Posted on 03/04/2005 2:57:34 PM PST by watchdog_writer
Senator McCain – tear down this wall
The good senator from Arizona, the Honorable John McCain who co-sponsored the Campaign Finance Reform bill still doesn’t get it. Senators McCain and Feingold now want to regulate the Internet, bloggers and e-mail. McCain started all this. I can’t say if he was misled or pressured to sponsor the bill. Anything is possible, but didn’t everyone know at the outset that finance reform only favors the democrats, and quite frankly, McCain should have known that as well. So the real question is why did he do it? We might also ask why he stated he had no confidence in Rumsfeld, or why he defended Kofi Annan, or why he criticized the White House on environmental issues. Come to think of it maybe he would make a good running mate for Hillary; after all she did support McCain for VP alongside Kerry? Some say McCain might run as an independent. They’re a little late. He’s already independent.
They call it campaign finance reform, but it’s just another clever way to control the voting public so that they remain ignorant liberal automatons. Programmed by liberal talking heads, liberal spin-doctors, and the MSM, voters pull the democrat lever like garbles pulling a lever for more feed.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly a Clinton appointee gave McCain what he asked for, and her decision has the potential to silence bloggers. "The commission's exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines" the campaign finance law's purposes, Kollar-Kotelly wrote.[1] The “purpose” is to keep important information from the voting public so that they can be brainwashed by liberal news and television? They say it’s not a democratic plot to silence conservatives? Then why is it that three republican commissioners wanted to appeal the decision to keep the Internet free, but the three Democrats would not go along?
Actually Judge Kollar-Kotelly is only the most recent culprit. The finance bill actually exempted the Internet. I haven’t read her decision, but somehow she came up with some legal theory to invalidate the exemption. I’m quite sure she wasn’t’ thinking of “moveon” when she rendered her decision. The fact is that only under-financed websites need the protection, and moveon has plenty of money to do whatever they want, and they don’t need to function on a hope and a prayer. Not that anyone at moveon believes in prayer anyway.
Why do you suppose this liberal judge allowed the exemption for news organizations to remain? What if every time the NY Times published an editorial favorable to a democrat it would amount to a political contribution? Since the ratio of liberal outlets to conservative outlets is probably 100 to 1, or even more, naturally the democrats don’t want to shut down their operatives. And since the democrats, and I blame the republicans for this, control most of the judgeships, the democrats control the country, and it’s about time that everyone besides freepers understands it.
The campaign finance law limits the press exemption to a "broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication”. What about a newspaper or periodical that has an online website, like the NY Times? I’m not so sure how the army of liberal judges will get around it, but you can bet the NY Times website will be able to say whatever it wants. I’m not as confident however that the Weekly Standard will enjoy the same exception?
By the time the liberals finish with McCain he will have been responsible for the most incomprehensible, anti-conservative legislation since the internal revenue code. I’m looking for McCain to step up to the plate and correct his error, but I’m not holding my breath.
The issue is not that the Internet favors republicans and therefore the democrats are against it. They have the same, and even greater access to the Internet than do republicans. The issue is that the DEMOCRATS DON’T NEED THE INTERNET. Get it, general public? They have everything else.
Democrats may be the minority party at the moment, but they are still running the country through the media and judiciary, so get used to it friends.
As for walling up the bloggers, I say: Senator McCain, “tear down this wall.”
Is it just me, or are our Congress Critter increasingly treating us more like inmates and chattel than citizens?
God bless you my son, you and many like you may preserve liberty for all.
Hey! McCain leave those bloggers alone!
All in all it just another rat brick in the wall.
Wow, a new term," like garbles pulling a lever for more feed."
A garble ate my beeber!
Is that a garble in your pocket or are you just stuned
to see me.
It seems that quote does not appear in "The Prince", at least not that I could find. I re-read the prince every couple of years, as the lessons you learn there are applicable to modern business organizations.
One of my favorites by Machiavelli is the following: Nicolo Machiavelli English:
And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new system. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old system, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the prince is endangered along with them.
Principe
Chapter VI,
Paragraph 5
Sentence 3
The original:
E debbasi considerare come non e cosa piu difficile a trattare, né piu dubia a riuscire, né piu pericolosa a maneggiare, che farsi capo ad introdurre nuovi ordini. Perché lo introduttore ha per nimici tutti quelli che delli ordini vecchi fanno bene, et ha tepidi defensori tutti quelli che delli ordini nuovi farebbono bene. La quale tepidezza nasce, parte per paura delli avversarii, che hanno le leggi dal canto loro, parte dalla incredulita delli uomini; li quali non credano in verita le cose nuove, se non ne veggono nata una ferma esperienza. Donde nasce che qualunque volta quelli che sono nimici hanno occasione di assaltare, lo fanno partigianamente, e quelli altri defendano tepidamente; in modo che insieme con loro si periclita.
Machiavelli was in a sense, one of the first consultants.
He also wrote a book called "The Art of War", but I would put less credence in such a tome written by a bureaucrat than I would the masterpieces of either Clausewitz or Sun Tzu - who actually fought wars.
yea I think the quote did belong to Lord Acton as that Constituion site that hosts the Machiabelli book actually has the same quote. No Prob. But I think you could be right in that it could have originated from Machiavelli, he certainly discusses many aspects of this.
Some of my favorite Machiavellian ideas are his thoughts that only 'impeteous' men jerk around the gentle flow of history and the idea that people operate a certain way irregardless of the cirumstances if they have been succesful in that approach in the past. These people fail when their approach cannot, even crudly modified, fit the situation that often calls for something close to the exact opposite.
Bon mots, If you are into books applicable for business I would suggest 'the Wisdom of Crowds' a great book on networkings and the functions/structure of small groups.
Sometimes the author seems to buy too much into the title of this book, as there are often exceptions, which he does try to cover. But all and all I would think it could prove quite valuable in business operations and structure.
I once had a professor who made us study various fallacies, including the classic "Argumentum ad populum", which means the argument of outnumbering your opponent. It is an 'error', but an easy one to win. If you get the whole crowd to turn against the person you are arguing with, you win - right or wrong!
This is part of what I am ignorantly assuming this book touches upon, as well as the possibility of something akin to Elliot Wave or various fractal theories of human behavior as analyzed as a group of organisms.
There is probably a more clever etymological term for this, but I am not up to date on the contemporary terminolgoy in social sciences... I know that technical analysts like to try to analyze such. Myself, I tend to believe that such attempts are destined for frustration - I believe that robust fractals are like the inverse of the famous "one way functions" that make up cryptography. That is, they are more descriptive than predictive, and will always be so. They are brilliant for hindsight, but will never pick a winner for those technical analysts who hope to do so consistently.
Whew... was that confusing? It must be the wine... oh and it's past my bedtime! G'night!
For example, when he relates to the killing or execution of people, you should think of it as firing or laying off.
When he uses the term "New Order", you should replace it with "new system" or such.
It truly is remarkable how a text written in 1511 by a Florentine is so applicable to a modern society. The only thing that has really changed are our gadgets... or as the French would say, "Les plus ca change, le plus le même chose".
If you get the whole crowd to turn against the person you are arguing with, you win - right or wrong!
Isn't that what the MSM tries to do?
Good night Bon mots.
Pouvoir vos rêves sont doux
The Columbia World of Quotations. 1996.
NUMBER: 2709
QUOTATION: Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad man.
ATTRIBUTION: John Emerich Edward Dalberg, 1st Baron Acton (1834–1902), British historian. Letter, April 3, 1887, to Bishop Mandell Creighton. The Life and Letters of Mandell Creighton, vol. 1, ch. 13, ed. Louise Creighton (1904).
William Pitt the Elder had made a similar observation, in a speech to the House of Lords, Jan. 9, 1770: “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.” In the present century, the economist J.W. Galbraith wrote, “In the United States, though power corrupts, the expectation of power paralyzes.” (”The United States,” published in New York Nov. 15, 1971, repr. In A View from the Stands, 1986).
The Columbia World of Quotations. Copyright © 1996 Columbia University Press.
Consider how there is nothing more difficult to handle, nor more doubtful to succeed, nor more perilous to handle, than being the head to introduce a new ordinance.
That would be like Regain with starwars?
Dittos, the guy is not fit to be in such a high position of power, he proves it daily. Why doesn't he just wear his Hillary 08 button on his forehead ? Once a traitor, always a traitor.
No patriot would act like John McClain acts.. Only one sitting republican Senator has EVER been asked or invited to join a presidential election as VeeP for the democrats.. John McLain.. and it is NOT an ACCIDENT... even Arlen Spectre is not leftwing enough for that...
McCain should be left out to dry with wet rawhide around his....(you fill this area with anatomy of your choice)
I am reluctant to suggest that McCain is being managed by someone who has sensitive information that would destroy McCain's reputation. It could be that he is just a closet liberal in republican garb?
He certainly is a transrepublicanite.. and for sure a transconservative..
Si!! Io so. Ho cambiato questo perche preferisco il contesto piu moderno.
Yes, I know that this particular word was changed by me to fit more precisely with the modern lexicon. These days people are more often discussing systems than new orders... in this context it can easily fit into a modern business setting. I believe this makes the applicability of this quote more easily apparent to our contemporaries.
I often mix the verb maneggiare with gestire (doesn't everybody?)
maneggiare = to handle
gestire = to manage
Lei e Italiano?
Merci beaucoup! Bon nuit!
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.