The Crisis Facing America

Why? Do they think Trump's actions are incongruous for a President too?

 

It's both interesting and sad that I'm so far under your skin all you can do is gossip behind my back.

 

Okay.
it
Interesting.
To make the transformation from engaged to enraged, it stands to reason, one must become aware of the hypocrisy. Something most hypocrites are incapable of accepting. Indeed that incapability INCREASES the level of hypocrisy among the hypocrites.

I'd also have to say I totally disagree with "french moralists" who saw hypocrisy as the vice of all vices. IN my book it doesn't even make my list of vices.

Then there is the issue of perspective, which in extreme partisan situations makes "hypocrisy" a matter of biased interpretation, which isn't really hypocrisy its simply rhetorical argumentation.

The last point, is that hypocrisy is a universal human "condition" NOT a partisan one. The evidence is all around you.

 

I think you sound like a column from the Economist or Weekly Standard, pushing the neocon/banking/defense contractor agenda of reviving the cold war

 

QED

A sad overreaction.

 

The "progressive" movement has always been bipartisan, and it has succeeded in relentlessly expanding government and its role in American society.
The Patriot Act was probably inevitable.

 

The last hypocrite exterminated by the French Revolution was Robespierre himself. Lenin and Stalin apparently died of natural causes almost all of the other Bolshevik revolutionaries had to do the full Robespierre. They missed their moment, and paid for it with their lives.

 

The Economist doesn't push a "neocon/banking/defense contractor agenda of reviving the cold war", but interesting that you think so. Also sad to see so many alleged Americans stand against their own country to defend Russia.

 

The mouthpiece for the FED and ECB and their darling SWIFT banking system through which they sanction Russia. Funny

 

Emojis appear to be a principle means of his communications.

 

Why do you think the Patriot Act was inevitable? Because the Republican party killed itself?

The Patriot Act was passed by the House 357-66 and the Senate 98-1 then signed by President Bush. Seems like the Republicans were solidly behind it since only 3 Republican Representatives voted against and an no Republican Senators voted against it. In what Universe is the Patriot Act the fault of the Democrats?

 

The bolshevik revolutionaries killed were mostly the jewish contingent that Stalin wished to purge, and he did one helluva job of it.

IMHO, Robespierre et.al. is not about hypocrisy, it is all about the truism "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

 

"In what Universe" did I blame the Democrats? Read my post again.

"The "progressive" movement has always been ***bipartisan***, and it has succeeded in relentlessly expanding government and its role in American society.
The Patriot Act was probably inevitable." (*** added)

 

Stalin eventually had almost all of the Russian Revolution's leaders executed. The purges did not stop until 9/39.

Power does tend to corrupt, hypocrisy was just an excuse for the French witch hunts, but absolute power did not corrupt George Washington. He seized the historical moment Robespierre and Lenin let slip away.

At least Robespierre lived long enough to regret the mistake.

 

Most people who complain about the "progressives" are talking about Democrats. Who do you mean by that label?

 

The "progressive movement" was bipartisan. There were many progressive Republicans including Hoover and TDR.

 

Is that good or bad? Reasons for either?

 

Which is why Washington is considered the father of the nation. He turned down dictatorship. Don't find many like that at any time in history, particularly these days.

 

The American Revolution was the first real revolution in human history.

"The modern concept of revolution, inextricably bound up
with the notion that the course of history suddenly begins anew,
that an entirely new story, a story never known or told before,
is about to unfold, was unknown prior to the two great revolu-
tions at the end of the eighteenth century."

On Revolution, Hannnah Arendt, Penguin Classics, 2006.
https://archive.org/stream/OnRevolution/ArendtOn-revolution_djvu.txt

So far it has been the last real revolution. It is certainly the only one that did not end in tyranny.

 

The progressive movement is a counter to the American Revolution which recognized government as an evil to be carefully restrained. Progressives are reactionaries. Progressives", as opposed to Communists, view Big Government as a force for good. "Progressives" are fundamentally anti-American, and even today a supermajority of Americans still reject Big Government as a very frightening threat to humanity.

 

Agreed favoring big government is anti-American, but even the Founders had their "big government" proponents...although I doubt they'd agree with the extent the modern Democrats have taken it.

That said, I'm still a little fuzzy on what you think "Progressives" are seeking and why you think they are bad. Are there any good aspects to their goals?

 

The goals of progressives are often very good. The movement is bad because in encourages a Big Government structure to achieve those goals.

 

Thanks and agreed. The whole "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" idea......or "We have to destroy the village in order to save it".

 

Thanks for posting that link to the transcript.

I didn't get to see that press conference. Now that I got to read it, I can see that my guess was correct. I can just go ahead and laugh at all of the ridiculous, insane charges people are throwing at Trump.

Thanks again.