Quotes on Democracy

Recently I had a conversation with a young woman who just positively glowed about the benefits of Democracy. I seem to get in these kinds of conversations frequently. Of course people who say they love Democracy have no earthly idea what they are saying. I believe they think they are saying that they Love America. The Problem is, is that America was not formed as a Democracy.

So, in order to understand Democracy we must have an understanding of what it means. Democracy is merely mobocracy. It is the idea that a 50% plus 1 vote equals legal rule. As such, we could cite the whimsical, but true saw, that Democracy is 3 wolves and 2 Lambs voting on what is for dinner.

The fact that our founders hated the idea of Democracy is found in the words of James Madison (you know … he who is known as the Father of our non-democracy Constitution). Madison said

“[D]emocracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

Our Second President, John Adams said of Democracy,

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

What follows is a flurry of quotes on Democracy. Of course my young female friend had no idea of what Democracy really means or else she would have never been so vehement about supporting the silliness and danger that is Democracy.

“A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens…which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it…which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’ ‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome.” ~

Robert A. Heinlein

“Democratism and its allied herd movements, while remaining loyal to the principle of equality and identity, will never hesitate to sacrifice liberty.” ~ Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

“Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.” ~ Hans-Herman Hoppe

“Democracy arises out of the notion that those who are equal in any respect are equal in all respects; because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal.” ~ Aristotle

“Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone’s slave.” ~ Karl Kraus

“Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.” ~ H.L. Mencken

American was not founded as a Democracy. It was founded as a Constitutional Republic. Of course that has been largely lost via government education combined with brain dead politicians who are forever giving us claptrap about America as that “great shining Democracy that the whole world aspires to be.

In point of fact the degeneration of our nation can be largely traced to the tendency of our Nation to embrace more and more mechanisms that smack of Democracy. The elimination of the US Senators being voted upon by State Legislators in 1913. The tendency towards referendum ballot initiatives. (Initiatives that are consistently ignored if the population doesn’t vote the way the State desire the outcome to end.) The push in some quarters to get rid of the Electoral College. All of these movements towards Democracy chip away at the Liberty upon which this diverse nation was founded.

Democracy … the killer of nations and the midwife of tyranny.

2012 Endorsement

Joseph Sobran once said, “I don’t have a dog in this fight. My dog died a long time ago.” So it is with election 2012, for when it comes to the major Demopublican and Republicrat parties I have no dog in the fight. The whole political paradigm of “Left vs. Right” comes to us from the French Revolution and just as both “Left and Right” then was a division of Jacobins all, so today our Left (Obama) vs. Right (Romney) finds us having to choose between one Jacobin or another of varying degrees. So, voting for the Major parties for an informed person is not an option since such a choice really amounts to having to vote for the “left side of the left” or having to vote for “the right side of the left.” I choose neither.

Because I believe that diffuse, limited, and decentralized Government is a biblical norm I will be voting for the Constitutional party candidate, Virgil Goode. The Statism of the major parties is not an option and neither is any candidate that represents movement Libertarianism. The problem of the political “One and the Many” is not solved by voting for any Candidate or party that would give us the “One” to the neglect of the “Many” (Movement Libertarianism), or the “Many” to the neglect of the “One” (Statism). I still believe in the Biblical norm, whether one calls that Subsidiarity or Sphere Sovereignty, and as such I will vote for a Party that still has a memory of such Biblical norms in their platform.

Rev. Bret L. McAtee
Worldview gadfly at Ironink.org
Submitted for publication for the Webzine “The Conservative Times.”
http://conservativetimes.org/?p=12508

Peeking At Romney’s Acceptance Speech

I have come to the point in life where I believe those elected as President are merely empty suits doing the bidding of the international banking interest that operates behind the scenes pulling the strings of policy that emanates from every White House administration. As such, I have for some time not really taken these elections seriously since I believe the fix is in no matter which major party candidate wins.

If people want to understand the reasoning behind this conviction I would encourage them to consider the truth in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAdu0N1-tvU&feature=related

Still, having admitted that, I want to take a peek at just a few excerpts from Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech.

“We are a nation of immigrants.”

And again later,

“When every new wave of immigrants looked up and saw the Statue of Liberty, or knelt down and kissed the shores of freedom just ninety miles from Castro’s tyranny, these new Americans surely had many questions.”

The is the official myth that Americans have been propagandized into believing since the Immigration Act of 1965. This unofficial American creed supports both the ridiculous assertion that “diversity is our strength,” and the attempt to officially codify multiculturalism as the basis of our social order.

First of all, the statement is just not true. Despite thirty-plus years of mass immigration set off by the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 — an act dedicated to overturning the White, Anglo, Saxon, and marginally Christian essence of the American nation — the vast majority of Americans are still American-born children of American-born parents. The idea that “we are a nation of immigrants” is also historically false as scores of millions of Americans are neither immigrants nor had parents who were immigrants.

Also the idea that, “we are a nation of immigrants” flounders on the reality that a nation of immigrants would not and could not be a nation. Were we literally a nation of immigrants we would be a Hodge-Podge of heterogeneous peoples having nothing in common except living in the same geographic area. A nation of immigrants would mean a nation with nothing to unify the varied religions, ethnicity, and people group history of the multitudinous immigrant groupings inhabiting the nation. Of course, such a irregularity of a nation of immigrants, would give us not a nation, but a anti-nation. Such a anti-nation would be characterized by balkanization, tensions, and distrust between the various immigrant groups.

This is not to deny that immigration has been important to our country. It has. However, originally most of that immigration came from people groups that were already homogenous in significant ways with the host culture they would eventually be assimilated with. However, the kind of immigration that we have been looking at since 1965 promises to overthrow the essentially British culture and largely Christian underpinnings that have informed this nation. (See David Hackett Fisher’s “Albion’s Seed.”) What the mantra of “we are a nation of immigrants” is effectuating now is the work on the part of the State to dissolve the historic faith and culture by electing a new people. It shouldn’t be surprising that those who identify with the historic faith and culture do not like hearing the multicultural mantra that “we are a nation of immigrants.”

With that statement, Romney might also be signaling not only an appeal to the Hispanic vote that Republicans believe they so desperately need, but it also may be communicating that a President Romney would support some kind of amnesty program for the current 15 million illegal aliens currently present in these united States. That the Republican establishment desperately desires some kind of amnesty program is a certainty.

Elsewhere in his acceptance speech Romney said,

“I wish President Obama had succeeded because I want America to succeed.”

I am fairly sure that this was placed in the text in order to counter Rush Limbaugh’s now famous statement, spoken shortly after Obama’s inauguration, “I hope he (Obama) fails.”

Limbaugh took incredible heat for that statement. I think we can agree with both Limbaugh and Romney here. Because Obama is a Marxist it was necessary for any Patriot to hope he failed. Who would want a Marxist leader to succeed in his plan to implement Marxism? We could also say that we wished Obama had succeeded in the sense that it would have been nice if his policies had been a success, even though everyone knew it advance that Marxism never succeeds except for the elite ruling class.

Romney went on speaking of his wife, Ann,

“I knew that her job as a mom was harder than mine. And I knew without question, that her job as a mom was a lot more important than mine.”

This is a bone thrown to counter the Democrat accusation that Republicans are waging war on women. However, it is a falsity. A Mom’s job is not more important than a Dad’s job, just as a Dad’s job is not more important than a Mom’s job.

Romney went on and on supporting the idea of Feminism. He said he chose a female as his Lt. Governor. He said he chose a female chief of staff. He talked about all the female Republican governors. God speaks in Scripture that ruling women are a sign of being cursed (Isaiah 3:12).

Elsewhere Romney soft-pedaled his Mormonism,

“We were Mormons and growing up in Michigan; that might have seemed unusual or out of place but I really don’t remember it that way. My friends cared more about what sports teams we followed than what church we went to.”

This is Romney’s way of saying that his Mormonism is nothing to be concerned about by Evangelicals and Catholics. Clarity requires me to insist that attending a Mormon Church is not the same as attending a Christian Church since Mormonism is a different religion.

Romney revealed what may very likely become a theme in the campaign,

T”he President hasn’t disappointed you because he wanted to. The President has disappointed America because he hasn’t led America in the right direction. He took office without the basic qualification that most Americans have and one that was essential to his task. He had almost no experience working in a business. Jobs to him are about government.”

This is the whole, “Obama is a nice guy but he was inexperienced and ill equipped to do the job as President” routine. I don’t buy that Obama is a nice guy. I don’t consider Marxists of any stripe in any position to be nice people. Obama has already revealed his fangs in the campaign by approving the add that connected Romney’s work at Bain Capital with the death of a man’s wife. Obama is more than incompetent. Obama is malevolent.

Now, I believe Romney to be every bit as malevolent but I believe he believes that he can’t win by attacking Obama as a socialist.

Romney said,

“And it means that we must rein in the skyrocketing cost of healthcare by repealing and replacing Obamacare.”

I’m all for repealing Obama-care. I get nervous when I hear Romney (the author of socialist Romney-care in Massachusetts) talks about replacing Obama-care. Replacing with what? A better “more efficient” socialist health care?

Finally we look at Romney saying,

“Every American is less secure today because he has failed to slow Iran’s nuclear threat.

I get nervous at the thought of Romney and saber rattling with Iran. Why would I want to vote for someone who may very well get us even further in the slough of the Middle East?

Oh My Akin Body

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Akin said on KTVI-TV. “But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

Todd Akin
Missouri Republican Candidate for US Senate

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…”

US Constitution
5th Amendment

A great deal of buzz has been created by the first quote above. Akin, the Republican candidate for the US Senate in Missouri has had calls from Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney to vacate his position as GOP standard bearer for the Missouri US Senate race.

A few observations from someone who votes neither Republican or Democrat

1.) Republicans have to meet a double standard. Joe Biden accuses Republicans of wanting to put blacks back and chains and the hub bub is a mere blip. Nancy Pelosi says that “we have to pass the Obama-care bill in order to see what is int it,” and there is a few guffaws but she doesn’t have to spend any political capital for such asinine statements. But let a George Allen make a “Macaca” comment and suddenly the press descends upon him like piranhas. Similarly with Todd Akin. At the very worst Akin was misinformed on his facts. At the very best he simply made a blunder in his communication.

However, having said that, the fact that the Democrats don’t get what they deserve when they make verbal gaffes (and Obango has made tons of verbal gaffes …e.g., — “You did not build that …”) does not mean that it is wrong for Republicans to get what they deserve when they make verbal gaffes. Yes, it is a double standard, but if gaffes are really stupid (and Akin’s was monumentally stupid) then they should be lampooned.

2.) Of course the reason that Republicans get slapped harder by the media is that their gaffes tend more to violate the narrative of political correctness and cultural Marxism. The major media outlets agree with Obango’s socialism and so try to cover for the man we call President by excusing his “you didn’t build that” comment. However, when Akin talks about “the female body having ways to shut down the whole (impregnation by rape) thing” then the media howls since abortion is one of the sacraments of a key constituent (feminism) supporting Cultural Marxism.

This is one way by which the major media outlets control conversation, and so thought, in our politically correct paradise.

3.) Akin, despite his in-artful way of phrasing matters, is on the right side of the life of the child issue. To be sure if a woman is impregnated as a result of a rape that is a burden of a consequence that has to be born by that woman. However, why should the baby the raped woman is carrying, be tortured and punished all because the baby’s mother was tortured by rape? Why should we kill the baby as opposed to bring capital charges against the rapist? Why shouldn’t the genuine criminal be visited with the death penalty as opposed to the judicially innocent baby?

4.) There was a time in history that families of criminals would be held liable for a individual family member who committed a crime. In recent history even, Communist countries would let people travel in other countries knowing that the communist traveler would know that if he sought asylum to escape Communism his family back in the old country would be murdered. The West has always thought that such blood ransoming of family as incentive for individuals to keep laws was pagan. And yet, that is exactly what is done when we abort babies conceived in rape scenarios. We murder them because of the criminal guilt of their rapist Father.

5.) Akin should have replied to the question that was asked of him,

“I believe that at conception we have a person. In believing that, the fifth amendment to the constitution forbids me from holding any person to answer for a capital crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. When a Grand Jury begins indicting the unborn persons for capital crimes then I will have to consider again my position but until then I must honor the US Constitution’s 5th amendment by not supporting ending the life of any person not indicted by a Grand Jury.”

Gary DeMar Once Again Reveals His Neo-con Stripes

Response to,

http://godfatherpolitics.com/6338/why-im-voting-for-mitt-romney-and-why-you-should-too/#ixzz21vQaHfzN

When it comes to voting, I am not a messianic. I do not believe that any one politician is going to come riding in on a white steed to make all wrongs right. When it comes to voting, neither am I a perfectionist. I wouldn’t be supporting Ron Paul’s candidacy were I a perfectionist. There are many matters about Dr. Paul I would like to correct but I am willing to hold my nose and vote for him. When it comes to voting I am a principled pragmatist, which is why I will never vote for Mormon Mitt Romney. Gary DeMar, apparently believing in Messianic candidates and in wrong headed notions concerning pragmatism is going to vote for Mitt and further Dr. DeMar desires to influence his readers to do the same.

I see a messianic streak in Gary’s reasoning. No, Gary does not think that Mitt is the Messiah who will right all wrongs but Gary does believe that Mitt is enough of a Messiah to thwart the work of the evil king Barack. That is a huge assumption on Gary’s part. For years conservative voters have been told that they need to vote for Republican X because he will stop the evil machinations of Democrat Y, and for years Republican X only serves to consolidate the gains made by evil Democrat Y. Remember, we were told that we had to support Bush lest the evil John Kerry be allowed to appoint Supreme Court Justices. The Bush turns around and gives us John Roberts, who voted to uphold the anti-Christ Death care legislation. Bush (and Mitt is nothing but the second coming of “W”) gave us socialist prescription medicine entitlement. Bush joined with Teddy Kennedy to give us “no child left behind” legislation. Bush gave us Empire mongering in the Middle East. We were told in 2000 and 2004 exactly what we are being told now by the Gary DeMars of the world, and that is, “We must support Romney because he is enough of a Messiah to thwart the work of the evil Democrat nominee. How many times before people learn that the reasoning, “The Republican is enough of a Messiah to give us time,” before they learn what a fatuous argument that is?

Gary admits that John McCain wasn’t much of an alternative to Obama in the last Presidential election cycle and yet in 2008 Gary supported McCain. Now in 2012 the Stupid party has a candidate that is only marginally different that McCain and Dr. DeMar is all breathless regarding the virtues of Mitt Romney?

In his article supporting Mitt, Dr. DeMar then goes on a tear defending himself from the charge of “Racism,” because he is not supporting Obama. In this tear DeMar even tells us that it is really the white part of Obama that he doesn’t like, saying, “In fact, it’s the white half of Obama that I don’t like.” This is where white Christians have descended in order to protect themselves from being called “racist.” We have bowed so deeply to the political correctness of this age that in order to oppose a mixed race man for President we have to inveigh against the white in him in order to be seen as credible in our opposition. Gary then spends a few paragraphs explaining why the black community is being dis-serviced by Obama but he spills no cyber ink explaining why the Christian white community is being dis-serviced by Obama. This is yet more evidence that Gary had drank deeply from the waters of political correctness as they issue forth from the stream of Cultural Marxism.

Dr. DeMar inveighs against the white half of Obama and his socialism and Marxism but he fails to understand that Romney is afflicted with the same disease. Romeny showed his Marxist stripe when he implemented Obama-care in Massachusetts before Obama-care was Obama-care. Romney would have us believe that Marxism is good for one of the individual states while it is not good for the nation, yet, his staff members urged Washington to consider Commonwealth Care as a model solution for the U.S. healthcare system. Romney attacked private wealth, just as any good Marxist, when in his four years in office, as Governor of Massachusetts, he raised taxes by $309 million, mostly on job-creating corporations, selling the wealth grab as “closing loopholes.” Romney is also a statist when it comes to education, and this is especially important to note given Dr. DeMar’s closing emphasis on education in his article.

Romney’s actual record on education is one of expanding bureaucracy a la NCLB. As Governor of Massachusetts, he created a new government department called the Early Education and Care Department. Its mission: provide government-managed preschool and childcare to youngsters.

So, who do you suppose he picked to help lead the new bureaucracy? None other than Linda Mason, co-founder of Bright Horizons Family Solutions, a preschool and childcare company that later was accused of child abuse (oh, and it was bankrolled by Bain Capital portfolio, too). But that’s not the important thing to remember about Bright Horizons.

Remember how Romney likes to talk about the importance of “traditional families” because, as he put it, “every child needs a Mom and Dad”? Well, not so much at Bright Horizons, which is proud of its 100-percent rating from the Human Rights Campaign (just like Bain Capital).

To earn a 100-percent rating from HRC, you must operate your business as a homosexual and transgender indoctrination center. That’s particularly terrifying when the business in question is supposed to be helping craft the minds of young children — so doing with storybooks like “Daddy’s Roommate,” “Heather Has Two Mommies,” and “My Princess Boy.”

Source

http://stevedeace.com/news/national-politics/common-sense-voting-lesser-of-two-evils-obama-appreciates-your-support/

Given Romney’s record on abortion, education, family values, and job creation while Governor of Massachusetts there is very little reason to think, along with the neo-con Dr. DeMar that there is any significant difference between Romney and Obama. There is a reason that the tag Obamney exists. Dr. DeMar writes concerning Marxism, “The facts are there for anyone to see.” Well, Dr. DeMar, that is also true regarding Romeny’s record. Dr. DeMar you are supporting a man of the left whose only virtue is that he hasn’t let his mask slip quite as badly as the other man of the left.

Dr. DeMar complains how neither major party takes the black vote seriously because the Democrats have no need to worry about losing it and the Republicans have not need to worry about gaining it. Yet, Dr. DeMar’s reasoning hold the same for conservative Christians like DeMar. Republicans don’t take these voters seriously because they can’t lose them and Democrats don’t take them seriously because they can’t win them. It seems then, a wise choice would be for genuinely conservative Christians to prove to the Republicans that they can lose their vote by voting third party or by staying home on the first Tuesday in November.

Then there is the whole issue of Romney’s lifelong flip flopping. Romney flops better than NBA star Dennis Rodman used to flop. Who is Mitt Romney? He has been all over the map on issues. Which Mitt Romney will show up once in the White House? Does not this constant flip flopping, etch-a-sketch character call into serious question important issues like integrity?

Dr. DeMar next waves the scare flag. In essence he says, “if we don’t support Romney the bad guys will gain power.” When will Dr. DeMar learn that the system is rigged and that it will never correct itself from within itself? Republicans, and Democrats are together responsible for the debt we are in. They are together responsible for the entitlement programs we have. They are together responsible for Supreme Court justices who enslave us. They are together responsible for the education mess that we have. Republicans will not save us. Only a guy afflicted with Messianic thinking would ever think they could. This is why we must become principled voters and refuse to vote either for the Girondists (Republicans) or for the Jacobins (Democrats).

Dr. DeMar seems to think that Romney could give us time to “right the ship of state.” My inclination is to think that Romney will drain the Tea Party of any zing it has left by putting them to sleep because he is “their guy.” I believe it might be better to have to play the strong opposition to a Marxist President than being lulled into sleep because our Marxist is President. A Romney Presidency is more likely to convince (wrongly) the frogs in the kettle that all is well once again.

Dr. DeMar’s counsel sounds a great deal like the counsel in the Old Testament to Kings to turn to Egypt or Babylon for support instead of trusting in God. We have no business leaguing ourselves with either the “in your face” left nor with the “smooth and subtle” left. Dr. DeMar’s “messianic and pragmatic” politics is largely what has gotten us to this place and if his counsel is followed we will perish slowly and incrementally as opposed to perishing while fighting with our boots on.

Finally, Dr. DeMar is correct when he says that as we did not lose this country in one election, neither will we gain it back in one election. This is absolutely accurate. The problem is, that a vote for Romney is another vote for losing the country. It is not a vote for gaining it back.

Dr. DeMar, after all your wise counsel in the past, why depart from those in the Christian community who need your wisdom now? Please, reverse yourself before you lose all credibility.