Posted on 03/19/2016 2:17:06 PM PDT by MarvinStinson
Many people lament that “Obama has destroyed America these last eight years” or, alluding to same, will say “I don’t recognize my country anymore.” This is much like viewing a woman who marries a greasy-haired, dope-smoking, heavily tattooed and pierced, unemployable reprobate and saying that her matrimonial decision destroyed her, when the real problem was that she was the kind of person who could make such a choice in the first place. Do you really think Obama isn’t a symptom at least as much as a cause? Do you think the 2008 A.D. America that elected him would have been recognizable to 1950 Americans?
And even if the next president is an anomalous good result, he won’t even be a pause that refreshes, but will at best slow down the runaway train racing toward the precipice. This is because our main problems aren’t illegal migration, trade deals or health care, as significant as those things are. Our problems are more fundamental.
Do you really want to save America? Okay, then completely transform the media, academia and entertainment so they’re not brainwashing citizens 24/7 with anti-American, anti-Christian, multiculturalist, socialist, feminist and a multitude of other lies. End legal immigration, which, via the importation of massive numbers of Third Worlders, is changing our country into a socialistic non-Western culture. Even more significantly, convince the 70-plus percent of Americans who are moral relativists to believe in Truth; these are people who, as the Barna Group research company put it, believe that what we call “truth is always relative to the person and their situation” and whose most common basis for moral decision-making is “doing whatever feels right….”
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Sure Obama is a symptom of a sick country.
Not quite sure what this is specifically alluding to, but even that was probably only an outward manifestation of a rot that happened on a whole different plane.
The American Electorate is corrupted:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency, than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”
– Translated into English from an article appearing in the Czech Republic as published in the “Prager Zeitung” of April 28, 2010.
Prince of Fools
The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president.
2008 Czech Newspaper Editorial
I’ll get right on that.
A Theory of Critical Elections
V. O. Key Jra1
a1 Harvard University
Perhaps the basic differentiating characteristic of democratic I orders consists in the expression of effective choice by the mass of the people in elections. The electorate occupies, at least in the mystique of such orders, the position of the principal organ of governance; it acts through elections. An election itself is a formal act of collective decision that occurs in a stream of connected antecedent and subsequent behavior. Among democratic orders elections, so broadly defined, differ enormously in their nature, their meaning, and their consequences. Even within a single nation the reality of election differs greatly from time to time. A systematic comparative approach, with a focus on variations in the nature of elections would doubtless be fruitful in advancing understanding of the democratic governing process. In behavior antecedent to voting, elections differ in the proportions of the electorate psychologically involved, in the intensity of attitudes associated with campaign cleavages, in the nature of expectations about the consequences of the voting, in the impact of objective events relevant to individual political choice, in individual sense of effective connection with community decision, and in other ways. These and other antecedent variations affect the act of voting itself as well as subsequent behavior. An understanding of elections and, in turn, of the democratic process as a whole must rest partially on broad differentiations of the complexes of behavior that we call elections.
Professor V. O. Key, Jr., of Harvard University, is widely known for his studies in party politics. Professor Key was formerly Book Review Editor of The Journal of Politics.
sorry- but many people did NOT make the choice to marry him and therefore have aq right to say they don’t recognize this ocutnry any longer- and to say that yes- the left HAVE destroyed this country- We didn’t want any of this to happen- it’s not the fault of htoze who did not vote for him- We rejected him-
While the gimmedat society may be increasing, there is still a major segment that isn’t- a segment that did NOT go to the alter with him
the quality of writing and opinion on American thinker has been sliding lately-
Great analogy.
Not important enough?
Supreme Court nominees.
‘Nuff said.
Wasn’t a whole lot of thinking behind this one.
We all remember the “vote this way or else” elections of the past. We also remember the “never has there been a more critical election”, claims.
Folks, this is that type of an election, and don’t let some lame brained idiot tell you otherwise.
It does matter who wins this election.
I can barely fathom the intellect that doesn’t recognize this.
“Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.”
Those Czechs are pretty smart.
What does Professor Key say about crooked elections—and crooked Soros voting machines?
Yes, very.
I forgot to highlight that specific sentence. It sums it up nicely.
I would make a case that the original American folly was church-state mix.
Now this idea didn’t arise with America. It didn’t even arise with settlers from Europe. It arose about 300 years into the church and became a persistent, poisonous meme that persisted across the Orthodox/Catholic split and the Protestant reformation.
Now I am talking about mix — not about influence. Influence is great. In fact it’s highly advocated in the Holy Book.
But at some point a respectful church and respectful state must stop and mutually say, here is where I end and you begin. The DMV doesn’t run our churches; why should our churches clamor for the president to boost the gospel as if millions of Americans would go to hell if he did not?
If we don’t have that kind of mutual respect, we even get the ironic result of churches that have gone rotten, getting their domination (not just influence) into the state. This is the likely cause of many of our modern illiberal “liberal” woes. Folly that was pursued with a religious passion.
Czech it out!
The problem is that the Barack Obama who ran for president in 2008 pretended to be a moderate who said his goals were to bring the races together.
In fact, he turned out to be a far left anti-white racist and America hater whose goal has been to destroy the country and its institutions as much as he can. He lied about virtually everything he actually stood for (marriage being one of the biggest lies). Sure, some of that was there to see (probably most evident in his connections with Jeremiah Wright), but most folks took him at face value. And as a result, we got the worst president in history.
The sad thing is virtually any Republican should have beaten Obama in 2012, but Romney essentially threw the race. Why? I don’t know, although I would also say there was probably a fair amount of voter fraud going on across the country.
I just remember the next day everyone I know being shocked, because no one could believe someone as bad as Obama could possibly have been reelected.
[[I can barely fathom the intellect that doesn’t recognize this.]]
That’s exactly what i mean- American thinker used to be a good blog- but lately it’s really been sliding into the abyss- This election truly is a turning point in American history- IF we lose, we will likely never recover from the disaster the left are drooling over inflicting on this country- Hillary has stood before the cameras and point blank declared she WILL go after our second amendment rights, she WILL push the gay agenda full steam ahead- and she WILL destroy what remaining moral values we have left- She’s told us flat out- and she means it- Dear leader got the ball rolling, and she is salivating over the idea of her ramming through extreme liberal agendas-
It is dismaying that the American thinker writers don’t seem to get this-
So was Jimmie Carter, Bill Klinton, Hillary, Dashel, Kennedy, Pelosi, reid, John Hanoi Kerry... ... It is easier to call them globalists, Illuminati, or whatever than name them all.
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.