Monday, August 23, 2010

Save Us From Rand Paul! (And Other Nonsense From the New York Times)

In the recent article entitled, “America’s Ruling Class,” author Angelo M. Codevilla writes that the ruling elite of this country
…whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America's ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.
In other words, the god of those who use state power to push the rest of us into line is, well, the state, and anyone who might say anything against this god should be banished, if not from America, at least from Congress. So, a recent editorial in the Official Publication of the Ruling Class, the New York Times, should not be surprising as it paints Rand Paul and others as a threat to our very souls, declaring:
These new Republican candidates are out of touch with mainstream American values of tolerance and pretty much everything else. They need to be challenged head-on.
Obviously, this is Really Serious Stuff. So why is Rand Paul a threat, along with others running for office? Well, read this and then shake in your boots:
Rand Paul, the United States Senate candidate in Kentucky and physician, who has criticized the minimum-wage law and the civil rights and fair housing laws. He wants to cut way back on unemployment insurance and has denigrated Medicare as “socialized medicine.”
How DARE anyone even utter words about a law that has helped create record teenage unemployment! As for the civil rights criticism, he questioned whether or not state agents should have the power to dictate to owners of private property who they should permit to be on that property. (Paul also stated that he believed that refusing to serve someone in a restaurant because that person is of another race is immoral and could not personally support such action. The Slimes leaves out that part because the Ruling Class mentality does not want anyone to believe that one can hold to the sanctity of private property and not be a racist.)

Even leaving out the “cut way back” comments on unemployment “insurance,” I find especially amusing that the Ruling Class Representatives hold that telling the truth about Medicare – that it really is socialist medicine – is to “denigrate” it. The reason I find this curious is that no entity has been more vocal about the need for the state to force socialist medical care on us than the NYT.

One has to remember that the Ruling Class today has its roots in the Progressive Movement of more than a century ago, and so-called Progressives believe with all their heart that “progress” occurs when the state advances against individuals and private property. Thus, to criticize ANY growth of the state (except to restrict abortions) is to criticize “progress” itself, and in “progress,” we find all Goodness and Virtue. Therefore, any cutback is seen as “turning back the clock,” and that, dear readers, Is A Very Bad Thing.

However, there is even more to dislike. In taking on Ken Buck, who is the Colorado Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate, Those Who Would Rule Over Us declare (with horror, I’m sure):
A former district attorney, he has said that the separation of church and state is too strictly enforced and wants to eliminate the Energy and Education Departments. Until recently, he supported repealing the 17th Amendment, which provides for direct election of senators. In the primary, he said he should win because “I do not wear high heels” — his opponent was a woman. As a federal prosecutor, he was reprimanded by a United States attorney after he gave information about the weakness of a case against gun dealers to the defense.
Again, anyone who wants to eliminate ANYTHING that the NYT calls progress – the advance of the State – is evil. Now, Tom DiLorenzo has written this about the 17th Amendment (but his words cannot mean anything to the Ruling Class, as DiLorenzo thinks it was not a good thing for Abraham Lincoln to start a war, eviscerate habeas corpus, and arrest thousands of people who disagreed with him).

But there is more. The reprimand of which the NY Slimes speaks was a reprimand of Buck for telling the truth, and what could be a bigger threat to the state than a federal prosecutor who actually does something other than lie? Of course, there is more to that case than the “Newspaper of Record” wants us to know. According to the Greely Gazette:
“I didn’t believe I had done anything wrong,” Buck said. “so I refused to resign, and I knew that an investigation would be started. But, I truly felt I had done the right thing and would be justified.” In the end, Buck’s evaluation of the case turned out to be accurate. More than 37 felony charges against two defendants were dropped, and the third man -- the main defendant -- walked out of court with a misdemeanor conviction, a $25 dollar fine, and one day of probation.

“A lot of financial resources were wasted to prosecute a felony case that merited only a misdemeanor charge,” Buck said. “That’s exactly what I said in the beginning. I was right. That’s what people need to know.”
There is another point about Buck that must really rile the Monitors of the Ruling Class: he recently secured perjury indictments against a detective whose lies in a murder trial more than a decade ago led to a wrongful conviction. Of course, that is intolerable to the Newspaper That Propped Up Mike Nifong, for the state must be free to imprison those who, well, should be imprisoned.

And the editorial goes on and on. Someone else is in favor of “repealing the progressive income tax” and other such Things That Are Intolerable Our Rulers. (I mean, how else can they live at our expense except to take as much of our property as possible?)

So, we see that our nation is under siege, as people are running for office who don’t worship the gods of Progressivism. Even worse, we have prosecutors who tell the truth and seek justice, at least once in a while. Now, I hardly am going to claim that these people will turn around things, and I’m sure that at least some of these “radical” candidates have no problem with our military adventures around the world.

Nonetheless, one gets a picture of the mentality of Our Rulers. Anything or anyone who raises questions about those things that others have imposed upon us is a Threat To Our Very Existence.


Victoria said...

I love Ron Paul, hence I am enthused about Rand's candidacy and hope he will turn out to closely follow his father's footsteps. For anyone who still believes in the mainstream media, if they followed Rand's campaign it would be a real eye-opener about how the press and the establishment collude to give us the politicians and programs they want us to have.

They just keep heaping the attacks on Rand since the moment he won the primary. First the civil rights b.s., then the attack on his medical credentials because interestingly he rejected regular board certification when they implemented unfair rules upon new doctors and opted instead to form his own certification organization. Recently they created a hoax in which they dug up some college coed and insinuated from her story that he had engaged in an abduction and coercion to take drugs during a college prank. When she was later contacted she clarified that she was not abducted against her will and was not coerced or forced to take drugs but was involved in a college prank. Yet the msm still continued to present the story in the negative light to smear Rand.

It is an interesting race. I sense that the msm won't have as much influence in Kentucky as they do in other areas.

Dan said...


It is very unfortunate that the term progressivism has been turned from being a definition for advancing our society in positive ways, into a term associated with socialism and the left wing.

I consider myself a progressive, in the sense that I believe that change is generally a good thing and without change there can be little measurable progress.

Though I may disagree with a specific position and if I do, will oppose their position vigorously, I can still respect an individual, provided they are honest and sincere.

We do need a lot of change in this country ... what bothers me most is how our leaders and media pundits (on both sides left and right) marginalize sincerity and integrity.

Debates are wagered with half-truth and innuendo; that insults both my intelligence and patriotism.

I would vote for a "radical" left or right candidate in an instant, if I truly believed that individual could represent me, my family, my community and my country with integrity.

To quote many others... "I get a little more Libertarian every day..."

kbp said...

I've always associated the term "progressives" to socialism.

I'd say it was the result of those that decided to ID themselves that way back in the early 1900's.

It is sad we decide who to vote for, if that option is open, by reviewing which candidate has done the least damage to date.

KC Sprayberry said...

It's very interesting as we approach the small 'revolution', the elections, in November, we are seeing more and more carefully worded but very inaccurate editorials from the NYT pages. I quit reading that paper a couple of years back as it was very depressing to see their well-slanted stories that took apart everything they didn't agree with. And for Americans to think of them as the voice of sanity is beyond reason. Americans have had almost two years of Progressive behavior that's caused a recession to continue to depths no one ever imagined while listening to promises from a certain party that we would see better times 'in the future'. Well, they're having better times at the cost of taking more and more from our wallets while committing children not yet born to a crushing debt. To even think of electing more professional politicians of either party into this mess is beyond crazy. It'll be interesting to see how these mid-term elections turn out. I firmly believe we may see a turnout of voters who will let their voices be heard and a change may be coming in the wind.

Doc Ellis said...

Dr Anderson,

This is an interesting essay.

Thank you for writing it.

liberranter said...

It'll be interesting to see how these mid-term elections turn out. I firmly believe we may see a turnout of voters who will let their voices be heard and a change may be coming in the wind.

KC, I hate to be the cynic that rains on your parade, but, history being the reliable guide that it is, the "mid-term elections" will change precisely NOTHING of import (think: Republican Revolution of 1994). Even the most high-minded and sincere of candidates seeking to monkey-wrench the status quo inside the Rome-on-the-Potomac corridors of power will find that, once elected, they either 1) are too few in number to make a significant difference against the entrenched and irreversible rot that has rendered Constitutional, republican (small "r") government terminal, or 2) will be quickly co-opted and ensnared by the very system that they hoped to change, which is exactly what happened to the infamous "Class of '94." And all of this assumes, of course, that these are people of genuine integrity rather than rank opportunists seeking their turn at the public slop trough - a very dubious assumption at best. Bottom line: It should be obvious to all of us by now that the current corrupt system is designed to be self-perpetuating and that anyone seeking to reform it, especially from the inside, will either by chewed up and spewed from its midst or hopelessly marginalized (two words here: Ron Paul).

I hope I'm wrong, but again, if history serves as any guide, it will be "deja vu all over again."

kbp said...

liberranter speaks words of wisdom.

Buy guns!

Anonymous said...

kbp, we have plenty in case needed! LOL It's the ammo that's harder to come by & more expensive. Makes trips to the range less fun.

Anyway, my main problem is with the terms "progressive" & "liberals" turned into dirty words. I agree with Dan that we have to have change. It goes back to "history repeating itself" if we do not have change. The problem lies in the changes and where they need to be made and the fact that none of the actual "needs" are being changed. It's all just sad & disgusting.

I am a Libertarian, but as my husband says, "that just makes you a liberal with a little conservative in you". If you can guess, he's completely "right wing". Now to the word liberal. I've always enjoyed the definition of being of broad mind. Not defining one's being by their social stature, wealth, job, family, etc. In other words, it being a personal belief system & not a dirty word pushed towards being a democrat. I do not vote down any party lines nor will I ever. Even before the glorious internet, I have always researched candidates, even if it meant walking into their campaign headquarters and demanding answers to my questions & concerns. Hopefully we have all learned (since most of us on this blog are, IMO, mid-30's & over), that no political "party" is out for our best interest. It's a game we play where whoever has the most money wins, yet most of us live in the "average" category. I want people to come to my door & talk to me, I don't want to see 5 gazillion political signs littering our roads, I want real debates back, I want to see who can spend the least amount of money & do something for our country and I want CHANGE!!! Stick to the Constitution and work from there. Democrats & Republicans do NOT make up our whole political world in the U.S. & we need to realize that. The love I have for this country is waning & it isn't because of Obama, it's because of everything I've seen happen over the last 40 years. We've been on a downward spiral for a lot longer, but this is just what I've seen. People with no character making our laws & breaking our laws, but are in the power to do so.