Statist Delusions [Mark Steyn]

Steyn is wrong about Article 2, Section 1, being a technicality.

Just ask the families who are mourning soldier brought home in caskets due to Obama’s insane rules of engagement. Ask them how they feel about a “technicality” in the Constitution.

One hundred percent loyalty to America, Americans, and our soldiers is what is essential in a Commander in Chief. Then we should ask if his foreign policies are supporting and upholding foreign political factions that are dedicated to killing our soldiers and Americans.

Geeze! Some technicality! ( eye roll). Steyn is wrong and, personally, I believe he knows it. For this reason he is not completely trustworthy. !

One more question:

When did the Constitution become a “technicality”?

Steyn knows that Article 2, Section 1, is not a technicality. It **is** the Constitution! He knows this, too, and is deliberately misleading his listeners.

While he does good work, I will never again fully trust him.

The president of the United States came to Osawatomie, Kan., last week to deliver a speech of such fascinating awfulness ...

He often delivers awful speeches that his many fans love. It's a conundrum but it may actually be that the worse his speeches, the more his hard core base loves him.

You beat me to it. But here it is, again, so nobody can mistake the meaning:

The political class looted the future to bribe the present

And, for better or worse (I think both) the future is upon us, but not quite arrived. There still exists a surplus, meaning money to be looted, that empowers those who consider it their role to steal it to continue to promise it. There still exists a convenient set of scapegoats, a more or less believable party line, a perverse ability to pretend that things are other than they are. Frightened and resentful people vote their fears and resentments, and demagogues thrive in such a political mess because there's good money in it, if in nothing else. That is, incidentally, why they're the last to starve.

There are a number of reasons why a thing such as 0bama could be voted into office and most of them portend very poorly for the future of freedom in the United States. In most countries the watershed is when the armed forces decide to join the ruling class. In the U.S. it is academia and the media who have elected to do so. We still may have a fighting chance, but that's all it is, a fighting chance.

Some kind of breakup or “virtual secession” will probably be our best case outcome. If we all have to average down all 50 states and 100s of cities to pander to the over-breeding parasite class, we'll be doomed to a USSR-type existence. To redistribute what is left equally among producers and parasites means the producers will go Galt and quit producing. What is left will increasingly resemble North Korea. I see a breakup before that takes place. Let some states become People's Republics, under one caveat: No fences to keep them in. Soon they'll be empty of producers, and the lesson will be inescapable.

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.