LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

A Great Cold Civil War

4

4est_4est_Gump

Run Forrest! RUN!
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
89,007
Now we are engaged in a great Cold Civil War. But the decision American voters will make in November is far more than merely an ideological clash about what the Constitution meant or means. For that supposes that both sides are playing by the same rules, and have a shared interest in the outcome. That presumes that both sides accept the foundational idea of the American experiment, and that the argument is over how best to adhere to it.

That is false.

For some, this is a difficult notion to grasp. To them, politics is politics, the same game being played by the same rules that go back a couple of centuries. The idea that one party — and you know which one I mean — is actively working against its own country as it was founded seems unbelievable.

But that is true.

Don’t take it from me, take it from Barack Hussein Obama who famously said on the stump in 2008: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

Many gullible voters took that to mean that the end of the George W. Bush era was at hand, and little more. Ho-hum: politics as usual. But the minute I heard that, I knew exactly what Obama meant. “Fundamental transformation” is the Holy Grail of the modern Left — I do not say “American Left,” since much of its inspiration and sustenance is most definitely not American — and by “fundamental transformation” they mean the utter destruction of the founding principles of limited government, individual self-reliance and personal freedom. In their place, they bring the poisoned gifts of fascism, central planning and rule by a credentialed aristocracy of like-minded fellow travelers.

And when they say “by any means necessary,” you had better believe they mean it. Election 2012 is not a clash of political parties but an existential struggle for the soul of America. To treat it as anything but that is both willful blindness and arrant foolishness.

...

This is why it’s crucial, when dealing with the Left, to reject the premises of their arguments, since those premises must necessarily posit that there is something “fundamentally” wrong with the American system, and that they are the cure.

By rejecting their premises, you do more than simply level the playing field: you also force them out of hiding and either cause them to flee or, more rarely, actually admit their true intentions — something that is almost impossible for them to do. For they must be devotees of what I (and David Kahane) have dubbed “American taqiyya,” the concealment of their destructive purposes under the rubrics of “Fairness,” “Tolerance,” “Compassion,” etc.
Click to expand...
Michael Walsh, PJMedia
 
say it simply

The elections will be cancelled

The troops are out in the streets already
 
Wait'll the Republicans start picking and chosing which laws they like.



Then and only then will you hear the screaming begin, but by then, it will be too late; established precedent. And we will have their silence and posts on record as to mute testimony to their complete agreement with the rule of man over the rule of law.
 
Its the timeless struggle tween the Puritans and Cavaliers.
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
Wait'll the Republicans start picking and chosing which laws they like.



Then and only then will you hear the screaming begin, but by then, it will be too late; established precedent. And we will have their silence and posts on record as to mute testimony to their complete agreement with the rule of man over the rule of law.
Click to expand...

You don't have to wait for that precedent Cap'n Disingenuous, that ship sailed long ago.

Who was it that decided that Presidential signing statements, which until then had been generally triumphal, rhetorical, or political proclamations.. should be used to expand the power of the executive branch?

That would be former President Reagan under the tutelage of Samuel A. Alito, then a staff attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Before Alito's 1986 memorandum advocating for "interpretive signing statements" to be used as a tool to "increase the power of the Executive to shape the law", there had been a grand total of 75 signing statements.
 
The C&P in the OP is by the way, a pant-load.

But that comes as no surprise. It's a PJmedia Opinion piece after all.

Such a broad range of information Cap'n. Right wing, far right wing, and batshit crazy (PJMedia) right wing. :rolleyes:
 
U_D

Which Imperial President threatened to pack the Supreme Court if he didn't get his way?

Which one said, "Let's see if Mr. Marshall can ENFORCE his ruling?"

And which one told Arizona to go fuck off?

(When he lost in court?)

;) ;)

What egregious stunt did President Reagan pull with his signings?
 
STFU, you pathetic clown

With your comments to NIGGERUD and NIIGERPOONZANDI........You look like a fool


and

PLEAE NEVER TAKE ME OFF IGGY

EVER!:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

3
Skinny digging is great!
Replies
11
Views
888
Lifestyle66
L
FiveInch033
Real economics....not the bubble Marxists live in..
2
Replies
30
Views
503
RightField
RightField
JenniferSmithJones
Funny facts about humans, mammals, and genetics
Replies
3
Views
236
JenniferSmithJones
JenniferSmithJones
D
Please help me find a story.
Replies
0
Views
176
Dobbo2121
D
Shaglus_Ziegler
Chatting with the new fake “god AI.
Replies
0
Views
75
Shaglus_Ziegler
Shaglus_Ziegler
Back
Top