If it were socialism, its critics would be unheard from, in jail, in Siberia, under heavy sedation or other psychiatric drugs… or dead.
How soon we forget.
An adviser is not a czar, at least not as the term was used when the nation’s first Secretary of Energy had grouped under his authority numerous formerly-independent executive agencies, or the first Secretary of Education similarly, or the first “Director of National Intelligence,” or “Secretary of Homeland Security” (didn’t they used to call that “defense”?!?!?!).
An adviser has no direct power; a “czar” has LOTS of power. If you have LOTS of “czars,” that’s a contradiction, because their power is diluted.
Go back to the dictionary, fascists. “Are advisers unamerican?” Only if an “American” President is required to be an expert in every area of government or administration! I used to think they were electing a National Pastor, but now it seems they want to elect a god!!! Now that’s “godless”!
As for “dictatorial style,” look to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney; as for “secrecy,” look to Cheney’s secret energy policy meetings we’re still trying to get to the bottom of.
I doubt it. Why was a camera trained on him at just the right moment to capture him pointing and yelling? Members of Congress received advance copies of President Obama’s address to last week’s Joint Session. Wilson probably tipped-off someone in the media about his planned “outburst.” Such cynicism and manipulation rules us today….
A fascinating discussion here! I’m not sure I buy it all, whether as an Irishman, an Indigenous person (whether of North America or of Ireland/Europe), or a half-baked Red Tory … even an Orthodox Christian … but intriguing reading and thinking. I may have to re-read it.
A way to insult both the Irish Catholic in me and the Native American in me would be to call me an Anglo! I don’t care if my first language is English or my skin and hair are relatively light!
Ironically, I found out a couple years ago that I am 1/4 English by ancestry. But I wasn’t raised with it, and although I’ve learned alot about America, Canada, law, history, literature, etc., via British stuff, I grew up too Irish Catholic to be comfortable with that. What happened, I presume, is that my Episcopalian grandmother married my Irish Catholic grandfather, but was apparently not very religious, and of course their kids were required to be raised Catholic. Plus, I think in those days “the mother’s side” was degraded in family-culture or identity alot. Therefore, I only learned it recently as a factoid that doesn’t fit well with the rest of me, and doesn’t do anything for me.
Even funnier is that I think we actually talked more about Indian stuff than Irish stuff, when *I* was growing up — my mother and I, anyway … she’s the part-Indian. The Irish stuff was there enough to influence me culturally, though not much because ‘we couldn’t afford any culture’!! For that matter, we didn’t talk too much about Indian stuff either. (My family … don’t ask!!) Mom’s grandmom also said her dad was Welsh, but we didn’t have much grasp of Welshness in the ’70s, or I guess not even the ’40s. I didn’t really become aware of Welshness until the nationalist movement started getting U.S. media attention in the ’70s-80s, though that wasn’t much either!
Just don’t call Michael J. Fox “chicken” … and don’t call me Anglo. Yo soy ingles un poco … pero no soy “anglo”!
…is against parliamentary procedure. As wild as even the UK House of Commons gets, outright accusing somebody of lying gets you censured and harangued.
Especially when you’re wrong in so saying!
Censure Joe Wilson.
I’m just sayin’!
Sounds like somebody had his bed short-sheeted or something!
If memory serves, it’s even Christian!
The opening line of the U.S. unilateral Declaration of Independence of 1776, “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” ISN’T! If they’re self-evident, you don’t have to say you hold them to be so: they simply are so. “The lady doth protest too much, methinks!” Certainly they went on to deprive myriads of their fellow Colonial residents, Native Americans, and Africans of their “unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”….
That’s right. One has the right to disagree with healthcare reform, though it seems irrational to me to do so. But to fundamentally question Obama’s Presidency is to seek to overturn the 2008 Election just because they disagree with the outcome. That’s sour grapes, breaking the rules of majoritarian democracy. Has he succeeded in doing anything he didn’t “promise” to do in getting elected? Arguably he has gone back on several promises already. In any case, it’s too soon, 8 months into a new Administration, lacking High Crimes and Misdeeds (not that they ever get prosecuted anyway … only sex). These attacks are driven by something less political than anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, racist, deceptive (fake “grassroots” incited, recruited, planned, and bankrolled by Big Business, Big Lobbyists, etc.), libelous (probably actionable), etc. Unlike 2000 and 2004, there are no serious accusations that Barack Obama was not the choice of both a majority of the voters or intended voters last Election Day, and of the Electoral College. Attacking his very being President, then, without grounds as I have said, is attacking America, democracy, the Constitution, the rule of law, the voting majorities of Nov. 4.
Just like they did with President Clinton.
That’s right: They now believe no Democratic Party member can ever ‘legitimately’ be President. They persecuted Clinton, they kept out elected Presidents Gore and Kerry, and it seems they will persecute Obama.
Just so we’re clear what’s going on here.
And when they openly bring guns to political rallies and public meetings, they mean to threaten democracy itself.
THAT is Fascism.