Posted on 06/25/2016 2:10:09 PM PDT by NRx
I am not even going to attempt to excerpt this. It is too long, the points are too nuanced and after reading it for half an hour I am only about halfway through it. I can't say that I agree with every observation so far but I will say that this is a very serious and sober read, and much of it has the ring of truth.
I would like to hear what others think of this. But please take some time and read it through first.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
The Atlantic.....a Marxist rag. Why bother.
As I am plodding along some of this stuff is problematic. I did a quick Google and what I saw (strictly first impressions) suggests that Jonathan Rauch is a strange hybrid of radical prog and neo-reactionary. Hmmm... still reading.
Rauch is a Brookings Institution faygeleh.
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. - John Adams
um...maybe because by reading we expand our knowledge and learn new things, or in come cases, by applying our analytical and integrative thinking skills, we reject the information in whole or in part?
this is the basis of the argument for why 25 million of us must be liquidated
Nationalism without a nationalist
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/nationalism-without-a-nationalist.php
t’s 2020, four years from now. The campaign is under way to succeed the president, who is retiring after a single wretched term. Voters are angrier than ever—at politicians, at compromisers, at the establishment. Congress and the White House seem incapable of working together on anything, even when their interests align. With lawmaking at a standstill, the president’s use of executive orders and regulatory discretion has reached a level that Congress views as dictatorial—
Didn’t make it to the nuanced part. Is the author kidding? 2020 until all this happens. REALLY!!!!?
Agree. I always avoid The Atlantic. Nothing credible, or shall I say anything they print has credibility problems.
Adding that to my reading list.
Just another tl;dr pile of liberal talking points from a Brookings hack.
Okay, the whole piece was written with an undercurrent that everything that has gone wrong with the political process is a result of conservative republicans, the TEA party and an uninformed republican electorate. There are a couple of slights of the democrats thrown in for a semblance of balance. About what I’d expect from the Atlantic.
Never mind misidentifying liberal GOPers as “conservative” and trying to prop up the semblance of two distinct political parties (Uniparty denial).
After reading the first paragraph I am inclined to not read anymore, because it is all conjecture based on the writer's fantasies. When you start out with utter rubbish, how can one expect it to become serious at all?
It's my own fault for clicking on The Atlantic in the first place.
Utterly stupid, waste-of-time article.
So much blather and drivel.
Could not continue past when he started in on how good pork barrel spending was. An argue do for returning to smoke filled rooms and pork barrel spending and ignoring us stupid voters is too much
Post it somewhere else. It was stoooopid
Also, it’s a polemic on how much better it would be if there were only two parties - a moderate GOP and an energetic Dem party to keep the masses under a bushel.
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.