DR. GOEBBELS RIDES AGAIN

Amazon-Connect Blog of John W. Cassell ^ | 7 July 2008 | John W. Cassell

[mkjessup]

The Presidency was not the key to this process: the Chancellorship was.
The President was not permitted dictatorial power, but he was permitted to give the Chancellor dictatorial power.
Hitler did not want to grant someone else dictatorial power - he wanted to have dictatorial power.

OK, I get that. But maybe you can help me out here: if an elected official can 'grant' another elected official 'dictatorial power', does that not mean that the first official already HAS such power?

How can one grant such powers unless they first possess said powers themselves?

[massgopguy]

“She was going to go picnicking with Mr. Parnell”?

[wideawake]

How can one grant such powers unless they first possess said powers themselves?

The Weimar Constitution tried to remedy this contradiction by making the Chancellor the only person who could wield dictatorial power and the President as the only person who could grant it.

In the US today we have a panel of nine judges who literally hold the power of life and death without review, but who are dependent upon the president and senate to nominate and confirm them in their power.

In the Weimar Constitution this division between appointment and office was supposed to operate as a check.

[TheThirdRuffian]

“Pat Buchanan is not “archconservative”. He is an antisemitic Nazi-sympathizing dhimmi.”

Amem. My punch-in-the-face-upon-sight-list are:

1. Jane Fonda
2. Pat Buchanon
3. Jimmy Carter, depending if it is a federal crime or not.
4. Michael Moore

Strangely, they all hate Israel.

[johnwcassell]

right on...Third Ruffian...

[lesser_satan]

Harry Reid is #1 on my punch-in-the-face-upon-sight-list. Something about the guy gives me violent impulses.

[TheThirdRuffian]

I can’t disagree. It’s a highly subjective list.

I would probably just ignore Dingy Harry. Strikes me as the kind of guy who would get off on being punched.

[prolifefirst]

Buchanan is a lot more likely to be correct than you.

I say this having read Buchanan’s calmly reasoned book and then gotten a short ways into your hysterical essay where you call his work “excrement”. Reading after that wasn’t worth my time.

[johnwcassell]

sociopaths are also very calm. the attempted extermination of two entire ethnic groups, an entire religion and two entire lifestyles...coupled over all with the deaths of twenty million people doesn’t lend itself to calm.

As Buchanan’s villian Sir Winston Churchill pointed out, “if Hitler invaded Hell I would say a kind word for the Devil”. Maybe I just knew too many decent people with those hateful tatoos.

Ever taken a hard look at Bin Laden’s face? It just radiates peace and calm.

[johnwcassell]

sociopaths are also very calm. the attempted extermination of two entire ethnic groups, an entire religion and two entire lifestyles...coupled over all with the deaths of twenty million people doesn’t lend itself to calm.

As Buchanan’s villian Sir Winston Churchill pointed out, “if Hitler invaded Hell I would say a kind word for the Devil”. Maybe I just knew too many decent people with those hateful tatoos.

Ever taken a hard look at Bin Laden’s face? It just radiates peace and calm.

[johnwcassell]

beg your pardon...Hitler did run for the presidency...he got about 1/3 of the votes. Hindenburg won. If pat buchanan called this a misstatyement he’d be skewed alive.