We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
... the better way of looking at the great divide is between those who think there is a perfect social arrangement and those who do not. The former imagine there is a perfect way to order human affairs to achieve maximum happiness. That perfect way is both discoverable and achievable. Morality dictates that anything and everything be done in order to reach this state of social perfection. The Rousseau-ists are entirely focused on the end and are willing to use any means necessary to achieve those ends. It’s why the body count for the various Rousseau-ist cults is staggeringly high. The other mode of thought rejects the notion that there can be a perfect arrangement. The human condition is immutable. The best we can do is incrementally improve the material state of society by adding a few grains of sand, each generation, to the foundations of society. That necessitates preserving the traditional institutions, while adding to them as they are the storehouse of knowledge, built up over countless generations through trial and error. The Burkeans focus entirely on the means knowing the ends are beyond the ability of man to perfect.
One side is willing to use any means necessary to reach the promised land. The other side is restrained by the means they will tolerate and they are willing to accept less than optimal results. If the people prefer high tariffs, for example, that’s fine as long as it is debated and enacted in a constitutional process. The Right can argue for something on rational grounds, but accept less knowing that people are seldom rational. That’s the claim, least ways.
That would be great, if it were true, but it has not been the case for a long time now, at least in American politics. In fact, what we call “conservative” is pretty much just the same stuff we call “liberal” but with slightly different ends...
This is the Cuomo vs Judge Moore argument. Cuomo feels no need for restraint from the founding documents or Moore's God. The Marxists fill government at every level and anything goes as long as it reflects the latest fad.
You do not ever mention the legal community and it's contribution to the current state of affairs.
When I went looking for lawyer to protect us and help us--there was no one. NOT ONE. But, of the 23 I spoke with, there were several who had the courage to tell me the truth. It went something like this: "I can't take this case because "THEY" will destroy me". Was "They" other lawyers--NOPE "They" was the inner circle of power in that community. Mostly the attorneys were afraid of the women of power. BECAUSE, they would not, or did not have any instinct for compromise, or for protecting the truth. I spoke with one attorney who had successfully saved a young white male lawyer from loosing his license in a bogus claim. I thought to myself--ohh, this man has the courage to do the right thing against the women of power. But, I was wrong: the first time I went to his office to schedule an appointment he had a young straight, white male legal student working in the office. When I went back for my appointment this older gentleman explained to me very clearly: "They let me save the kid, but they won't let me do anything like that again. Now, I have to help the leadership of the Episcopal Church map out their legal strategy for their new 'campaign'" When I asked how that came to be he said: " my wife worked out a deal with the women's group--they won't come after me if I help them with the upcoming split in the church."
Dear Barrister. I also spoke with several attorneys who put their head in their hands and said quite simply, "I can't take this case--they will kill me". I appreciate their honesty. NO ONE--NOT ONE MEMBER OF THE BAR THAT I SPOKE WITH EVER SAID, "You don't have a case"", or "you don't have any evidence" NOPE--EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE 23 ATTORNEYS said very clearly--I CAN'T ( meaning I am afraid).
So dear barrister--what plans do you have to establish a law firm that will take the cases that challenge the individual "agent of change"? What plans do you have to take on those people who so blatantly destroy the law? I appreciate your work with FIRE, but that is really pretty safe isn't it?
I forgot to include this: the young man working as his office manager the first time I went in--he was gone the second time. "The gals wouldn't put up with that!" I DARE YOU to find a young white male intern--who is not gay and is Republican/conservative working in a law office in that city. Five bucks barrister.
Indeed, the main difference tween the two electable slates seems to be who gets to divvy up a minority of the money (they both in agreement that social security, medicare, SNAP and veterans spending are inviolable) and which industries need special favor (e.g firearms vs organic farming).
So a good first step would be to expose "them". List them by name and their position in the hierarchy. Then list their crimes, frauds and duplicities. Not those things that are personal to you but rather the general acts against the people. Would that take guts? Would that cause a retaliation? Why not find out?
Sorry Sweepea: After fifteen years of blacklisting there is not much left for them to destroy--but, whatever we have--they will destroy it. Would like you know this: DH and I are over 70 now. Whenever we go into hospital we know we will be vulnerable--not to the whims old age--but, rather to the "shared goals" of the agents of change on the nursing staff. Those little gals, single moms, angry divorcees, etc., whom the women of power will contact and offer "incentives" to do harm. That is HOW BAD it has gotten out there.
All the more reason to put it in the spotlight. Do it anonymously. Make it complete, leave noone out and document every "crime" you are aware of. After all these years revenge is a dish best served cold.