Posted on 11/16/2003 7:40:59 PM PST by luv2ndamend
Like it or not, Tom Daschle has lot in common with the late Salvador Allende, the former Marxist president of Chile who tried to turn his country into another Cuban dungeon. Daschle, like Allende, also holds his country's constitution and traditions in contempt; he too despises those who disagree with him and he too believes that the mere existence of opposition proves evil intent.
What this boils down to is that Daschle, like the would-be dictator Allende, does not believe that the opposition, meaning the GOP, has a legitimate right to exist, let alone govern. This is why Daschle, Schumer, Kennedy, the hero of Chappaquiddick, and the rest of the Dem bigots in the Senate have cynically used slander and the unconstitutional filibuster to shred people whose boots they are not fit to lick.
I see the Democratic party consisting of three layers. At the centre we have the hardcore leftists of which Daschle is a leading member. The outer layer consists of the mass of Democrats, most of whom tend to vote for the party because pa and grandpa did, and so on.
These are traditional members in the sense that they believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Not surprisingly many of these folks voted for Reagan. The middle layer is something of mixed bag, with many moving one way and then the other. Ultimately, those committed to their liberal, meaning leftwing, principles will gravitate towards the hardleft core while the more conservative-minded like Senator Zell Miller will be pulled towards the party’s traditional base.
Those who would abandon the traditional base to support a group of leftwing politicians who do not believe Americans should be defended from nuclear attack, that the military should be virtually wound up, that Republicans are Nazis and that the country is an oppressive racist, sexist tyranny run by big business or whatever, raise an interesting question: Why? Why should inherently decent people support those who make little attempt to hide their hatred, spite and mean-spiritedness?
From my own experiences I have concluded that what separates the radical from the liberal is not ends but means. And where liberals come to see the ends as being the supreme moral goal it is a tiny step to accepting the doctrine that the "ends justifies the means," especially if carried out in another country. And this is why we still have, for example, the sickening spectacle of Charley Rangel publicly licking Castro's bloodstained boots while pouring scorn on America and President Bush.
I think the late Lionel Trilling came to the same conclusion in his novel The Middle of the Journey. In the book Maxim, a typical leftwing extremist, confronts Laskell with the iron logic of his own ideology:
"Certain things were clear between Laskell and Maxim. It was established that Laskell accepted Maxim's extreme commitment to the future. It was understood between them that Laskell did not accept all of Maxim's ideas. At the same time, Laskell did not oppose Maxim's ideas. One could not oppose them without being illiberal, even reactionary. One would have to have something better to offer and Laskell had nothing better. He could not even imagine what the better ideas would be."
What is striking about this passage is that it unmasks the liberal Laskell as being as fixated on the idea as much as Maxim is. In short, it's the idea that counts, not people, not liberty — and certainly not patriotism. Dictators are to be judged according to their professed liberal beliefs and not by what they do. Hence the mass murderer Castro is praised by the same people who condemn General Pinochet.
It's this mentality that drove liberals to ardently defend Clinton while ferociously attacking those who exposed him. This is why Daschle confidently stated over two years ago that the Bush agenda is dead. Not because of a one-man coup carried out by a grasping, greedy little man, but because in the eyes of the Democratic core every Republican administration is illegitimate, regardless of how many votes it gets. A view that the Dems anti-democratic behaviour in the Senate amply confirms.
As the idea is morally superior to any alternative, particularly the present, it follows that those who oppose it are either fools or just plain evil. Trying to paint Reagan as pure evil was patently absurd, even to most of his enemies, therefore he must have been an "amiable dunce", so pronounced the smug Clark Clifford, or "virtually brain dead" as the leftwing Robert Wright of The New Republic obligingly put it. Events in eastern Europe and Russia demonstrated who were the real dunces.
Trying not to make the same mistake twice, Democrats, led by Daschle, Kennedy and Schumer, have decided on evil mode for Bush, the man who wants to restore slavery and put arsenic in your water. Utter nonsense, but to Daschle and his fellow Democratic thugs perfectly justified because they do consider Bush as evil. To do otherwise they would have to treat him as an "amiable dunce", which he clearly isn't.
But what is Daschle's and Kennedy's idea? It's a world run by the likes of themselves for the benefit of the masses, particularly those who are stupid enough to vote Republican. It's a world where dreadful energy shortages are a virtue, except for the nomenklatura. This is why Daschle attacked the Republicans as the party of gas, oil and plutonium. In other words, the Energy Party.
That's right, Daschle openly attacked the GOP for wanting to expand the country's energy supplies instead of cutting them. For wanting to make energy abundant instead of making it increasingly scarce. For wanting to expand the lifeblood of the American economy. This is the man whose wife's special pleading for airlines — forget conflict of interest, that's for lesser folk — made both of the filthy rich.
Daschle, Kennedy and the rest of their corrupt mates declared war on prosperity. Without abundant energy supplies the American economy would collapse. Do these political louts realise this? Not really. They think that they can reduce energy supplies in a way that will cause the American people to call for the government to control energy producing industries, a policy that would eventually lead to central planning by which lower living standards could be accommodated without severe political or economic disruptions.
This policy could only be fully implemented in a one-party state. But like I said, it won't work anyway because no American government could survive an imploding economy, particularly one in which energy became largely the preserve of the Democrats' rich supporters, eg, Soros and Streisand.
Is Daschle that ruthless and single-minded? The answer, regrettably, is yes. In May 2001 he along with other Democratic kommissars masquerading as Senators threatened to have Bob Tyrrell, editor of the conservative American Spectator, jailed if he refused to turn over his magazine's records to them.
Being a real man, Tyrrell successfully resisted the efforts of these thugs to violate his First Amendment rights. So much for these hypocrites' respect for the Constitution. It should be of concern to readers, but not a surprise, to learn that most of the mainstream media either ignored or supported Daschle's assault on the First Amendment. (They're too dumb to ask who'll he come for next).
But the attack on Tyrrell's rights was nothing compared with the assault on Senator Strom Thurmond's health. On one occasion, not long before he left the Senate, Thurmond became visibly ill. On seeing this Joe Biden offered to "pair" with the 98-year-old Senator so that the old man could get some much needed rest.
To do this Biden had to get permission from Daschle and the corrupt Hillary Clinton. They refused and then sat down, coldly watching Thurmond, callously waiting for the old man to keel over.
To put it bluntly, in order to control the Senate Daschle and Clinton adopted a tactic they knew could have killed a fellow Senator. The phrase for this is attempted murder. This ain't the Democratic Party your father knew. But then any measure is justified in the war against evil. Just ask ghoulish Tom, Ted and Hillary.
Daschle represents a party that in other countries in more recent times would have been called the People's Democratic Party. It's now the party of the new left, peddling the kinds of ideas that bring only misery and slavery in their wake. But to these ruthless ideologues it's the idea that matters and not people — and especially not their rights. Never forget that.
Gerard Jackson is also Brookes' Economics Editor
To do this Biden had to get permission from Daschle and the corrupt Hillary Clinton. They refused and then sat down, coldly watching Thurmond, callously waiting for the old man to keel over."
This I did'nt know.
And I had forgotten daschel's and hitlery's response to a request to allow Strom Thurmond to leave, accompanied by Biden, to keep the balance in the senate.....that is so chilling and cold it just gives me the creeps. It does cause one to wonder they hoped Strom would collapse. Depravity gone wild.
How can the other senators stand to be in the same room with tom, hitlery and ted? It boggles the mind.
This certainly should be required reading.
They can, but whether they choose to read it and whether they choose to see the terrible truth about the evil of the left is another story.
Conversly, many may read it and still either bury their heads in the sand or maintain their state of denile.
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.