April 15, 2018
Aren't Democrats Lucky? (For the Time Being, Anyway)
By Jim Yardley
https://www.americanthinker.com/art...emocrats_lucky_for_the_time_being_anyway.html
Why are Democrats lucky? Well, first of all, they have their faithful minion, Robert Mueller, trying desperately to do what they were unable to do themselves, which would be to reverse the results of the last election.
Granted, the ostensible excuse they have for loosing Mueller's "dogs of war" against President Trump is the search for a smoking gun to prove that Hillary Clinton's loss of the 2016 election was the result on her being ganged up on by Trump and the entire Russian Republic.
Of course, during the energetic turning over of every rock looking for such proof, Mr. Mueller has consistently come up empty-handed. No evidence of any such collusion. This lack of evidence even started before the election, thanks to those in the FBI and DOJ who started turning over rocks as soon as they received the unsubstantiated insinuations in the Trump "dossier." Most normal people would at this point say to themselves, "Well, without any evidence, I guess nothing was done improperly." Now, this is the point where Democrats are very, very lucky.
Democrats, fortunately for them, are obviously not normal people. Normal people can believe in things they cannot see. Democrats can't. Look how many Democrats, liberals, Progressives refuse to admit that God actually exists. But they leap with the faith of the recently converted to the belief that Donald Trump must have done something wrong. There has to be some evidence to be discovered that will allow them to impeach (the properly elected) President Donald Trump.
Let's just be honest with ourselves. Faith in (as lawyers would say) "facts not in evidence" is, frankly, awe-inspiring. Faith that allows them, and the ever faithful Robert Mueller, to ignore things like rules of evidence, attorney-client privilege, and who knows what other liberties he may take in the process of trying to prove that Donald Trump isn't really the president and should be removed from office immediately.
It appears, and I have to base this judgment on pure appearance, that Mr. Mueller has been a student of Lavrentiy Beria, the head of Joseph Stalin's secret police, who has been quoted as saying, "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime."
It is sort of sad that our mainstream media haven't picked up on that, or at least mentioned it, since it would at least be a connection that someone made with Russia. Granted, Mueller's not a Republican, but then you can't have everything.
Now many people would ask just how such a failure to achieve their goals could possibly be considered lucky. Because should these rabid and obsessed Democrats actually succeed, the danger that they would expose themselves to would be based on that very success.
The Democratic Party has become more and more leftist oriented in the past few years that no matter how left wing they may appear now, imagine how leftist they would be under the leadership of Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
And again, referencing the behavior of the old Soviet Union under the leadership of Stalin and Beria, the leftists tend to eat their own. Hitler and the Nazis behaved exactly the same way. Personal loyalty to the desires of the "leader" outweighed any impetus toward rationality.
When any Communist Party member opposed any idea or plan supported by Stalin, they were given a show trial and sent to count trees in Siberia. The leaders in such a totalitarian state really liked being the leader. They really like having absolute power. And any effort to curb the abuse of that power was, to put it gently, strongly discouraged. It never made any difference if, before the slightest resistance to the whims of the leader emerged, those who resisted were loyal party members. Vivid examples exist in every totalitarian state. And the Democrat, Progressive, liberal political party is the ultimate domestic example of the totalitarian tendency among leaders.
The more leftist a political group drifts, the more totalitarian it becomes. And the more totalitarian it becomes, the less tolerance for any resistance it allows.
While Russia has always provided the rest of the world stunning examples of this we have to rely on Weimar Germany to provide us with the most telling example of how this operates, thanks to Reverend Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) in his poetic analysis of what happens when resistance to existing norms isn't sufficiently vigorous or support for the political leadership's plans isn't sufficiently adequate.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.
Today, it appears that Democrats are ignorant of this work by the Rev. Niemöller and failed to see the danger that history, around the entire world, has shown us what happens to resisting a leader, any leader, with the totalitarian bent in their view of how to govern.
That is why Democrats are lucky. They are seemingly ignorant of what faces them from their own.
It's apparent that the old saying is absolutely true: ignorance really is bliss and how can you be luckier than living through life in a blissful haze, ignoring the very real potential for Democrats to eat their own.
Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller and a a two-tour Vietnam veteran. He writes frequently about political idiocy, business, and economic idiocy and American cultural idiocy. Jim also blogs at http://jimyardley.wordpress.com, and can be contacted directly at james.v.yardley@gmail.com.
Aren't Democrats Lucky? (For the Time Being, Anyway)
By Jim Yardley
https://www.americanthinker.com/art...emocrats_lucky_for_the_time_being_anyway.html
Why are Democrats lucky? Well, first of all, they have their faithful minion, Robert Mueller, trying desperately to do what they were unable to do themselves, which would be to reverse the results of the last election.
Granted, the ostensible excuse they have for loosing Mueller's "dogs of war" against President Trump is the search for a smoking gun to prove that Hillary Clinton's loss of the 2016 election was the result on her being ganged up on by Trump and the entire Russian Republic.
Of course, during the energetic turning over of every rock looking for such proof, Mr. Mueller has consistently come up empty-handed. No evidence of any such collusion. This lack of evidence even started before the election, thanks to those in the FBI and DOJ who started turning over rocks as soon as they received the unsubstantiated insinuations in the Trump "dossier." Most normal people would at this point say to themselves, "Well, without any evidence, I guess nothing was done improperly." Now, this is the point where Democrats are very, very lucky.
Democrats, fortunately for them, are obviously not normal people. Normal people can believe in things they cannot see. Democrats can't. Look how many Democrats, liberals, Progressives refuse to admit that God actually exists. But they leap with the faith of the recently converted to the belief that Donald Trump must have done something wrong. There has to be some evidence to be discovered that will allow them to impeach (the properly elected) President Donald Trump.
Let's just be honest with ourselves. Faith in (as lawyers would say) "facts not in evidence" is, frankly, awe-inspiring. Faith that allows them, and the ever faithful Robert Mueller, to ignore things like rules of evidence, attorney-client privilege, and who knows what other liberties he may take in the process of trying to prove that Donald Trump isn't really the president and should be removed from office immediately.
It appears, and I have to base this judgment on pure appearance, that Mr. Mueller has been a student of Lavrentiy Beria, the head of Joseph Stalin's secret police, who has been quoted as saying, "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime."
It is sort of sad that our mainstream media haven't picked up on that, or at least mentioned it, since it would at least be a connection that someone made with Russia. Granted, Mueller's not a Republican, but then you can't have everything.
Now many people would ask just how such a failure to achieve their goals could possibly be considered lucky. Because should these rabid and obsessed Democrats actually succeed, the danger that they would expose themselves to would be based on that very success.
The Democratic Party has become more and more leftist oriented in the past few years that no matter how left wing they may appear now, imagine how leftist they would be under the leadership of Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
And again, referencing the behavior of the old Soviet Union under the leadership of Stalin and Beria, the leftists tend to eat their own. Hitler and the Nazis behaved exactly the same way. Personal loyalty to the desires of the "leader" outweighed any impetus toward rationality.
When any Communist Party member opposed any idea or plan supported by Stalin, they were given a show trial and sent to count trees in Siberia. The leaders in such a totalitarian state really liked being the leader. They really like having absolute power. And any effort to curb the abuse of that power was, to put it gently, strongly discouraged. It never made any difference if, before the slightest resistance to the whims of the leader emerged, those who resisted were loyal party members. Vivid examples exist in every totalitarian state. And the Democrat, Progressive, liberal political party is the ultimate domestic example of the totalitarian tendency among leaders.
The more leftist a political group drifts, the more totalitarian it becomes. And the more totalitarian it becomes, the less tolerance for any resistance it allows.
While Russia has always provided the rest of the world stunning examples of this we have to rely on Weimar Germany to provide us with the most telling example of how this operates, thanks to Reverend Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) in his poetic analysis of what happens when resistance to existing norms isn't sufficiently vigorous or support for the political leadership's plans isn't sufficiently adequate.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.
Today, it appears that Democrats are ignorant of this work by the Rev. Niemöller and failed to see the danger that history, around the entire world, has shown us what happens to resisting a leader, any leader, with the totalitarian bent in their view of how to govern.
That is why Democrats are lucky. They are seemingly ignorant of what faces them from their own.
It's apparent that the old saying is absolutely true: ignorance really is bliss and how can you be luckier than living through life in a blissful haze, ignoring the very real potential for Democrats to eat their own.
Jim Yardley is a retired financial controller and a a two-tour Vietnam veteran. He writes frequently about political idiocy, business, and economic idiocy and American cultural idiocy. Jim also blogs at http://jimyardley.wordpress.com, and can be contacted directly at james.v.yardley@gmail.com.