Hat Tip: American Thinker
The American Thinker article The Nazis Were Marxists is an excellent reference to provide a counter argument to Collectivists who try to paint conservatives and libertarians as extremists and similar to Nazis.
In a spectrum between individual freedom on one end and statist collectivism on the other, it is clear that Socialists, Nazis and Communists would all be together on the same end. Lest anyone forget, the term Nazi came from the German acronym for National SOCIALIST German Workers Party. Nazis and Communists have always shared a passion for State domination of the individual.
A growing number of Democratic Party members prefer to describe themselves as Progressives rather than Liberals. I applaud the use of the term Progressive over Liberal because I think it is more descriptive of what a growing number of Democrats are trying to accomplish. Progressive was and is the label preferred by members of the International Socialist movement from the early 1900’s to the present day. What Progressives have always tried to accomplish is better described as Collectivism. The term Liberal has long been distanced from relating to liberty as Classical Liberals like Jefferson used the term. The term Progressive encapsulates the arrogant elitist attitude of Collectivists (Socialists, Nazis and Communists) that they (the elite) know better than individuals (you) what is best for you.
Obviously to a Collectivist, the growth of the nanny state over the freedom of the individual is progress regardless of what individuals deprived of their basic rights might think.
From America’s Army. Go ahead, text a thank you to the troops.
Click here for more information on texting at www.americasupportsyou.mil
I saw a great bumper sticker today that said, “If you don’t stand behind the troops, you are more than welcome to stand in front of them.”
The story about someone calling the Nevada Department of Child and Family Services on political writer Chuck Muth is a chilling example of how due process can be bypassed and a quasi criminal charge created simply on the basis of an anonymous tip. There are abused children out there who need protection and who need to be taken away from negligent parents, but the authority to make those decisions should be subject to the same Constitutional restrictions placed upon law enforcement agencies.
Why should the Department of Child and Family Services have search and seizure authority without having to obtain a search warrant like say when police investigate murderers or drug dealers? One would think that the same people protesting against the Patriot Act would be protesting against someone’s home being searched and children potentially being seized without the accused being able to face his accusers or the use of warrants, indictments or trials.
To put things into historical perspective, just think about how difficult it would be to become a pioneer nowadays. If you choose to strike out into uncharted territory to stake a claim, your kids would be seized by a government bureaucrat faster than you could get your covered wagon over the river and through the woods to the place where you would build your log cabin. Abraham Lincoln would not have been able to educate himself in front of the fireplace because a government agency would have determined that his living conditions were substandard.
Because of capitalism and the American culture of entrepreneurship, the standard of living has become so good so fast that now, one has to be concerned that an extended camping trip can become a government investigation and custody battle over your children. Heaven help us if another depression occurs like what happened in the 1930’s. Parents who lose their house could lose their children too. So much for the concept of families banding together!
Government intrusion into the private lives of Americans has come a long way. My how the role of government has changed!
Is this the end of a controversy? If stem cells can be created from someone’s own cells, why would anyone advocate the destruction of embryos for stem cells when it is unnecessary?
The Journal Nature says today that “Shinya Yamanaka of the University of Kyoto in Japan reported that his team had created pluripotent cells from human skin cells and, on the same day, a team of researchers led by James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, reported the same.” Pluripotent cells are stem cells like embryonic stem cells which are believed to be able to become any kind of cell.
Something tells me that despite a completely ethical method of creating stem cells, The Left won’t let go of this issue so easily.
Watching Hillary Clinton campaign for president is entertaining to say the least. Hillary is a candidate who must hookwink her constituency more than most to win the election. She cannot point to any real accomplishments except to say that she married Bill Clinton.
We simply would not have even heard of Hillary Rodham if she had not at one time been The President’s Wife. The arrogance and presumption with which she addresses the masses is palpable and contributes to her lack of likability. If she wins (and it is looking more and more like an if) it will be the biggest accomplishment of public relations over substance in the history of politics.
If Hillary Clinton is elected president, unfortunately the American people will get what they deserve. Perseption can and is molded by the “Old Media Establishment” but there are chinks of reality that are continuing to seep in from the New Media. One can only hope that a few rays of reality shine on Hillary Clinton and that the majority of Americans percieve them over the hologram projected by the Clinton campaign. Democrats are being told that by electing Hillary they are putting in the White House some Wizard of Oz that can solve all of their problems. In reality Hillary’s image is shrinking down to the reality of a nutty collectivist pulling strings and blowing smoke behind the curtain.
