As we survey the recently transformed political landscape, a few observations crop up:

(1) The Republicans, unable to or incapable of defending freedom and capitalism, have "me-tooed" themselves into political oblivion. Trounced and shellacked by the Democrats in both the presidential and congressional elections, they have been reduced to mumbling amongst themselves and wondering what happened. Well-deserved, all of it: Having abandoned their principles of limited government and individual autonomy, they stand for nothing to anyone; and who wants to vote for a watered-down "welfare" state when you can have the real thing straight?

  If you wanted to turn the United States of America into a socialist country, what strategy would you adopt? Joseph Stalin, the world's top communist from 1924 to 1953, is reputed to have advocated the following strategy to William Z. Foster, leader of the Communist Party USA: "Work for more government intervention and control of the business activities of the people. In this way the American people will accept Communism without knowing it."

Gary Applebaum, M.D. Year after year, the health-care debate centers on universal coverage.

It's a laudable goal. But all too often, the single-minded focus on this objective is a distraction from achieving what most Americans really want: inexpensive, easy-to-use health insurance. As currently structured, the American system is ill-equipped to provide this.

The solution to this problem is not a government-run health-care bureaucracy. Rather, it's a private insurance system dedicated to more than just treating the sickest among us. Right now, we have a sick-care system. What we need is a health-care system.

"Character," according to Webster's, is "one of the attributes or features that make up and distinguish an individual ... the complex of mental and ethical traits marking and often individualizing a person, group or nation." Character - our very personalities - lies at the heart of who we are, what we think, what we choose, and how we act.

A country, too, has a character, a style of living, a dominating influence in its institutions that drive its culture. What, historically, was ours? What was the character of America?

"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson

 

As I detailed in part one of this article (see "America's Shadow Government: Part One," River Cities' Reader Issue 706, October 15-21, 2008), the next president will inherit more than a financial catastrophe when he assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government - an authoritarian regime that is fully staffed by unelected officials, fully operational, and ready to take over the running of the country at a moment's notice.

As the 2008 presidential election approaches, it is both interesting and illuminating to observe the trends of our political discourse: factions, groups, special-interest lobbies, and coalitions rule the day, and all thought of Joe and Jane American Citizen as individuals has fled our minds completely.

One of the most devastating indictments of the manner in which political "science" courses are taught in our colleges and universities today is the muck of contradictions that passes for the notion of a "political spectrum."

A "spectrum," according to Webster's, is defined as "a continuous range or entire extent." Observe that this definition does not designate the identity of the phenomenon, but only the manner in which it makes its nature manifest: a varying characteristic that forms a sequence of intermediate values between two opposing extremes.

Without those two opposing extremes the concept of a "spectrum" collapses into insensibility: one would never speak, for instance, of a rainbow with two red edges, or of a thermometer with a boiling point at each end.

"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson


As I detailed in part one of this article, the next president will inherit more than a financial catastrophe when he assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government - an authoritarian regime that is fully staffed by unelected officials, fully operational, and ready to take over the running of the country at a moment's notice.

This is all part of the government's Continuity of Government (COG) plan, which was laid out in two May 2007 directives issued by President Bush. These directives, which do not need congressional approval, provide that the president (or his appointees) will take control of the government in the event of a "national emergency" - loosely defined to mean "any incident" that disrupts governmental functions or "severely affects the U.S. population." This could mean anything from a terrorist attack to a hurricane. Particularly significant is the absence of a plan to repopulate or reconvene Congress or the Supreme Court, which would give unchecked executive, legislative and judicial power to the executive branch.

As we are all now aware, the $700-billion bailout has become the law of the land. A lot of people are, understandably, upset about this and are pointing out the flaws of this legislation: that it is, ultimately, unfunded; that it rewards failure and penalizes success; and that it represents an increase in government's control over the economy unseen since the Great Depression.

All valid arguments, of course - and totally irrelevant: Such critiques miss the crucial point completely.

Mount Weather "All men having power ought to be mistrusted." - James Madison

America's next president will inherit more than a financial catastrophe when he assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government - one that is fully staffed by unelected officials, fully operational, and ready to take over the running of the country at a moment's notice.

Pages