This article is a review of Big Agenda: President Trump’s Plan to Save America (2017) by David Horowitz, an instructive and engaging tome that can be read at one sitting. Horowitz begins with a discussion of the dissension in the Republican ranks with Trump's candidacy for the presidency. And he is correct when he writes that many Republicans were erroneously and unproductively fighting as hard to defeat Trump — particularly some even in the cast of the old George H.W. Bush mindset — as they did to defeat the Democrats in previous elections.
Charles Richardson’s column of February 4 insisting the popular vote count is “a moot point” could have been completely accurate if — and this is a big if — there were not at least 11 heavily liberal Democratic states, including California, trying to undermine the Electoral College and instead making the popular vote supreme in presidential elections.
As Ronald Reagan used to say, when repeatedly correcting misstatements, “here we go again!” And yes, I repeatedly hear the United States of America referred to as a democracy by both parroting ignorants as well as those who know or should know better.
Politics is politics, and to paraphrase the remark misattributed to Bismarck, “politics are like making sausages, not a pretty sight.” Trump, bombastic and offensive to some, is using populism and taking advantage of the disaffection and anger of American voters to get elected president. He did not become a successful businessman from idiocy and pomposity, but from cunning, common sense, and hard work.
The BBC reports Europeans are quite alarmed (“a nightmare for Nato’s European countries”) because Donald Trump has stated that if elected president he may withdraw a guarantee of protection to Nato countries that do not “fulfill their obligation” to the US.
Green Perry's mellifluous language and arguments in his letter almost makes one hope socialism does triumph globally and stops all the evils of capitalism. What a soporific. The top six countries he mentioned, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand and France, first of all, started from a higher base than most of the world — part and parcel of European Western civilization — before they embraced social democracy.
"A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!' " — William F. Buckley, Jr.
In the context of my article on this subject, I have been asked if there is also a classical versus modern conservatism paradigm similar to the classical versus modern liberalism, and was invited to write an article about the subject.
An interesting conversation with a European neurosurgical colleague, who decries the "gun culture" of America, took place that may be of interest to readers of GOPUSA. The dialogue began with a difference of opinion on an unrelated topic, but in the course of that exchange, I happened to innocently use a figure of speech that offended the other party, and the conversation below ensued.
Over the years, in both commentaries and letters to the editor in my local newspaper, I have noted the naïve expression of many letter writers and liberal pundits, who glossing over the Constitutional protections guaranteed by the 4th and 5th Amendments, opine, “If you don’t have anything to hide, then you don’t have anything to fear!” When the Soviet KGB needed culprits, their motto was “Show me the man and I will show you his crime.” In other words, charges can be brought against anyone, once the State has decided to trample on the rights of any targeted citizen.
The term "liberal" originally stemmed from the human quest for free inquiry and the study of the liberal arts. Aristotle explained that the greatest pleasure a free man could possess is to have the economic means to indulge himself in the study of nature, books, science (philosophy) — and the liberals arts, rather than to be forced to labor endlessly with no free time for leisure and the contemplation of life.
For Russia, as well as to the rest of the world, the approaching presidential election of March 4, 2012, is raising concerns as to how it will affect Russian democracy and the stability of Europe — Russia vis- à-vis the West. Just this past November, Russian Chief of Staff General Nikolai Makarov and President Dmitry Medvedev, threatened to have Russian missiles deployed against the proposed U.S. missile shield in Europe.
Let us now discuss the more arcane, extreme and revolutionary, right-wing philosophy, namely anarchism. You may ask when and where in recent history have anarchist revolutionaries been successful? For the answer, we must travel back in time to Spain during the Spanish Civil War (1936-39). It was in Barcelona and surrounding districts that idealist anarchism flourished in the early period of the war as anarchists defended the radical Republican government that the communists also supported against the military insurrection of General Francisco Franco.
The Founding Fathers of this great nation designed a Republican form of government. By this, they meant a government under the rule of law and not the capricious rule of man, under a written constitution whose main function is to clearly demarcate the limits of authority of the federal government.
The "Right" versus "Left" convenient but capricious political arrangement came from the seating position of delegates to the National Assembly during the French Revolution, but it is at times a confusing concept and too often subject to media and academic bias and even misinformation. I have found it easier to have a political spectrum based on degrees of government control.
Douglas Harden wrote an informative column (Macon Telegraph, Aug. 14) about how the Electoral College process works and explained why our Founding Fathers created that system for presidential elections.
However, I beg to differ with his assertion, “The framers... felt the common, everyday, average, eligible voter was not intelligent, well-versed, well-read and knowledgeable enough to vote for the most qualified and best candidate.”
Macon Telegraph journalist Charles Richardson, former Mercer University President, Dr. Kirby Godsey, and Mercer Law Professor David Oedel have all brought interesting points to the discussion of the problem of education and ethics. I believe this is a problem -- not just affecting Georgia and Bibb County -- but also the nation. And, in contemporary society, it goes deeper than educational methodology and throwing money at the problem.