"In a democracy (‘rule by mob’), those who refuse to learn from history will be the majority and will dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance."
. . .that I can’t quite get behind, IYKWIMAITTYD.
Nah. That’s WAY too friendly, and besides, feds aren’t my type. You know, human. I’m not into bestiality, ya know. (Ya can’t blame me for dehumanizing the feds, because they have done it to themselves.)
Too many laws. Most of the laws on the fedgov’s books should be completely scrapped, metaphorically “nuked from orbit.” If they are truly necessary AND PROPER (undeniably completely within strict constitutional bounds), then re-pass them with the limitation that ONLY what is in the black letter of the bill is enforceable and the entire law must be strictly enforced on ALL inhabitants of the country, no exceptions or “immunities.” Period. What we have now is a complete, total, and absolute perversion of “equality before the law.”
Just askin’ because. . .
My view of politicians in general is that modern plumping is a Really Good Thing, because when one is regular and daily gives birth to a politician, one can always just reach for the flush lever. . .
The Dhimmicrap Circus of Klowns has put forth its A-Team:
(And yeh, as known to any literate person, the 20th Century KKK was a Democrat organization and populated by such notables as Senator “KKK,” Robert Carlyle Byrd, so the Koup Klutz Klan has tradition going for it in its lynch mob tactics.)
I don’t trust Marco Rubio any farther than I can walk on water.
Rubio would make a decent vice president, with Cruz holding his leash and occasionally rubbing his nose in his messes, but his serial misrepresentations (OK, outright lies: saying one thing in English and another in Spanish, for example) of his own positions on alien invaders qualifies him only for a couple of terms being “paper trained,” IMO.
Like most proponents of amnesty for alien invaders (and despite his “nuanced” lies, that’s exactly what he holds for), he also sets straw men up as the only alternatives to his amnesty (no matter what he disingenuously calls it) proposals.
Moreover, He makes some good “Christ talk” from time to time, but his lies say his “Christianity” is suspect.
Do note: Rubio talks a good game on many policy issues, and even when making moral arguments, but his outright lies on the issue of alien invaders and amnesty call all his “good game talk” into question, for
He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. ~ Luke 16:10
Rubio has proven he cannot even be trusted to keep his lies straight, and that’s no little thing.
One of the things that most disturbs me about politics nowadays is the consistent brutality politicians and Hivemind Podpeople (but I repeat myself; Mass MEdia Hivemind Podpeople are just political operatives with bylines *sigh*) perpetrate upon language and reason by means of corrupting terms. For example, there are very (very) few “conservatives” who espouse anything even remotely resembling conservative values or policies, and there are even fewer “liberals” who have any even remote connection to liberal values or policies. (Democrats who continually try to poison democracy by vitiating voting integrity commit vile calumny of democracy by claiming “democratic” principles, for example.)
My mind was “tainted” as a lad when both my extended family of pastors and theologians and historians, and my readings of Aquinas, Mill, and many others led me to think that calling things by honest terms is really the only way to approach finding true things, and that finding that which is true is a Very Good Thing.
Nowadays, in politics, The Hivemind (in all its forms), in the groves of Academia Fruitcake Bakeries, etc., lies in the form of words used to cloak their opposites are the norm.
Consider a fair definition of “speech codes” often in effect on so-called “liberal” campuses, nowadays,
“. . .a “speech code” [is] any university regulation or policy that prohibits expression that would be protected by the First Amendment in society at large. Any policy—such as a harassment policy, a protest and demonstration policy, or an IT acceptable use policy—can be a speech code if it prohibits protected speech or expression.
“Many speech codes impermissibly prohibit speech on the basis of content and/or viewpoint. An example of this type of policy would be a ban on “offensive language” or “disparaging remarks.” Other speech codes are content-neutral but excessively regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. A policy of this type might limit protests and demonstrations to one or two “free speech zones” on campus and/or require students to obtain permission in advance in order to demonstrate on campus.”
As against such statements as these from the prototypical classic liberal, John Stuart Mill:
“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. . .
“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
~ John Stuart Mill, On Liberty
Mill, in his essay, “On Liberty” expands on the very principles the Founders sought to carve into the law of the land. Interestingly, Edmund Burke, the prototypical English conservative recognized that the Founders were expressing their understanding of the rights of individuals within the framework of conservative values. (“Conciliation with the Colonies,” March, 1775)
GENUINE liberalism and GENUINE conservatism BOTH hold free speech to be a cardinal liberty, due protection by the state. So-called “liberals” nowadays most certainly do not (though they lie and say they do), and many so-called “conservatives” today are not much better.
One can simply list fundamental individual rights and go down the list checking off those that so-called “liberals” genuinely demonstrate support for or that so-called “conservatives” genuinely attempt to protect and find little in the way of liberal efforts to support expression of individual rights or conservative efforts to protect existing expression of individual rights. What one is more likely to find is both camps saying they are doing so while really simply trampling individual rights in the process of creating privileged classes.
I really tire of these lying scum. One suspects such behavior would only be amenable t amelioration by means of citizens’ vigilance committees bringing back tar and feathers. Like that’s gonna happen. . . *sigh*
That the IRS is run by incompetent liars is now a well-established fact, but it matters not, because most Americans just DGARA.
The “dog ate my email” flap? “Once [a “Lois Lerner *cough* crash *cough*] _may_ be happenstance. Twice [destruction of backup data on ONE of THREE required servers] _may_ be coincidence. Three times [destruction of data on the SECOND of THREE required backups] _is_ enemy action.” Four times (the last required backup) is spiking the ball in the end zone, and doing the same thing for SIX MORE employees under investigation is nothing less than the IRS thumbing its nose at the American people. Watch as IRS Commissioner John Koskinen blows a raspberry at the American people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5XJxfT5dL8
And what, if anything, will the People do about it? Nada. Zip. Zilch. A big zero with the rim kicked off. Whine and bitch and moan on social media. Ditto to their congresscritter, if said People are really serious, active and engaged.
*yawn*
IOW, Nada. Zip. Zilch. A big zero with the rim kicked off.
Anyone focused on bringing pressure on their STATE legislators to compel a national convention to redress the wrongs heaped upon citizens by the “feddle gummint”? Such a convention MUST be carefully monitored by concerned, literate patriots, though, or it WILL be hijacked by asinine leftist-statist traitors to liberty.
My suggestions for such a convention?
There are others, but this would be a good place to start.
According to six years of hyperventilating by Dhimmicraps and Mass MEdia Podpeople, leading Dhimmicraps are now racists.
Hey! Don’t look at me that way! It’s THEIR standard: disagree with King Putz the Petulant Prevaricating Pussy* and you’re a racist, according to six years of fake umbrage.
Continue reading “That’s Racist or Something, Isn’t It? *heh*”