SOME HISTORY

American Leftists claim to be deathly afraid that a second term for GWB will allow him to appoint Supreme Court judges who uphold the constitution instead of making the law up as they go along. I would like to think it is true but from the way the Senate Democrats recently filibustered Estrada, I fear it is unlikely. And you don't always get what you expect with judicial appointments. Power can easily go to the head of the enthroned one. We might recollect the time when a Republican President appointed a Republican governor to the court and the nation got out of it one of its most determined judicial dictators -- Earl Warren.

Condemnation of the President: "What has [the president done] to entitle him to re-election? We contend he has done nothing to earn this high distinction but that, on the contrary, in the conduct of the war, his deplorable mismanagement of our most important armies, with the disastrous and alarming consequences, have furnished evidence sufficient to convince the country he is not the pilot to carry us through the perils of this war..." But the President concerned was Lincoln, not Bush.

"Neocons" in 1944: "Jewish government officials secretly manipulating the president? That accusation, heard recently in connection with the decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein, was also raised sixty years ago, in the heat of the 1944 presidential race. The lightning rod for criticism in 1944 was Sidney Hillman, a prominent labor leader and aide to President Franklin D. Roosevelt."

There is some discussion here of how the welfare state "colonised" Britain's formerly self reliant and mutually supporting working class: "the extensive culture of privately run working-class schools was destroyed by the board-schools founded by the 1870 Education Act, which were not free, but were effectively subsidised to a point where they put their private competitors out of business. All of this was part of a process in which 'the working classes are firmly tagged as the patients, never the agents.'... The state,... by taking away the working classes' means of providing for themselves, and especially by creating catastrophic "Downer" ghettos in housing estates, has created a culture of dependency.

Some interesting statistics about the lead-up to World War II from Jim Lindgren: A Gallup poll taken in 1938 showed that the support for an anti-Jewish campaign was quite low in America but that Democrat voters were 50% more likely to support such a campaign than were Republicans (14.7% versus 9.8%). Those "racist" conservatives again!

"Genghis Khan may not sound like a compassionate conservative, but Weatherford argues that his subject was a great deal more tolerant and far-sighted than his barbaric reputation suggests. Suborned peoples, of all creeds and cultures, were permitted to conduct their affairs autonomously - so long as they recognized his paramountcy. He was the first of the great free traders, a meritocrat, and, by the lights of his time, a nicely enlightened despot. You could do worse than being ruled by Genghis Khan, and many did".

*******************************

ELSEWHERE

In academe, Brian Leiter is probably second only to Noam Chomsky for half-truths and twisted reasoning. Because he seems to be widely-read, it is probably time someone took on the job of shooting him down regularly -- as various people do for Chomsky. Being a humble psychologist rather than a high-flying lawyer, I am not the man for the job but even I am tempted to point out the odd bit of shallow rhetoric emanating from him. Take this post. He says the very name "Constitution Restoration Act" is Orwellian. The U.S. constitution is Orwellian? How twisted can thinking be? The provisions of U.S. constitution are about as opposite to a socialist dictatorship (which is what Orwell describes) as you can get! And restoring elements and assumptions of that constitution that have been eroded by an arbitrary "progressive" judiciary must surely be similarly anti-Orwellian. So it is Leiter who is Orwellian. He is calling black white. Once again we note that familiar Leftist "projection" -- seeing your own faults in others. Leiter also heads up his discussion of the Act as "Theocracy anyone?" -- implying (apparently) that the Act concerned is designed to introduce some sort of Christian dictatorship. The whole point of the Act, however, is simply to protect people from being harassed in the courts just because they are Christians. So in Leiter's strange world protecting people from official harassment is equivalent to setting up a dictatorship! Again, he claims something is the opposite of what it is. With scholarship as atrocious as that, it is clear that Leiter's popularity derives from his Leftist ideological correctness rather than any intellectual stature. His reasoning is such garbage that I suppose it is no wonder that nobody bothers to critique it regularly.

The poll of conservative bloggers says that George Bush will defeat John Kerry hands-down.

Another stupid (psychopathic) lie: "U.N. ambassadors from several nations are disputing assertions by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry that he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq."

The myth of the disenfranchised: "Already, in state after state, the Democrats have said that voter confusion over how to vote constitutes voter disenfranchisement. But, as George Will recently noted, disenfranchisement is something the government does to you. It's not something you do to yourself. If you can't figure out how to fill in the ovals or punch the chads -- and some minority of voters will always botch it -- that doesn't mean your right to vote was rescinded. It means that you didn't take your right to vote seriously enough to pay attention to the instructions."

Sweden "As early as 1977, Swedish relative income fell below the average for the twenty-three rich OECD countries. Swedish economic growth has been below the OECD average since 1970. The accumulated effect of the slower growth rate is large. From 1970 to 1998, fifteen countries surpassed or caught up with Sweden in terms of GDP per capita, while Sweden did not overtake a single one.... In the early 90's Sweden's extensive sick-leave system resulted in 30% of the working population being "sick" at any point in time. Unemployment rose to 13%. Taxes rose to 55% of GNP, with deficits of 15% of GNP.... It isn't difficult to conclude that Sweden took a resource-rich land, a hardy and resourceful citizenry, avoided the expense and destruction of wars, and then proceeded to smother those advantages with a socialistic welfare state. It's hard to imagine a more ideal testing ground for an ideological experiment, yet socialism has failed there as well".

For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH and SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here

**************************

That power only, not principles, is what matters to Leftists is perfectly shown by the Kerry campaign. They have put up a man whose policies seem to be 99% the same as George Bush's even though they have previously disagreed violently with those policies. "Whatever it takes" is their rule.

Leftists are phonies. For most of them all that they want is to sound good. They don't care about doing good. That's why they do so much harm. They don't really care what the results of their policies are as long as they are seen as having good intentions

Comments? Email me here. If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.

********************************