“he is like W the second, and we cannot survive that.”
I think you know the significance of my FReep handle. So I have a deep reason to disagree with you, but for another reason.
I look at W as parallel to the 7 year consulship of Marius, a proto-socialist whose policies badly degraded the Roman republic so that only a dictator could control all the INTENTIONALLY divided interests, particularly the deliberately increased number’s dependent upon the government providing for them.
In my view W was Marius lite, Bummer is Marius intense, and Bumney will be Marius consolidated. If there IS a Sulla who arises to defeat out all the principles and cronies in this fascist/Statist/Globalist cadre, he will not bring back the American republic in anything you or I wish it to be. He’d almost certainly be part of the plan of the Incrementalists who’ve insisted upon being called “Progressives” for over 100 years.
I am not completely disagreeing with you. Just consider all 3 — W, O, and R — as front men for the dismantling of constitutional limits on power.
Needless to say I’ve more analysis to back up this short synopsis. I don’t yet know what can be done about it outside of prayer. That was something the ancient roman republicans did not have as part of their culture because there were yet no Christianity.
In our lifetimes, only Kennedy and Reagan stand out for not setting out to destroy our republic. All of the others armed our enemies, and favored them in trade, while attacking the Christian basis of our culture.
The gross ugliness of Bush lies in the difference between what he pretended to be, and what he clearly was. We had no great expectations for Clinton, nor Obama.