meaning around and around. Yet none of us are prisoners. People aren’t prisoners of Neo-Neocon, stuck to her blog forced to comment along or else face the threat of neo-cons and their Shock and Awe tactics. Democrat Underground or Kos readers aren’t forced to comment there, whether they be Democrats or Republicans. This is true freedom of association. It is not a prison. Neither physical, mental, or spiritual. It is not a prison of the body, not a prison of the mind, and not a prison of ideological rigidity.

    Do some people wish to bridge the gap between different ideological sectors of the English net? Yes. And they do it often by writing posts and linking to each other. But they don’t do it by attempting to combine two blogs into one. Can you imagine combining Daily Kos with Blackfive? Democratic Underground with Michelle Malkin? Better get your devil protectors on, lawyers and judges, for this court in session will be held in hell.

    Dialogue is not going to solve this little problem called the Gulf or unemployment or Obama’s intentional prevention of border security anyways. Even if we had real dialogue with the Left, even if they came here and debated with us or if we came to them and debated with them, what would it solve? Would it give any more rights to business owners whose dealerships Obama’s minions nationalized? Would it give more security to Texas and the Southern Border? Would it clean up the Gulf oil environmental catastrophe faster?

    No. It wouldn’t. Freedom of association is real on the internet, for now. And it is not such a thing one should discard lightly in favor of “dialogue”, with the Left even. No human right, embued by God, should be so treated lightly. Even if this particular one is provided by human technology, not divine origins. In point of fact, it would be wise to extend this right to those living in America now, in their homes, neighborhoods, counties, and states. The ability to move where you wish, independent of economic sanction or societal rejection, would improve the state of humanity.

    I’ll tell people a minor secret I observed. There’s a lot of questions flying around concerning Obama, whether it is malice or incompetence, knavery or simply foolishness that drives Obama the man and ideologue. I say that the question is the wrong question to ask. The better question is, will Obama and his ideology survive if Obama doesn’t keep riding the tiger and pushing Americans into serfdom. Would Obama survive if he allowed reforms and higher efficient economic plans or would he go the way of Communist leaders once they started capitalist reforms? I think the answer is that Obama has to make the Gulf what it is and the economy what it is in order to survive. He has no other choice. If he chose any other, if he made American lives better and helped the Gulf states, Obama would be killing himself and his cause. His cause requires that we be made slaves, forever bound and disarmed. Thus the grip of the Left tightens ever more and ever fast.

    I have mostly contended that Obama has intentionally crafted the consequences that we see today. I suppose to many this would put me squarely in the camp of malice forethought and knavery. But I don’t think so. I think Obama’s actions are intentional because for him to do anything else would be the same as killing himself. Obama does what he does to survive. He fights the Tea Party because the Tea Party, if he ever gives them legitimacy, will destroy the power of the Left. And that cannot be allowed. The very survival of the Left is on the cusp, because the Left has committed many crimes (Polanski) that were forgiven simply because they had power and wealth. They are not going to simply give this up and face the consequences. So they intentionally hurt Americans, weaken the economy, and allow economic catastrophes federally assisted room to grow. Because they fear for their own lives.

    Not because they hate Americans, though some do. Not because they think they won’t kill the Golden Goose, though some think exactly that, but because they want to survive. They cannot get off the tiger.

    Book, congrats on finally getting your comment section to accept html tags ; )

  • Mike Devx

    Ymar in 26 said,
    > Don Quixote called places like here “echo chambers”, implying that one sentiment is monotonously repeated by everyone marching in zombie lockstep. I knew instinctively that it was not the case.

    They are echo chambers only in the sense that we tend to agree a lot.  I’m more entertained and enlightened when we bring up points where each of us diverges from the more common agreements, though.  I’m glad when it happens and wish it occurred more often.  I suspect we’re uncomfortable disagreeing, even in a minor way.  And we shouldn’t be!  If there’s one thing conservatives don’t do, it’s march in fascist lockstep!  We leave that to those other guys.  We just prefer social lubrication; but if you think you’ve got a valid point that is divergent, I myself would enjoy always to hear it.

    Also in 26, Ymar says (and my comment will be completely off the real topic of this post…)
    > Book, congrats on finally getting your comment section to accept html tags ; )

    The problem with HTML tags is their primitiveness and the way in which HTML and the web developed/evolved.  I recently started my latest software project.  This one is concerned with  a company’s internet applications and security.  I’ve been learning a lot.  Book’s web site – not Book – restricts quite a few things, including HTML tags, because they belong to a set of technologies that malicious hackers can use to invade the website and corrupt it – and attack web sites such as Book’s, and in the end even attack YOU via your browser as the page displays, be it Book’s main page or even this comment page.
    All of these comments are held in a database, and when you directly type in HTML tags, they get saved in that database as is.  And then redisplayed on your home browser when you view the comment.  That “string” that looks like an HTML tag but isn’t, doesn’t modify the display of the text such a “bold” would; it is used instead to – for example – pull information off of YOUR home computer and send it to anyone, to any other computer.   And it happens to you on your home computer invisibly.  Unless you’re very strict about firewall security on your home computer, you have no clue it’s just happened to you, simply by the browser displaying that corrupted comment.

    So web hosters such as Book’s hoster struggle to protect you.  It’s good they’ve found a way (or think they have) to allow HTML tags by distinguishing them from more malicious sets of strings of keystrokes that are difficult to automatedly distinguish from HTML tags.  By allowing it, they *may* have inadvertantly opened a hole through which a malicious hacker could creep.  It’s far safer, if irritating, for a web hoster to simply completely disallow users to freely type in those angle bracket-based tags, which form the basis of one kind of expression that malicious attackers use.)

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    “I suspect we’re uncomfortable disagreeing, even in a minor way.”
     
    That’s not my issue, of course. My issue is when people think that people should behave a certain way, so they will artificially change the risk and rewards to tilt things that way.
     
    If people are uncomfortable disagreeing, then leave them be. If somebody doesn’t wish to address a point I raised, I leave them be. I treat it as if it didn’t happen. I don’t intentionally try to create circumstances where people are forced to respond via coercion or changing the make up of the community simply because I think a subject should be “debated” more.
     
     

  • Pingback: November and the GOP’s Long March Back « Elkhorn Creek Lodge()