Posted on 12/05/2013 1:21:53 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
It is possible to be a socialist, and radical in one's agendas, and yet moderate in the means one regards as practical to achieve them. To change the world, it is first necessary to acquire cultural and political power. And these transitional goals may often be accomplished by indirection and deception even more effectively than by frontal assault. Political stratagems that appear moderate and compromised to radical factions of the left may present an even greater threat from the perspective of the other side. In 1917, Lenin's political slogan wasn't "Socialist Dictatorship! Firing Squads and Gulags!" It was "Bread, Land and Peace."
Yet Hillary Clinton as America's "first lady of the left," is also not an obvious subject to many conservatives. And since conservative politics begins with the defense of America's constitutional order, this is a far more significant matter. Underestimating the foe on any battlefield can be a fatal fault; in politics likewise............................................"
They sure are. Both the Stalinists and regular Marxists are well represented, just no Americans.
I strongly support democrat infighting, but that article was a little confusing.
I gotta say Bill Clinton and the DLC had a good thing going on there for a while. And then they elected all those more conservative dems to congress (pro-life, etc.)
And then Barack Obama came along and lo and behold they are all under the bus.
Can Hillary Clinton put that humpty dumpty back together? I doubt it.
Hillary Clinton is Americas Elena Ceausceau
“I strongly support democrat infighting”....
Me too!!!!
Conservatives (note I included both the repubs and the Tea Party types) need to keep the heat on the demodummies and maybe, just maybe their power over the people will erode enough to allow conservative replacements come next election. Demodummies are definitely running scared and well they should.
A LITTLE confusing ?
more like eva peron
typical progressive logic
if you oppose raising social security benefits, then that means you are “slashing” them
“Hillary Clinton is Americas Elena Ceausceau.”
She sure is. This article reminds me of when the Germans thought Goering and Himmler were infighting. This is propaganda.
Oh, wait, Boehner is so sorry of letting Obamacare be a democrat issue that cannot be blamed on the GOP or Bush, that now with Amnesty he is going to correct the record and make Hillary happy.
The mainstream press wants to focus only on the far right, but now the Democrats are heavily exposed and the mainstream press is having a hard time covering for them with the mid-terms coming up.
The news keeps getting worse and worse for the Democratic Party as it contemplates 2014 and 2016. The congressional wing of the part finds itself strapped to Obamacare, a disaster that promises to anger voters even more next year than this, with tens of millions losing coverage through employer-provided policies, and back-end website chaos leaving people who thought they were covered uninsured when show up at the emergency room.
But Democrats comforted themselves with the notion that the "historic first" strategy that worked so well with Barack Obama would repeat itself in 2016 with Hillary Clinton becoming the Republic's first woman president. The excitement over the 51% of the population that is female mobilized to push Hillary and the entire ticket to success has been almost the sole comfort for the donkeys.
But there are signs that this is as much a fantasy as the notion that if you like your insurance and doctor, you can keep them. Paul Bedard writes in the Washington Examiner:
"A new YouGov/Economist poll found Clinton, whose approval ratings have typically been sky high, with an unfavorable rating of 48 percent, more than the 46 percent who have a favorable opinion of her.
The YouGov pollsters said that the change in American attitudes toward Clinton "suggests that negative press surrounding the tragic September 11, 2012 attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which led to the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, may have impacted views about Clinton and her tenure at the State Department."
During her time at State, Clinton's favorable ratings were typically 15 points higher than her unfavorable ratings." I always believed that Hillary's approval ratings as Secretary of State were purely the result of the enthusiastic media coverage she received....(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Mr. President, learn from Ceausescu! (October 2010)
http://www.wnd.com/2010/10/211825/
Are we nearing Obama’s Ceausescu Moment?
If there is going to a Democrat civil war, I would like to suggest that it be fought with automatic weapons.
He's right, and oh so wrong at the same time. One of the truly great things about the America that used to be was economic mobility. It's well documented that successive generations had a high probability of moving up or down the economic ladder. The English had a rigid set of economic and social classes; we had "shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations."
What Obama and his clique miss is that the more oppressive the economic drag you put on workers, the more difficult you make economic mobility, at least upward economic mobility. The economic friction on savings accumulation (ZIRP to support government waste, taxes, regulation) grows greater every year. Meanwhile, it's easier and easier to move down into the government safety net of economic justice. I mean, with all of the disincentives for industrious behavior, "Why bother?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.