I Apologize: Obama is NOT a Dictator, He’s a Tyrant

In the past, people have objected to me calling Obama a dictator.  I hereby apologize – really.  I looked it up and dictator doesn’t accurately describe Obama, tyrant does:

Definition of TYRANT

1a : an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution

b : a usurper of sovereignty

2a : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally

b : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power

So, why do I say that?  Because of this story:

ObamaCare in Trouble? Exchange provision delayed, as lawmakers push to repeal another

 The Obama administration now says a special system of exchanges designed to make it easier for small businesses to provide insurance will be delayed an entire year — to 2015. 

Obamacare is a law.  As near as I have been able to tell, it would require Congress to change the legislation in order to put this off until 2015.  The legislation reads “shall,” and that means the law cannot be altered by Presidential decree.  Now, I’ve looked, but there seems to be ZERO evidence that Congress has even debate changing this deadline, so, if the deadline has been changed by Obama – without Congress passing a law to authorize the change – then Obama meets the description of both definition 1a & b.  That makes him a tyrant.

Incidentally, Obama has “gone around” Congress on many occasions — more than enough to have established that he sees no restriant on his authority outside of that which HE chooses to recognize.  The exact definition of a tyrant.

67 thoughts on “I Apologize: Obama is NOT a Dictator, He’s a Tyrant

  1. The term used over at the site…Protein Wisdom is …..” Liberal Fascism”.

    I think this is a good moniker for what is going on with the Liberal Press enablers of the Tyrant……Liberal Fascists

  2. DonAmeche, liberalism by definition cannot lead to fascism. Fascism is a form of extreme rightwing radical authoritarian nationalism. It is the anti-thesis to socialism. You might as well talk about free-market communists.

    As to the original post, yes Obama is a tyrant. His kill list is unconstitutional. His drone program is unconstitutional. If there were any Republicans in congress who actually fit the definition of “defending the constitution” they would be holding impeachment proceedings right now. Obama’s administration has murdered Americans. Yes one was engaged in terrorist activity – but being suspected of criminal behaviour is not all that is needed to order a citizens death. As ever it falls to the ACLU to fight the due process denying drone program in the piss weak courts. Sorry Obama, just because you and John Brennan have decided that someone needs to die it doesn’t count as “due process”.

    Kind of fits the Republican party really. They’ll impeach a President for lying about a blowjob, but when it comes to a President who is usurping the one thing that your Founders most feared and despised – the power to murder an American citizen – they are silent. Rand Paul is the only one who has expressed any sort of opposition at all. Once upon a time the Democrats might have done so, no chance of that since you guys have been calling them “soft” for the past forty years.

    • Dave,

      Liberalism — as we know it today — is Progressivism, and that is socialism, and socialism CAN lead to fascism (NAZI was an abreviation for national socialist workers party).

      Next, fascism is NOT “on the right.” That is the result of Left-wing propaganda and it actually comes from Europe where it meant fascism is on the right of the left. It would be better to think of fascism/communism as up and down but still on the left. This is probably one of the biggest driving forces behind people devising diamond/triangles to describe the political spectrum.

      But the truth remains, fascism is NOT the antithesis of socialism, it is a sibling, as are socialism, communism and progressivism.

      At least you got your critique of Obama correct.

      • Joe, your historical references are all over the place. As I have already said, you cannot use references from Europe at your will: either you admit USA and Western European countries are the same kind of Western liberal Christian democracies, and in that case the political categories should have the same meaning here and there, or otherwise, you maintain that USA is a totally different kind of society from Europe, and in that case no political categories related to European experience (Communism, Fascism, Collectivism, Nazism) should be used in political discourse here in the USA. You cannot change the meaning of such categories at will. Unless you clearly separate these 2 assumptions, your political discourse becomes kind of grade-schoolish, or a kind of propaganda.
        But in any case, let me ask you what would be wrong if we all admitted the following:
        -that there is a legitimate debate to be had about the DEGREE of government intervention, -that nobody in that debate is a Communist or a Fascist, -that nobody should call their opponents demonizing names as Communist, Fascist, Hitler, Stalin, comrade, etc because it only debases the level of discussion, -that there have been plenty examples of successful liberal policies in Western economies, -that when democratic Western countries reach the limits of ‘big gov’ policies they don’t become “Communist/Collectivist/Stalinist” countries, but just turn around and apply ‘small gov’ policies without demonizing their opponents, just like civilized and Christian people should behave.
        Would it really be so terrible to agree on those points?

        • Zalo,

          When I understand the origins and ideologies involved as well as their relationships to history and between the U.S. and Europe, I most certainly CAN use them. What’s more, I use them accurately and in context. Now, if you don’t like that, then maybe you should reconsider your position rather than trying to continue the Progressive tactic of trying to force people to change the terms being used to discuss something that already has an established and commonly understood name — especially when it is done simply to deflect criticism of a failed position.

          • Joe, it was you who said “fascism is not on the right”, and “fascism/communism as up and down but still on the left”. So you are taking European categories and changing their meaning at will, I’m not changing anything. So again, if you insist on using these categories then you have to accept them at their European meaning, namely Fascism on the Right and Communism on the Left. It makes no sense at all for a scholarly discourse to have the meaning of these categories changed as you do. On the other hand it makes a lot of sense to change them at will if you just want to use them as a piece of propaganda, just as Goldberg does. The choice is yours. And so that you know I’m not trying “to continue any Progressive tactic” or trying “to force people to change the terms being used”. The drive to change terms is coming from you.
            But you still did not comment on my main proposal: what harm would come from agreeing on my points?

            • Zalo,

              I am not changing the meanings of these ideologies, merely placing them on the AMERICAN political spectrum. There is no contradiction here — just your attempt to use a fallacious assertion to confuse the discussion.

              Neither Goldberg nor myself are attempting to confuse anything. Actually, when people like you assert that fascism is on the extreme right, YOU are the one trying to poison the well — because you do not explain to your audience that fascism is not on the right in this nation. And there’s your fallacy, and the point where your entire attack fails.

              As for the harm: what harm is there in properly applying those terms — especially when they convey a dearth of information to the informed, thus saving pages of needless explanation and stipulation?

              • If you want to place them on the AMERICAN political spectrum, then you have to come up with different names and meanings. Otherwise only confusion ensues. It’s like taking ‘football’ from England and placing it on the AMERICAN sports spectrum. These two sports are completely different, so to be able to continue a meaningful discourse about sports, you cannot continue using just ‘football’, you have to find another name for one of them, as it has been done in both places: here by calling their version ‘soccer’ and there by calling our version ‘American football’.
                But you still misunderstood the main points of my original post, so I will re-post them here. I was proposing if we all could admit the following:
                -that there is a legitimate debate to be had in America about the DEGREE of government intervention, -that it would be extremely helpful for all sides of such debate to have a clearly measurable definition of how big is ‘big’ and how small is ‘small’, otherwise we are all shooting in the dark, -that nobody in that debate is a Communist or a Fascist, -that nobody should call their opponents demonizing names as Communist, Fascist, Hitler, Stalin, comrade, etc because it only debases the level of discussion (and I would add, it’s not a Christian thing to do so), -that there have been plenty examples of successful liberal policies in Western economies, so ‘liberal’ doesn’t automatically mean ‘bad & demonic’, -that when democratic Western countries reach the limits of ‘big gov’ policies they don’t hereby become “Communist/Collectivist/Stalinist” countries, but simply turn around (most recent example: Sweden) and apply ‘small gov’ policies without demonizing their opponents, just like civilized and Christian people should behave.
                Would it really be so terrible to agree on those points?

                • “If you want to place them on the AMERICAN political spectrum, then you have to come up with different names and meanings.”

                  NO! Did you cease being “human” when your ancestors came to this country from overseas? No. So why should we re-name something when the essence of what it is would not change? So that you and those like you can support it without suffering the stigma that rightfully goes with it, that’s why. And that is a Marxist tactic. It is part of cultural Marxism, now known as political correctness (the shield that the cultural Marxists described). The Progressives use this because they are the American extension of Marxism — and they have the same goals. In their early days, they openly praised fascism and communism. The only reason they are not called what they are is because they differ from the Marxists in their approach — incrementalism vs revolution.

                  Soccer and football can have different names because they are different sports. fascism in Germany is equivalent to fascism under Wilson and FDR, so there is no need to change the name. It is the same and has the same characteristics no matter where it is practiced. BTW: the attempt to “control” something using language is another Progressive characteristic. Dewey was VERY consumed by the idea, and Dewey was a card-carrying Communist, as well as a founder of the American Progressive movement. So your analogy fails.

                  In fact, if you will bother to read his work, Wilson openly said he wanted to bring Communism to America as, in his view, it was the perfect form for an “administrated” government. However, Wilson realized he couldn’t call it communism. Because Americans were enamored with “progress,” and because Wilson recognized he would have to implement his idea piece-meal, over time, he decided “Progressive” was the perfect term. SO, why would we want to use “Wilsonism” to describe something that is already defined? Wilson was actually a fascist, because he embraced communism, only he integrated it into the American sense of nationalism and free enterprise (which is essentially what fascism is). So why not call Wilson a fascist? HE WAS A FASCIST! See how the ideologies transfer seamlessly? And that is why we are fully justified in calling ideologies by what they are and comparing people who adopt the tactics and rhetoric of past historic figures to those figures. Truth and reality are what they are — period!

                  • Joe, are you kidding or what? How can you compare political notions and ideologies with something as fundamental as what makes us human? Your philosophy professor would have disqualified you on the spot, had he heard what you just said.
                    What you say about Progressivism, is basically arguing that those policies have been harmful to America. And this is a totally legit debate to have. What is not legit, is to associate them with Communism, i.e to demonize them, as this would be news for any political scientists all over the world.
                    Then you say things so outrageous, it’s hard to know if you are serious or just enjoy making everybody twitch their eyes in disbelief, namely that “fascism in Germany is equivalent to fascism under Wilson and FDR, so there is no need to change the name. It is the same and has the same characteristics no matter where it is practiced”. This statement alone makes a mockery of all sacrifices German Jews endured to escape Nazi Germany and find solace under ‘fascist’ FDR, or of all the sacrifices freedom lovers from Eastern Europe endured to reach the shores of USA, let alone shores of France, or God forbid, Sweden, as these two (as every other Western European nation) have always been more Fascist/Communist/Nazist/Whatever than the USA, if your genial criteria is to be used.
                    Then I don’t see the need that you have to scream HE WAS A FASCIST!, I don’t see what is to be gained by such a claim, (even if it were true), the likelihood of which is less than that of you and me being struck by lightning at the same moment.
                    I was thinking in fact that in this atmosphere of after-Easter, when we all celebrated the Prince of Peace, we would take heed of His words that even by calling our fellow man ‘Fool’ we would jeopardize our salvation.
                    This brings me to my main proposal points which you again have ignored (I will not re-post them here, see my 06:34 post of today). So what would be so terrible to agree on all of those points?

                    • My philosophy PROFESSORS all respected me — because I pushed them — HARD! I once beat the dean of the department in a debate, in class, about HIS man, John Stuart Mill. The dean conceded. I defeated my logic teacher in open debate. he was a certified member of Mensa. I know my test scores, both intelligence AND logic. I’m not worried in the least that I understand my positions, or that they are flawed — because I know they are not.

                      Take my reference to what it is to be human. You missed the point entirely, and now you are trying to argue that I made a bad analogy?!? And you have the nerve to lecture me on the principles of basic logic? HA!

                      Woodrow Wilson (and crew) are the ones who openly said that Progressivism was the way to bring the Communist agenda to America. So it isn’t me making the claim, it is those who established it making the announcement. Try reading their work sometime.

                      FDR openly admired BOTH Mussolini and Hitler — until they started to show their true nature. FDR envied their lack of constitutional restraint, and modeled the New Deal largely after what the Fascists were doing in Europe. Again, read what he and his advisers wrote.

                      Zalo, I am a Christian, and I try — HARD — to live my faith. But I am also a Marine, and I am tested when I am tasked to deal patiently and kindly with a person who does not know nearly as much as they believe they know. In this case, I have read what ALL these men wrote — BY THEIR OWN HAND! I do not pay attention to what the professors and historians say because I have learned they cannot be trusted. So I know I am standing on solid ground when I tell you that the European cancer that is Fabian Socialism, Fascism and Communism are all wrapped up in the American Progressive movement, and that this movement is alive and relevant today.

                      Now, I’ll have no more to do with you on these matters until you make some effort to educate yourself about the things you’re discussing.

                    • Yep, you say “I am a Christian, and I try — HARD — to live my faith. But I am also a Marine” when in fact by what you say on this blog, it sure looks like you are first and foremost a Marine, and then also a Christian (big difference, methinks).
                      In any case, again, here’s what I propose to all of us to accept (i.e. to all readers of this blog):
                      -that there is a legitimate debate to be had in America about the DEGREE of government intervention, -that it would be extremely helpful for all sides of such debate to have a clearly measurable definition of how big is ‘big’ and how small is ‘small’, otherwise we are all shooting in the dark, -that nobody in that debate is a Communist or a Fascist, -that nobody should call their opponents demonizing names as Communist, Fascist, Hitler, Stalin, comrade, etc because it only debases the level of discussion (and I would add, it’s not a Christian thing to do so), -that there have been plenty examples of successful liberal policies in Western economies, so ‘liberal’ doesn’t automatically mean ‘bad & demonic’, -that when democratic Western countries reach the limits of ‘big gov’ policies they don’t hereby become “Communist/Collectivist/Stalinist” countries, but simply turn around (most recent example: Sweden) and apply ‘small gov’ policies without demonizing their opponents, just like civilized and Christian people should behave.
                      And I put my original question forth again: would it really be so terrible to agree on those points?

                • Zalo….your words………

                  .”….that nobody in that debate is a Communist or a Fascist, -that nobody should call their opponents demonizing names as Communist, Fascist, Hitler, Stalin, comrade, etc because it only debases the level of discussion (and I would add, it’s not a Christian …..”

                  Have you even HEARD the Words of the Left…..Pelosi as just ONE example since the Obamacare debates in 2009 ??? She is STILL using the Term Nazi to describe what she calls the right.
                  Have you read the Legislation Passed and Proposed by the Left and Supported by the like of McCain in the GOP ?
                  The Legislation is Patently Anti-Constitutional….it is of the nature of Statism and Commumnism ( You didn’t build that….The Country does better when we redistribute..)..

                  In America today … there are the Bonsfide Communist Party, Socialist Party and Progrssive Party ….. So THEY are wrong ?? Misguided in their own SELF-applied Terms based on their own Philosphical identification with those European antecedants?

                  I think you are spending a lot of time “wordsmithing” and ignoring the vital Political rift going on right now ….. you appear smart…..so the question is WHY would that emphasis on wordsmithing be your focus ?? And Please No this is not an entre into repeating what you said above……but rather one to address the REAL issues facing the country.

                  • DonAmeche, I thought this blog is blog is maintained by people claiming to be Christians, Pelosi and Co. are not claiming such thing. So no, cannot justify behavior by saying “they did it too!”.
                    Socialist Party of USA plays absolutely no role in the American political landscape. Nope, your arguments can’t fly, sorry.

                    • Zalo,

                      The Socialist AND Communist Party in this nation have said they don’t have to play a role because the Democrat Party has adopted their agenda. You really should pay attention to their press releases.

                    • BOTH parties Strongly endorsed Obama ….Valerie Jarrett and Van Jones ( Obama Appointees) are self -acknowledged Socialist ? Communist.

                      So what agenda are YOU pushing exactly ??? Pelosi and Co. don’t claim to be Christian so they get a Pass ??? And it is the RNL that is wrong??

                      I ask again WHAT is your agenda?? ……….Standard anti-Christian perhaps….figures.

                    • Zalo, I have been reading your pleas for comity and equanimity, your idea that the issues can be discussed without throwing around ‘hot’ words.
                      Let me clue you in……Utah, B, ameche, augger, libercrite, and a couple of other minor thinkers in here want dischord and hard feelings. They are not interested in the truth, as they think that they embody the truth. However, they promulgate their version of reality with a harsh dismissal of anybody who dares confront them with facts that do not buttress their sick, unamerican ideals. Point out the fact that under Eisenhower, we had a strong economy in spite of high tax rates. Point out the Interstate Highway system built with those taxes, then stand back as a wave of bile flows from Joe’s crowd.
                      Suggest that allah and the christian god are one, and you might as well catch a ride to the stoning, you’re featured.

    • @ Dave from “Down-under”,
      Communist China is the Penultimate form of “Free-market” Communism.

      I agree with you 100% about The Drone program …. and the Republican’s abrogation of all duties in Defending the Constitution. However I disagree Strongly about the ACLU……….Perhaps Utah or Joe or Texas can put up a post Showing their GROSS bias in applying their “Talents” to protecting All American’s Rights…..

      Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz led a GOP fight against the Drones …. importantly bringing it to the Public Attention … which is what is desparately needed today …. because the Press has built a virtual wall of disinfo and stupidity around True news and events.

      I don’t agree with you that “Once upon a time the Democrats would have argued in favor of the Constitution”…..The history of the Supreme Court and the Legislation for the past 100 years is clear proof of a Progressive agenda….and an INCREASING progressive agenda at that …… (The GOP old guard is complicit in this as well).

      Liberal is what THEY call themselves…..it is how the Press fashions ITSELF …. therefore I think the Moniker ..” Liberal Fascism.” fits well to describe what is going on in the collusion between the Party in power and the Press ….. I think it would be a winning…Re-tweetable moniker, that is both descriptive and identifies their goals …. I hope it gets legs

      • Don,

        Liberal Fascism was coined by someone else and then made popular by Jonah Goldberg in his book by the same name. In it, he details the rise of the Progressive/Liberal Party and how/why what we call liberalism should rightly be called fascism. He even makes a great case for considering Woodrow Wilson to have been the world’s first fascist dictator. If you have never read the book, you should consider it. It is well cited and goes a long way toward connecting the dots of history.

        • Thanks …. Will get it on the next “Amazon Run” along with the Chick-flick list I’m given.

          I think it IS a good Moniker for the Re-Tweet younger Crowd…..which is part of where the “Culture War” needs to be fought.

          • Don,

            Yes, but it gets better. The guy who coined the term liberal fascist (sorry, name eludes me at the moment) also said it would be fascism with a smiley face. The book has a yellow smiley with a Hitler mustache (fitting).

            You might also want to get Goldberg’s follow-on book about liberal cliches. In that one, he details how they teach people to dismiss real issues by reciting stupid cliches — straight out of Brave New World and 1984. Both books together are a treasure trove of understanding the origins and tactics of the modern Left.

  3. Joe, If Woodrow Wilson Openly stated that his goal was to promote communism, then there should be some record of his saying such a thing. However, I am unable to find such a quote. Is he using coded language, your favorite excuse when confronted with this sort of unpleasant fact? Apparently, this is just another unsubstantiated pillar that you think supports your warped world view.
    Zalo, you have their number, but it is a waste of time talking to these hate-filled morons.

    • There is. You just refuse to read the many times I have linked to it so you can keep telling people I am lying. That may work for you, but the moment someone reads what I post for them, they see you for what you are.

      How do you think Texas came to agree with me about you and Wilson? He read the links I posted to Wilson’s essays.

      For anyone who is interested, I have covered this topic — ad nauseam — you just need to search the RNL archives.

      • Joe, I’ve read all your crap, and wilson does say what you want us to think he said. One clear quote, and you have never provided it.

        • “Joe, I’ve read all your crap, and wilson does say what you want us to think he said”

          There’s your 1 clear quote: YOU admitting that Wilson DOES say what I tell you he says.

          Thanks, very much. It is about time you admitted it.

    • I was not able to find direct citation to state “I support Communism” by Wilson either, but I was certainly and very easily able to find several quotes and notations that Wilson certainly had great distain for our government’s checks and balances … preferring to gain complete control over government himself … a hallmark of totalitarianism that I am certainly glad he did not achieve.

      And as such, and for the sake of evidence based logic for Greg, I would offer the easiest example of this logic via both the Espionage Act (1917), and the Sedition Act (1918) which both welcomed socialists who supported his war efforts, but also provided for the arrest of any persons who would utter a criticism of his war policies.

      Again, a hallmark of totalitarianism, and a blatant disregard for the First Amendment rights of an American citizen.

      As a side bar offering; Woodrow Wilson, for whom so many liberals aggrandize, was a Democrat with a profound, and irrefutable history of racism as evidenced by his regard for them as “indolent slaves” and “shiftless children”. Wilson even went so far as to illustrate the black man with monkey features and both publicly and privately referred to them as ‘drakes’.

      Yes sir, Woodrow Wilson-D … a legacy progressives can certainly be proud of.

      • Eugene Debs, the head of the Socialist party, was jailed by the Wilson Administration because of Deb’s anti-war activities. Many socialists and communists demonstrated against Wilson and his policies, including the awful legislation that you mention above, and many socialists were imprisoned using the provisions of those acts.
        Wilson did some bad things,but it was socialists who hit the streets in protest.

            • Oh shut the f**k up Greg. It’s utterly amazing that you cry for sources every single time you don’t like something, and then raise hell when someone asks you for sources.

              But I tell you what, I’ll give you a link to the print though honestly, I should not. I should make you actually spend the money for a hard copy, but you would just bitch, piss, and moan like a typical card carrying member of the “Free Sh*t Army”.

              As if looking up the title in Google wasn’t easy enough …

              http://books.google.com/books?id=sHttQqlEb50C&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&dq=socialism+and+democracy+woodrow+wilson&source=bl&ots=ddJCxMPi_f&sig=FKbPg8zmrlcr4QEH8jY1nrbTwXM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mmJhUdDFKIa08QSdnYHADw&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=socialism%20and%20democracy%20woodrow%20wilson&f=false

              • Augger,

                You are wasting your time. He won’t read them. He will tell you he did, then prove he didn’t with his ignorant statements. But he won’t read them because he’s been proven wrong so often, he has figured it best for him to stay ignorant. This way, he can tell himself whatever he wants and still believe he is “honest.”

                Greg, shut the pie hole. You know bloody well this is true and that I have shoved the truth in your face many times. You simply do not want to accept it, but that does not change reality. And as for you and SBJ trying to tell people I lie to them: I DON’T HAVE TO! The truth is bad enough; I have no need to embellish it.

                • Thats precisely why I just use him a punching bag. I can get it out of my system, and then move on to other crazy (censored) liberals who will at least provide intellectual discourse beyond the level of Forrest Gump.

                  So you see, at least Greg has a use after all. 🙂

                • I had a good history teacher, I know all about Debs, I know Wilson did some unconstitutional things, as did Lincoln, Jefferson, and most presidents we have suffered under.
                  Here’s the truth, your professors promoted you, because they were sick and tired of your misreading of terms. Joe, why would I read anything that promotes your lying, which is done on these pages? When you say that the muslims haven’t condemned the 9/11 attacks, you are lying! When you deny that Cordoba was a bright light of the dark Middle Ages, you are ignoring history, may as well call it a lie, and you a liar. When you and Utah say that Muslims have hated us since their religion was in its infancy, you cross the line from prevarication into fantasy.
                  Utah says that the only reason we weren’t attacked by muslims before our support of Israel was their lack of technology. Right, Utah, and they waited for 40 years after the invention of the utility knife, and 98 years after the first manned flight. Pretty stupid of you, Utah; they hate us because of our meddling in their affairs, our uncritical support of Israel. Thinking that Muslims brood about our freedoms, are jealous of our TV programming or whatever bullcrap and poison fills your head, is the thinking of sick minds..

              • Thanks for the link, but it does not answer the question for me. Wilson seems to be explaining the advantages of socialism over pure democracy. However, I sense that he was about to do an ‘on the other hand when the page ended.
                So, Wilson has trouble with democracy; so do the people in here. So Wilson dislikes big corporations, So does B, so do I. And Socialism was in its infancy, there was no ongoing government practicing such a philosophy, so it may have sounded good on paper.

                I did catch his delight at the possibility of government not having to deal with the individual, but that is a trademark of many totalitarian regimes, a state Wilson approached with his anti-free press activities. Far too many pols are too quick to abandoned professed principles when they present an obstacle to the politician’s whims.

      • Augger,

        Wilson doesn’t use those words. I have explained how the Progressives speak many times, and I believe I made my case — many times. They say things plain as day, but in a way that allows dolts who do not hear the exact words “I support Communism” to say that Wilson never said he supported Communism. This way, they can have it both ways.

        What Wilson did say was that the best means of governing was by ‘administration,’ and that the best form of govt. for “administration” seemed to have been that in Revolutionary Russia. Now, that can be found in his essay on Administration. One will also find that he argued for a national leader to be elected, and that this leader should be charismatic and “know the will of the people,” so that, once elected, he would have free reign to do the will of the people. This was a rosy way of advocating a dictatorship — even if it is an elected dictatorship. What’s more, it was based on a cult of personality. At the time, the only example of this was Lenin, but because it is more reminiscent of Mussolini and Hitler, Goldberg argues that Wilson was the world’s first Fascist (this and because Wilson believed in nationalism and govt/industry co-operation instead of ownership is a pretty solid reason to accept Goldberg’s argument).

        So, as usual, Greg is playing the Progressive game — which is why I have deemed him irrelevant. He’s simply a disingenuous and intellectually dishonest person.

        • joe, you are a marginalized idiot! Wilson is a communist, because doesn’t say he’s a communist? Administrating is a communist tactic? You are irrelevant, stupid, and a really bad liar, all in one.

    • Malfamy, I’m not sure why we would be described as hate-filled or that my world view is warped because of your inability to do research or see through propaganda. As far as being called a moron, I can only assure you that you are quite off-base in that assessment. Certainly much of this essay by Wilson is indeed coded. Such verbal deception is indeed part of the standard operating procedures of the leaders of a socialist/fascist/non-democratic ideology. Read also Herbert Marcuse’ essay “Repressive Tolerance” in which the Marxist/Socialist outlines his philosophy that verbal deception as a tool of propaganda should be used to empower an “elite” class with the goal that these “elite” can establish a dictatorial oligarchy over the society. This is the exact ideology of today’s liberals. My world view is that socialism and fascism are a recipe for tyranny. My views are substantiated by these articles, by current events and by the self-evidential nature of the matter.

      Here is a link to Wilson’s essay. Please, friend, entertain the possibility that using word-tricks, your liberal ‘heroes’ may be lying to you. It is no shame to be deceived… only shameful to not seek the truth.

      http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/woodrow-wilson-on-socialism-and-democracy

      • I seek the truth, you play word games. Coded speeches my ass! Where do you get these stupid ideas?
        All these progressives you hate? They put this country on top, they made us a wealthy country, a superpower. If that was a 100-year plan, then by God, let the bastards run the world!

        • “Coded speeches my ass!”

          Oh for God’s sakes. Let’s please not bring your colossal ass in to this.

          • Oh Yeah?

            The end came faster than I wanted, but not as fast as I needed. Like a once-brightly shining nova, my luster dimmed until I was just another star in the night sky. I speak, of course, about the crazy years, the lost years spent in the studios of the best photographers, the crazy parties that lasted until we were dragged from the trendiest clubs in the most Now locales. The money that flowed through my hands, never reaching my pocket or bank account. But what did I care? I could always make more; I was a star, a commodity, my assets were a gold mine without apparent end, such was….

            My Life As An Ass-Model

            Never heard of an ass-model? Neither had I. Oh, hand models made a small splash in the fashion world, and there was more work for a hand model, it’s true. Look how many products need an attractive hand to hold them; not too many advertised items benefit from being clenched between buns, no matter how fine. And mine were fine, that’s not bragging, just fact.

            No, ass models were more like stand-ins, substitute butts for the actors and actresses who leveraged their brand by appearing in ads for their own perfume, or line of clothing. Many actors and actresses can emote on cue, but surprisingly few have rear ends that can display arrogance, friskiness, sublime sensuality, or insouciance at the drop of a director’s megaphone. Mine could do this, and more, all within the space of a 1-minute intro for the latest exercise-machine infomercial.

            My ass had attitude, was how Phillippe put it. Phillippe was my agent; he discovered my ass, and saw its potential right away. “Zose bun-muffins, in my hands, zey weel become legend.” This was not the kind of talk one looks forward to hearing in the shower room of a Detroit jail, where I was facing nine months and a day for stealing a pizza. I would have gotten away from the cops, I was a competitive runner and broad-jumper in high school, But the pizza-box was an aerodynamic drag. I could have thrown the pie away and made a clean getaway, but I wanted that damn pizza, a double-pepperoni with olives and onions, and some rookie cop managed to catch me as I scrambled over an alley fence that, sans 16-inch box, I could have sailed right over. Damn cops ate the evidence right in front of me as we drove back to the station house.

            “How about I make you a legend right now?” I said as I whirled one hundred eighty degrees, fists out, ready to defend my as yet unsullied honor. Phillippe blinked, but I stopped my fist just short of his hawk-like nose; he wore his towel over his shoulder, and I saw immediately that his interest was not prurient.

            “Magnifique, tres bon.” He stepped back made a square with his hands through which he looked at me. “Can you you do zat again, zis time right-to-left?” By zis, I mean this time, the men under the other shower heads were watching our interaction. One suggested that not hitting the little frenchman would be a sign of weakness, though he put it in less delicate terms. I knew he was right, but Phillippe was talking fast now. “Le fighting move. Can you do eet from either direction?”

            “What is your game, man?” I was thinking the guy maybe liked rough trade, and that wasn’t my game.

            “Phillippe, I am called”, He stuck out his hand, which I declined to shake, mindful that some bad characters were waiting to see how this was going to play out.

            Then realization dawned on him. “Perhaps ees not best place to discuss rump” he says. “Szhust meet me in cafeteria, later. What’s to lose?”

            He had me there, I had 27 more days staring me in the face; might as well hear him out. “Okay.” I said. “We’ll do lunch. but you had better leave with me, or it’ll be your ass that gets talked about.”

            Over soggy fish sticks and mushy broccoli, Phillippe explained himself. He had been caught trying to take a Jay of kind-bud on the 9:40 Air France Flight to Montreal, and given ten days in the hoosegow. He had been eyeing my backside for the last three days without my being aware of the surveillance.

            “I am sorry eef I was too forward, but I did not want to get out before offering you a zhob, no, a career.”

            “As what?”, I asked around a mouthful of stale biscuit.

            And he made the pitch for work that would be my ticket off the mean streets. I never thought that listening to another man describe my rear end would get me excited, but I had never before heard of ass-modeling, either.

            “From every angle ees ass of yours perfect. Needs tan, but zat ees all.” He asked me to describe my exercise regimen.

            “Shit, I just survive, you know. I live in a 10th floor walk-up no elevator, but that gig is over now, me being a week late with the rent.”

            He was writing on a pad. I read pretty good upside down, and saw the word ‘stairmaster’. “I snatch purses, do dash-and-grabs at department stores with a couple of black guys I know. He wrote “treadmill” after a 2 surrounded by parentheses.

            “And you eat…” Yes dumb-ass, I do, I started to say before realizing he was asking me what I eat.

            “The stores throw their old veggies around midnight Tuesday, before the trucks bring in the weeks fresh produce.”

            “You cook zese? You fry, saute, bake…”

            “Raw, mostly”. He dutifully jotted that down on his pad. Then looked up at me.

            “Stop eating zis, zis shit.” Is too stop eating now. Too much starch, goes straight to make ass bumpy like cheap white cheese. No salt, water retained go straight to derriere.”

            “Well, I gotta eat.”

            “You go before judge tomorrow afternoon, non? I get out in morning. I make phone talk, you agree work for me, is places we go like never you dream of.”

            And he went on and on, until the guards chased us out. He was a scout for a modeling agency, several, in fact. he freelanced. He wanted to be an agent, and he felt that I, part of me, would be the one to make his name in the hoity-toity world of high-fashion.

            “We start little. Model for art classes. We get portfolio started, is little job on movie set. no, not porn movie. Is lead actor let himself go a bit, cottage fromage on cheeks, lack definition. Say yes.”

            I did. Phillippe was true to his word. A lawyer I could not afford came to get me in the morning; he brought me a suit of clothes that smelled expensive. They fit me like they were tailored. Phillippe had a good eye.

            In court, the lawyer testified as to my good character, although he had trouble remembering my name. Phillippe showed the judge the contract I had signed on the walk from the jail to the courthouse. The judge motioned me forward; when Phillippe stared towards the bench, she stopped him with a glare and a growled “Mr. Nivennes, you may not approach the bench!”

            In a whisper that I could barely hear, the lady judge asked me, “Did you read this document before you signed it?”

            “No, your honor.”

            “Well, you should have, that man is not your lawyer, son. But I’ve seen your record, and I don’t care what bad business deals you make, as long as leave town, and don’t come in front of me again.”

            I started to thank her. “Don’t thank me, just turn around slowly, nice and slowly. Walk back to your seat, slowly, not too slowly, though, and flaunt what you got on the way.”

            I felt cheap, used, but I complied. I head her mutter a ‘damnfine’ under her breath.

            “Time served”, she banged her gavel. “Court dismissed” , And Phillippe and the nameless lawyer escorted me out the side door to the ‘processing:out’ window.

      • I missed the end of this thread when it first appeared. JA, you sound like someone interested in debating, with an eye towards gleaning the truth. That makes you an enemy of these bozos. Stick ariound long enough, you will see I am right.
        The essays you linked here are interesting, but the second is better. The first is a screed by the AH Foundation, not unbiased
        The second essay actually dismisses socialism, and the thrust of Wilson’s writng is to find a way to combat the ascendancy of large corporations, a problem we share today. Calling the man evil is ridiculous, but his policies towards dissent were plainly unconstitutional.

        • JA, before you trust melfamy with anything of value (i.e., your time), I would remind you of that melfamy brings to the table concerning debates:

          “joe, you are a marginalized idiot! Wilson is a communist, because doesn’t say he’s a communist? Administrating is a communist tactic? You are irrelevant, stupid, and a really bad liar, all in one.”

          I suggest just giving melfamy what he really wants; a case of “free” twinkles”, and let him waddle his fat ass out in peace.

            • “As with everything else, you have my ass wrong! You need a laugh…http://melfamy.xanga.com/758185821/cats-in-the-cubicles-no-silver-spoon/”

              At last, Melfamy’s purpose is revealed, to promote his nonsensical blog. Sadly, on another blog site where nobody takes him seriously or has any consideration for this unseen intellect that he keeps boasting about.

              “Let me clue you in……Utah, B, ameche, augger, libercrite, and a couple of other minor thinkers in here want dischord and hard feelings. They are not interested in the truth, as they think that they embody the truth. However, they promulgate their version of reality with a harsh dismissal of anybody who dares confront them with facts that do not buttress their sick, unamerican ideals.”

              Blah blah blah blah blah, please Santa Claus, stop boring everybody with your righteous anger. You spend more time insulting people and denying everything, than you do actually providing anything substantial to a discussion, rather it is in agreement (which is never) or in disagreement (which is virtually always). You’re so predictable. This is literally what you do in every discussion: Denial, ad hominem, post links to your stupid blog, boast about your “intelligence”; denial, ad hominem, post links to your stupid blog, boast about your “intelligence”; denial, ad hominem, post links to your stupid blog, boast about your “intelligence”, etc, etc, etc. You are literally the manifestation of infinity. If any aspiring mathematician or physicist wanted to observe infinity, all they would have to do is come to RNL and read your comments. Your presentation of the “truth” is like watching a wind up clapping monkey with symbols. It’s cute and funny for a while, then it gets down right annoying; and you can always expect the EXACT SAME THING from it…every…single…time.

              I’m sure your response to this is only going to prove my point.

          • Augger,

            Melfamy is willfully ignorant. In this case, an open denier, as well. I have posted the essay where Wilson says this many times, and other RNL readers who once agreed with Melfamy but took the time to read Wilson’s essay now know I am not lying. I never knowingly lie. It is not who I am. Sadly, I cannot say the same about Melfamy.

            • I disagree. I don’t think he’s willfully ignorant, I just think he’s a natural dumb ass.

              Best part him ran down his mother’s thigh.

                  • I did, actually. You see, you used a trite, hackneyed phrase, one that has been used by practically everyone with no imagination. My logical extrapolation of the old chestnut was a stroke of genius.

                    • Oh dear lord Greg. Your comeback sucked. Get over yourself. You appear pathetic when you have to resort to self aggrandizing.

                      You really are a miracle, and proof that substandard people should not procreate … a strong argument for abortion rights!

                    • Gosh I hope not. You are weak enough in the head already. I would not want to be the cause of your tipping point.

  4. Pingback: RNL Reader: Just Let Progressives Run the Country?! | The Rio Norte Line

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.