"One can only be glad that the Thomas (F) is dealing with jurno-babble and is not responsible for policies. What a vacuous fraud."
===
Well we now have New York and other states passing laws regarding consensual sex on college campuses and a thug punching out a woman at a bar in Florida.
These are the consequences of the '60's where it was decided anything goes, there is no authority, and the PC crowd decided everyone is the same and there should be no distinctions.
I heard a psychiatrist make a cogent observation this morning when he said equality does not equate with equivalency.
Yes, there are differences but we allowed the PC crowd to erase them and now we are trying to rebuild what we once had and threw away because change is everything.
Meanwhile Hillarious allowed an interview by a cozy, patsy, safe interviewer and she took a page from Obama's play book and blamed everyone else for her lies and corrupt and illegal behaviour. It's the, I am a victim strategy. Iran is trying the same thing and winning as are the Palestinians.
Wake up America and smell the stench for God's sake! Do you really want to contend with Hillarious and her deviousness for four more years after eight of Obama? She does not give a damn about ethics because she is above us mortals Bless her soul!
===
A posting from a friend. (See 1 below.)
===
Let's hear it for our president! (See 2 below.)
===
Does the Demwit Party still have a soul and if so is it worth saving? You decide (see 3 below.)
===
Now for a little 'black humor.'
A male patient is lying in bed in the hospital, wearing an oxygen mask over his mouth and nose. A young student nurse appears and gives him a partial sponge bath.
"Nurse,"' he mumbles from behind the mask, "are my testicles black?"
"Nurse,"' he mumbles from behind the mask, "are my testicles black?"
Embarrassed, the young nurse replies, "I don't know, Sir. I'm only here to wash your upper body and feet."
He struggles to ask again, "Nurse, please check for me. Are my testicles black?"
Concerned that he might elevate his blood pressure and heart rate from worrying about his testicles, she overcomes her embarrassment and pulls back the covers. She raises his gown, holds his manhood in one hand and his testicles gently in the other. She looks very closely and says, "There's nothing wrong with them, Sir. They look fine."
The man slowly pulls off his oxygen mask, smiles at her, and says very slowly, "Thank you very much. That was wonderful. Now listen very, very closely: "Are - my - test - results - back?"
The man slowly pulls off his oxygen mask, smiles at her, and says very slowly, "Thank you very much. That was wonderful. Now listen very, very closely: "Are - my - test - results - back?"
===
This from one of my dearest friends, severest critics and fellow memo reader:
Now let's hear it for Obamacare.
"My son has run a small business for the past 20 years. His pre-Obama
plan for his less than 50 employees in health insurance was to give them$250 per month to select their own plan. He was allowed to deduct this
as a business expense, his employees got a freeby benefit.
Obamacare now disallows him the expense deduction AND the employees
have to pay tax on the contribution as income. What a great plan for that
which makes America great - small businesses."
===
Poor old Donald Trump, bless his soul:
Donald has served the Demwits well by distracting them from having to defend Hillarious.
Yes, Sir Donald has an ego as large as Obama's and that is not a healthy circumstance but Republicans must learn to deal with him as long as he pursues his illusive goal of becoming the Party's Nominee.
That said, though what he said was probably not totally factually correct and was said in an uncouth manner, what he said has brought forth a needed debate because we must solve the immigration mess.
I have said repeatedly, a nation that cannot protect its borders will soon not exist. How we go about it must be left to the experts.
Once our borders are as secure as is practical and within reasonable cost, the issue of what to do about those who are here illegally must be addressed so that they can work their way to citizenship, if they so choose.
As to the matter of the PC crowd getting up on their high white elite horses and penalizing Sir Donald, that is their right just as it is his right to speak his mind and pay the consequences of his language from the PC elites.
These same elites attacked the proud owner of Chick Fil-A, our own Ms. Deen and they will continue to turn their oral guns at anyone who offends their mistaken and misplaced sensibilities.
Their damage to our nation in beyond count and irreparable.
So Donald, trim your sails a bit, pay the price if you feel the need and let the chips fall where they may.
Unlike Hillarious you ,at least, are not a ducker!
===
Steve McCann poses the correct question to The Republicans Establishment - the nation's interests or your own. (See 5 below.)
===
===
Steve McCann poses the correct question to The Republicans Establishment - the nation's interests or your own. (See 5 below.)
===
Finally, a response to my last memo and my trip memos from a good friend. (See 5 below.)
===
Dick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
3)-
It should not be forgotten that the issue of the nuclear threat from Iran transcends that of support for Israel. A nuclear Iran or even one that has attained the status of a threshold nuclear power with Western approval — which the president’s deal will assure — presents a clear and present danger to the Arab world, including U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia as much as it does to Israel. The boost such an outcome would give terrorist groups allied with Iran, such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen as well as the Assad regime in Syria would undermine the regional balance of power and help Tehran in its quest for regional hegemony. Moreover, Iranian nukes are also a threat to the United States and Europe, especially if Iran’s ballistic missile program is not halted; an aspect of the problem that the agreement is as unlikely to address as the regime’s state sponsorship of terror.
But there is no ignoring the fact that it will be the pull of the alliance with Israel that will determine more votes in Congress than general qualms about regional or even U.S. security. The existential threat to Israel from an Iranian weapon is obvious, a point brought home again today by the published comments of former Iranian President Rafsanjani who repeated what many others in power — including the country’s Supreme Leader — have already said: that Israel “will be erased soon.”
If Democrats are going to buck Obama, it will be because their instinctual support for Israel makes it impossible for them to vote to approve a weak nuclear deal that, as this one does, provides Iran with two paths to a bomb: one by cheating on its easily evaded rules and one by patiently waiting for it to expire in ten years.
Luntz’s poll, which was sponsored by the Jewish National Fund, is consistent with other surveys that have showed a growing gap between Republicans and Democrats about Israel. But the highlights he provided still ought to shock pro-Israel Democrats:
* 76 percent of Democrats but only 20 percent of Republicans say Israel “has too much influence” on U.S. foreign policy.
* Asked whether Israel was a “racist country,” 47 percent of Democrats agreed, 32 percent disagreed and 21 percent either didn’t know or were neutral. By contrast, 76 percent of Republicans disagreed while only 13 percent agreed and 12 percent didn’t know or were neutral about this canard.
* When queried as to whether Israel wanted peace, only 48 percent of Democrats agreed while 31 disagreed and 21 percent didn’t know or were neutral. By contrast, 88 percent of Republicans agreed while only five percent thought it didn’t and seven percent didn’t know or were neutral.
* 88 percent of Republicans also termed themselves “pro-Israel,” a label that only 46 percent applied that label to themselves.
* Most important for those looking to handicap a vote on a deal with Iran were those questions relating to support for politicians who are perceived as friendly or hostile to Israel. Only 18 percent of Democrats said they would be more likely to vote for a politician who defended Israel’s right to self-defense while 76 percent of Republicans said they would. 32 percent of Democrats and only seven percent of Republicans said they would be less likely to back such a politician. On the other hand, 45 percent of Democrats and only 6 percent of Republicans said they would be more likely to vote for a politician who criticized Israel. 75 percent of Republicans and only 23 percent of Democrats said they would be less likely to vote for such a politician.
* For those looking for a link to anti-Semitism, while a majority of both parties saw anti-Semitism as a problem in the United States, fully 50 percent of Democrats but only 18 percent of Republicans agreed with the proposition that, “Jewish people are too hyper-sensitive and too often label legitimate criticisms of Israel as an anti-Semitic attack.”
This data confirms what has already become obvious. While clear majorities of both parties in Congress are part of a strong pro-Israel coalition, support for that consensus among rank and file Democrats is weak and growing weaker all that time. That means Democrats inclined to choose partisan loyalty to Obama over support for Israel’s survival face fewer critics within their party. Where a Republican inclined to throw Israel under the bus would face a wall of opposition from his party, Democrats may have no such fears.
Though the agreement the president will present to Congress will almost certainly fall short of the same criteria that the administration presented before the negotiations began, the soft support for Israel among Democrats will be Obama’s trump card as he twists arms and hands out favors in search of Democratic votes to sustain a veto of the Iran deal. This means the debate on Iran will not be so much one about policy as a battle for the soul of a Democratic Party that has lost its way on Israel.
Some will blame this state of affairs on the Israeli government or even Republicans for “politicizing” support for the Jewish state. But such arguments are entirely disingenuous. The fault here lies entirely with Obama and the left-wing of the Democrats who have embraced positions attacking Israel and, in the case of Iran, prioritized détente with the Islamist regime over support for America’s only democratic ally in the Middle East.
It is true, as I wrote earlier this year, that both Republicans and Democrats failed when they passed the lamentable Corker-Cardin bill that created an approval procedure for the Iran deal that turned the treaty confirmation process on its head. The president should have been forced to present the agreement as a treaty that requires two thirds of the Senate to vote yes for it to be ratified. Instead, distracted by Obama’s disingenuous designation of the deal and bullied by the president’s rhetoric, they voted for a bill that allows it to become law with only the one-third plus one of one of the two Houses of Congress to sustain a veto.
B-- A-----
_________________________________________________________________________________
Dick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
Political Survival at the Expense of the Country
By Sherwin Pomerantz
Living in Israel during these difficult times regionally (are there any times that are NOT difficult here?) certain things become self-evident.
I am certain that Prime Minister Netanyahu (or Bibi as he is usually called) loves Israel. I am equally certain that he sincerely cares about our future and is deeply committed to our security and long term existence in this region. But, sadly, I am also 100% sure that the most important thing to him, seemingly beyond those already mentioned, is his desire to stay in office at any cost.
How else to explain his acquiescence to the far-right religious elements in his cabinet by last week overturning three cardinal achievements of his prior term as Prime Minister. And what were they?
First the earlier law that permitted some 30 Orthodox city rabbis in Israel to perform state-recognized conversions to Judaism has now been re-cast so that only those among the 30 who are approved by the Chief Rabbinate will be so authorized. But given that the Chief Rabbinate is controlled by the ultra-orthodox who opposed the reform in the first place, it is doubtful that any of these 30 rabbis will ever be authorized to perform conversions, putting the control of the entire process back in the hands of a handful of people who are not known for their worldly outlook on these issues.
Second the Cabinet approved the transfer of authority over the rabbinical courts from the Ministry of Justice to the Religious Services Ministry, once again giving the authority over those courts to the ultra-orthodox. This effectively puts the responsibility for the rabbinical courts into the hands of the ministry headed by David Azoulay. This is the same David Azoulay who earlier this week said in a radio interview: “A Reform Jew, from the moment he stops following Jewish law, I cannot allow myself to say that he is a Jew.” Really? This is the man who now controls the rabbinical courts who hold sway over all issues of personal status in Israel?
Third the Cabinet approved the transfer of authority over the conversion system from the Religious Services Ministry to the Prime Minister’s Office as part of the coalition agreement when the government was formed earlier this year. This way Bibi can do the bidding of the Shas party on this issue as their pulling out of the coalition would bring down the government.
So clearly, even though the great mass of the Israeli population thinks that these moves are not in the best interests either of Israel or the Jewish people, the Prime Minister understands that in order to stay in power, this is what he must do, the good and welfare of the state be damned.
But I do not accuse him solely of creating this situation. After the elections earlier this year an opportunity existed to form a unity government that would have kept the extremist elements out of the cabinet. But the opposition failed as well by not looking at the whole picture and doing what would have been best for the country in these very difficult times when the entire region around us is in chaos. The failure of the opposition to swallow its pride and try to come to terms with the Likud in a unity government contributed to the current state of affairs where:
· A minister of the government who labels Reform Jews “not Jews” and the Prime Minister does not demand his immediate resignation;
· The head of the Ministry of Health who will only allow himself to be called Deputy Minister because his religious beliefs do not allow him to call himself a Minister in this country that, as he sees it, was established by man rather than by God;
· A Ministry of Foreign Affairs without a minister, with the Prime Minister acting as Minister even though the courts this week ruled that the Prime minister cannot also simultaneously head other ministries.
And the list goes on all because at the end of the day the current Prime Minister’s most important job is staying in power and the opposition is too self-centered to help him make things right. So everyone looks the other way or comes up with some Chelm-like accommodation.
It reminds me of the story of Chaim Yankel, a resident of Chelm, who made his neighbors proud by being the first member of his town to be accepted into medical school. While making rounds, a doctor points out an X-ray to a group of the medical students. "As you can see," he says, "the patient limps because his left fibula and tibia are radically arched. Chaim Yankel, what would you do in a case like this?" "Well," ponders Chaim Yankel, "I suppose I'd limp too."
And that’s how this most high tech of high tech countries solves its political problems. We nod our heads and say, “I suppose I’d limp too.” Even though we all know we can do so much better than that.
Sherwin Pomerantz is a 31 year resident of Jerusalem, President of Atid EDI Ltd., an economic development consulting group and a former National President of the Association of Americans & Canadians in Israel.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)--QUIT BASHING OBAMA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by COL. ROBERT F. CUNNINGHAM and PATRICK RISHOR, The Gilmer Mirror (Northeast Texas Newspaper)
Quit trashing Obama. Here is a list of his impressive? accomplishments:
1. First President to be photographed smoking a joint.
2. First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
3. First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
4. First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.
5. First President to violate the War Powers Act.
6. First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
7. First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
8. First President to spend a trillion dollars on "shovel-ready" jobs when there was no such thing as "shovel-ready" jobs.
9. First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
10. First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
11. First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.
12. First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
13. First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.
14. First President to terminate America’s ability to put a man in space.
15. First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.
16. First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
17. First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce them.
18. First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.
19. First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
20. First President to file lawsuits against our American states that he swore an oath to protect and defend (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
21. First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued many years ago.
22. First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).
23. First President to fire an inspector general for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
24. First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his offices.
25. First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchi
26. First President to golf more than 150 separate times in his five years in office.
27. First President to hide his birth, medical, educational and travel records.
28. First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
29. First President to go on multiple "global apology tours" and concurrent "insult our friends" tours.
30. First President to go on over 17 lavish vacations, in addition to date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.
31. First President to have personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife. First President whose wife hates America.
32. First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
33. First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.
34. First President to repeat the Quran and tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
35. First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona), violating his sworn oath of office.
36. First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they "volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences."
37. Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the lastsuggestion.
3)-
As the Iran nuclear talks head down the home stretch, it is increasingly obvious that Secretary of State John Kerry’s comments about walking away from the negotiations if a “good agreement” isn’t obtained are not credible. A deal or, as Omri Ceren predicts, a “non-agreement agreement” is inevitable even as the deadline was extended to the end of the week. That means the focus will soon change from the standoff in Vienna to Washington where a Congressional debate on the deal that comes out of this process will soon begin. The result of a vote on the deal is by no means certain but most observers believe that although there will be majorities in both Houses that will vote against it, opponents will fall well short of the two thirds they need to override President Obama’s expected veto. Such an outcome will be made possible by the decision of a critical mass of Democrats in the Senate and especially the House to back the president’s deal even though it will not satisfy the administration’s own stated goal of preventing the Islamist regime from getting a weapon. If so, that will be explained by partisan loyalty and the hold the president still has over much of his party. But there’s no escaping an answer that is just as obvious that was highlighted in a new poll conducted by Frank Luntz that was reported today in the Times of Israel that sees Israel losing Democrats across the board.
It should not be forgotten that the issue of the nuclear threat from Iran transcends that of support for Israel. A nuclear Iran or even one that has attained the status of a threshold nuclear power with Western approval — which the president’s deal will assure — presents a clear and present danger to the Arab world, including U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia as much as it does to Israel. The boost such an outcome would give terrorist groups allied with Iran, such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen as well as the Assad regime in Syria would undermine the regional balance of power and help Tehran in its quest for regional hegemony. Moreover, Iranian nukes are also a threat to the United States and Europe, especially if Iran’s ballistic missile program is not halted; an aspect of the problem that the agreement is as unlikely to address as the regime’s state sponsorship of terror.
But there is no ignoring the fact that it will be the pull of the alliance with Israel that will determine more votes in Congress than general qualms about regional or even U.S. security. The existential threat to Israel from an Iranian weapon is obvious, a point brought home again today by the published comments of former Iranian President Rafsanjani who repeated what many others in power — including the country’s Supreme Leader — have already said: that Israel “will be erased soon.”
If Democrats are going to buck Obama, it will be because their instinctual support for Israel makes it impossible for them to vote to approve a weak nuclear deal that, as this one does, provides Iran with two paths to a bomb: one by cheating on its easily evaded rules and one by patiently waiting for it to expire in ten years.
But if, as Luntz points out, a growing number of Democrats are ready to abandon Israel, it will be that much easier for the White House to rally the president’s party behind a détente with Iran that he considers integral to his foreign policy legacy.
Luntz’s poll, which was sponsored by the Jewish National Fund, is consistent with other surveys that have showed a growing gap between Republicans and Democrats about Israel. But the highlights he provided still ought to shock pro-Israel Democrats:
* 76 percent of Democrats but only 20 percent of Republicans say Israel “has too much influence” on U.S. foreign policy.
* Asked whether Israel was a “racist country,” 47 percent of Democrats agreed, 32 percent disagreed and 21 percent either didn’t know or were neutral. By contrast, 76 percent of Republicans disagreed while only 13 percent agreed and 12 percent didn’t know or were neutral about this canard.
* When queried as to whether Israel wanted peace, only 48 percent of Democrats agreed while 31 disagreed and 21 percent didn’t know or were neutral. By contrast, 88 percent of Republicans agreed while only five percent thought it didn’t and seven percent didn’t know or were neutral.
* 88 percent of Republicans also termed themselves “pro-Israel,” a label that only 46 percent applied that label to themselves.
* Most important for those looking to handicap a vote on a deal with Iran were those questions relating to support for politicians who are perceived as friendly or hostile to Israel. Only 18 percent of Democrats said they would be more likely to vote for a politician who defended Israel’s right to self-defense while 76 percent of Republicans said they would. 32 percent of Democrats and only seven percent of Republicans said they would be less likely to back such a politician. On the other hand, 45 percent of Democrats and only 6 percent of Republicans said they would be more likely to vote for a politician who criticized Israel. 75 percent of Republicans and only 23 percent of Democrats said they would be less likely to vote for such a politician.
* For those looking for a link to anti-Semitism, while a majority of both parties saw anti-Semitism as a problem in the United States, fully 50 percent of Democrats but only 18 percent of Republicans agreed with the proposition that, “Jewish people are too hyper-sensitive and too often label legitimate criticisms of Israel as an anti-Semitic attack.”
This data confirms what has already become obvious. While clear majorities of both parties in Congress are part of a strong pro-Israel coalition, support for that consensus among rank and file Democrats is weak and growing weaker all that time. That means Democrats inclined to choose partisan loyalty to Obama over support for Israel’s survival face fewer critics within their party. Where a Republican inclined to throw Israel under the bus would face a wall of opposition from his party, Democrats may have no such fears.
Though the agreement the president will present to Congress will almost certainly fall short of the same criteria that the administration presented before the negotiations began, the soft support for Israel among Democrats will be Obama’s trump card as he twists arms and hands out favors in search of Democratic votes to sustain a veto of the Iran deal. This means the debate on Iran will not be so much one about policy as a battle for the soul of a Democratic Party that has lost its way on Israel.
Some will blame this state of affairs on the Israeli government or even Republicans for “politicizing” support for the Jewish state. But such arguments are entirely disingenuous. The fault here lies entirely with Obama and the left-wing of the Democrats who have embraced positions attacking Israel and, in the case of Iran, prioritized détente with the Islamist regime over support for America’s only democratic ally in the Middle East.
It is true, as I wrote earlier this year, that both Republicans and Democrats failed when they passed the lamentable Corker-Cardin bill that created an approval procedure for the Iran deal that turned the treaty confirmation process on its head. The president should have been forced to present the agreement as a treaty that requires two thirds of the Senate to vote yes for it to be ratified. Instead, distracted by Obama’s disingenuous designation of the deal and bullied by the president’s rhetoric, they voted for a bill that allows it to become law with only the one-third plus one of one of the two Houses of Congress to sustain a veto.
But any chance to vote on the most important foreign treaty in a generation should have caused both the Republican and Democratic caucuses to stand firm on an issue on which there has always been a clear consensus. Unfortunately, that hasn’t happened despite obvious evidence that the president has decided any Iran deal, even an indefensible one, is better than none at all. If Obama succeeds in getting his Iran deal, and the odds favor it, blame Democrats for abandoning their pro-Israel principles, not Republicans or the Israelis.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) The Fate of the Republican Establishment
Over the past century there have been two common traits found in all nations that have adopted socialist governing principals. The first is the creation of a privileged governing class, and the second is the abject economic and political failure of those same societies. True to form in the United States, as it plunges headfirst into the socialist abyss, there has been the evolution of the privileged governing class -- except here it is often referred to as the “Establishment,” which for the time being, has two branches.
The Republican Establishment, with the exception of the presidency of Ronald Reagan and the Republican controlled House of Representatives from 1995 to 1998, has been content, since 1946, to merely slow down the big government policies of the Democrats, while politically decrying their tax and spend policies. However, in truth, many have been comfortable with reaping the financial and ego-gratifying rewards of such indifference while playing the game with their counterparts in the other branch of the overall governing class.
you can still Google today to see pics if you never saw it?), I read a dissertation on why the collegiate
intellectuals endorsed Communism.
4) The Fate of the Republican Establishment
Over the past century there have been two common traits found in all nations that have adopted socialist governing principals. The first is the creation of a privileged governing class, and the second is the abject economic and political failure of those same societies. True to form in the United States, as it plunges headfirst into the socialist abyss, there has been the evolution of the privileged governing class -- except here it is often referred to as the “Establishment,” which for the time being, has two branches.
There are no offices on Connecticut Avenue in Washington D.C. with signs reading “The Republican Establishment” or the “The Democratic Establishment”; rather the Esabishment is an amalgam of like-minded groups with one common interest: the control of the government purse strings and the attendant power contained within.
The Republican and Democratic political establishments are made up of the following:
1) A preponderance of current and retired national office holders whose livelihood (re-election for current office holders and lobbying or consulting for retired politicians) requires fealty to Party in order to maintain access to government largesse;
2) the majority of the media elite, including pundits, editors, writers and television news personalities based in Washington and New York, whose proximity to power and access is vital in order to gratify their self-esteem and to sustain their standard of living;
3) Academia, numerous think-tanks, so-called non-government organizations, and lobbyists who fasten onto those in any administration and Congress for employment, grants, favorable legislation and ego-gratification;
4) The reliable deep pocket political contributors and political consultants whose future is irrevocably tied to the political machinery of the Party; and
5) The crony capitalists, i.e. leaders of the corporate and financial community as well as unions whose entities are dependent on or subject to government oversight and/or benevolence.
The Republican Establishment, with the exception of the presidency of Ronald Reagan and the Republican controlled House of Representatives from 1995 to 1998, has been content, since 1946, to merely slow down the big government policies of the Democrats, while politically decrying their tax and spend policies. However, in truth, many have been comfortable with reaping the financial and ego-gratifying rewards of such indifference while playing the game with their counterparts in the other branch of the overall governing class.
But in contrast to the stability of the Republican Establishment, over the past ten years there has evolution in the power base of the Democratic equivalent. An evolution that appears to be either willfully ignored or is unseen by an oblivious counterpart.
While the Democratic branch of the governing class came into flower during Franklin Roosevelt’s three and a half terms in office as a byproduct of his brand of benevolent socialism, the current iteration is politically dominated by the radical American Left, whose philosophical underpinning is based on the Marxist tenet that the end justifies the means. In order to seize all political and societal power, this new Democratic Establishment aims at permanently relegating an impotent Republican Party and its extended family to the back of the bus, stripping them of all power, money and influence.
But rather than view the current iteration of the Democratic Party as a threat to them and the nation, the GOP Establishment parties on as if nothing has changed. Apparently it is their view that Barack Obama and his fellow travelers’ abuse of and determination to seize all power is just another inning in a baseball game in which they will eventually get to the plate for their turn at bat.
The true nature of the Republican Establishment’s motivation has been exposed by their reaction to the Tea Party movement and conservatives in general. This grassroots rebellion was the first manifestation of the awareness by a large portion of the American public of the long term consequences stemming from the nation’s catastrophic debt accumulation, coupled with the virulent and coercive transformation of society. Despite the overwhelming success of the Tea Party working within the Republican Party in the 2010 and 2014 mid-term elections, nearly all of the Republican elites downplayed their success and fell-in with the mainstream media and the Democrats in their well-worn and gratuitous aspersions against these concerned and patriotic Americans. The Conservative movement poses a threat to not only the accumulated power of the governing class, but their livelihoods; thus the concerted effort to marginalize them by any vile or preposterous means possible.
However the myopia of the current Republican Establishment is astounding. By choosing to continue its alignment with the Democratic branch of the governing class and vilify the conservative/Tea Party movement, they have rejected the only possible means of their potential, albeit altered, survival.
If the Democratic Party cabal continues their hegemony in America beyond 2016, the nation and the Republican Establishment are doomed. Their relationship with the Democrats is akin to the old fable of the scorpion and the frog. A scorpion asks a frog to carry him across a river. The frog is afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so both would sink and drown. The frog then agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is who he is.
With the ongoing demographic changes coupled with the vast number of low-information and ill-educated voters, the Republican Party cannot win a general election without an overwhelming turnout of the conservative voting bloc, as amply demonstrated in the disastrous presidential campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney. Any viable chance of winning the 2016 election would require the nomination of an authentic conservative candidate and not another so-called moderate (i.e. Establishment representative). However, that would also set the stage, in part as a reaction to the ongoing animosity, for the radical transformation of the GOP Establishment if that nominee were to occupy the White House and more conservatives were elected to Congress.
So the Republican Establishment finds itself on the horns of a dilemma: does it continue to cast its fate with the other branch of the governing class -- the Democrats -- by nominating another unelectable moderate in 2016; or does it get behind a viable conservative and risk losing much of its current power base.
In either case they lose in the long term. So the question they must answer is: What is more important: the fate of the country or the fate of their privileged status?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5)--Many years ago while still in the Army, and serving in Germany on the East-West German Border (whichyou can still Google today to see pics if you never saw it?), I read a dissertation on why the collegiate
intellectuals endorsed Communism.
As I recall, it was basically because they thought they had the intelligence to be able to understand
and rationalize why Communism provided a near perfect world where, "everyone produced according to their
abilities and received according to their needs". You, of course, know the ideology of it all---simply BS.
The dissertation did then point out that the missing ingredient would always be that "human nature
is so fundamentally flawed" that if people do not get properly rewarded for what they produced, while
others who produced little received all that they needed, why would the producers work so hard to
produce when others did not?
and rationalize why Communism provided a near perfect world where, "everyone produced according to their
abilities and received according to their needs". You, of course, know the ideology of it all---simply BS.
The dissertation did then point out that the missing ingredient would always be that "human nature
is so fundamentally flawed" that if people do not get properly rewarded for what they produced, while
others who produced little received all that they needed, why would the producers work so hard to
produce when others did not?
I know you know all this-----but what is amazing to me, and to you I guess, considering your subject,
is that to this day the intellectuals still do not get it. They apparently are still so "intellectually elite"
that since their fellow professors and themselves receive pretty much according to their needs (high
salaries), and living in their insulated little worlds, believe that a Communist based theory really does work.
Of course, many do not produce much of anything, but they think they do and receive anyway----so it all
must work as they expected it would.
is that to this day the intellectuals still do not get it. They apparently are still so "intellectually elite"
that since their fellow professors and themselves receive pretty much according to their needs (high
salaries), and living in their insulated little worlds, believe that a Communist based theory really does work.
Of course, many do not produce much of anything, but they think they do and receive anyway----so it all
must work as they expected it would.
We probably are really screwed in addition to Obama and Hillary being more evil than Hitler----they just
have not manifested themselves in the same way YET!
For what it is worth--probably nothing.
have not manifested themselves in the same way YET!
For what it is worth--probably nothing.
I enjoyed your trip reports---want to do something similar soon. We just did two weeks in Canada with Granddaughter
Leah P-----. It was fun----the French in Quebec are insane, but you already know that.
Be well!
Be well!
B-- A-----
_________________________________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment