[loveliberty2]

America's Founders had a realistic view of human nature. In their view, however, it was not the decisions and actions of individual citizens which were to be feared, controlled, and regulated. Rather, they recognized the human tendency to abuse power, once it had been delegated to individuals in elected and appointed positions in government.

Devoted to liberty for individuals, they devised a form of self-government under a "We, the People's" Constitution which would divide, separate, check and balance the powers of their government.

Another thread today features a Rich Lowry column in which he states:

"The acrid whiff of decline is in the air in America, in the enduringly weak employment picture, in the spiraling debt, in the persistent pessimism about our prospects, and in the intellectual preparation for a “post-American world.”

If Lowry truly believes what he writes in the first phrase of this sentence, then he surely must know that, in order to restore America to its foundations in liberty, a leader must emerge who, like Thatcher, has an inner core that is firmly fixed in America's founding principles, coupled with a fierce ability to defend those principles of liberty against what Obama has called "a righteous wind" of his version of "change."

Does anyone remember this remark from early November 2008? "At a Virginia rally -— 'If you’ll stand with me, then I know that we can win Virginia and we can win this election and we can finally bring the change we need to Washington,' Obama told the estimated crowd of 35,000. 'I feel like we got a righteous wind at our backs here.'”

Inasmuch as the term "righteous wind" has not been a staple phrase in American politics, and, upon further research, one finds these words from Chairman Mao:

“The ill wind of opportunism is falling, the righteous wind of socialism is on the rise.”

Four years later, in 2012, the "wind" has brought what Lowry here describes as "the acrid whiff of decline" and "persistent pessimism about our prospects."

So-called "progressives," sometimes reveal the roots of their beliefs in their easy use of words and ideas from those they have studied.

Which potential Republican candidate has studied, and is likely to call up the ideas and words of Jefferson or Madison in a debate?

Which is most likely to be able to expose, rebut and rebuke the counterfeit ideas of "redistribution" which have led America to the brink of "decline" with the "self-evident" truths of the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence?

[mojitojoe]

Does anyone remember this remark from early November 2008? "At a Virginia rally -— 'If you’ll stand with me, then I know that we can win Virginia and we can win this election and we can finally bring the change we need to Washington,' Obama told the estimated crowd of 35,000. 'I feel like we got a righteous wind at our backs here.'” Inasmuch as the term "righteous wind" has not been a staple phrase in American politics, and, upon further research, one finds these words from Chairman Mao: “The ill wind of opportunism is falling, the righteous wind of socialism is on the rise.”

Why does this not surprise me?

[Starboard]

Inasmuch as the term “righteous wind” has not been a staple phrase in American politics, and, upon further research, one finds these words from Chairman Mao:

“The ill wind of opportunism is falling, the righteous wind of socialism is on the rise.”

---

A very interesting, and disturbing, attribution. What Obama does not say is also very telling: he NEVER praises American culture, accomplishments, liberty or prosperity. Nor does he ever honor her greatness. To the contrary, he has nothing but criticism and disdain for this country.