Linux-Advocacy Digest #160, Volume #28 Tue, 1 Aug 00 19:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbough,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:26:38 -0400
Harold wrote:
>
> On 1 Aug 2000 18:47:48 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
> wrote:
>
> >On 1 Aug 2000 17:27:46 GMT, Loren Petrich wrote:
> >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>What is your definition of "owns" ? The days of the rigid class
> >>>divisions where everyone is a factory owner or an exploited factory
> >>>worker are long gone.
> >>
> >> But those are supposed to be the Good Old Days of Capitalism,
> >>right?
> >
> >This is a straw man, and you are misrepresenting both me and my arguments.
>
> Standard for Loren, I am afraid.
> >
> >Why do you tell outright lies about my political views ? Are you not
> >capable of debating without resorting lies and personal attacks ?
>
> Let me state this plainly, so you understand:
>
> 1. If you disagree with Loren, you are a "right-winger, and evil.
>
> 2. Anything said about you is justified, since you are evil.
>
> 3. Any lie said to you is justified, since you are evil.
>
> 4. Any misrepresentation is fine, since you are evil.
>
> 5. Any derogatory comment is justified, since you are evil.
>
> I hope this helps. See any of his posts to get examples.
See if the following article doesn't sound PRECISELY like Loren:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_excomm/20000725_xex_fascism_corr.shtml
Fascism, corruption and
my 'Democratic' Party
By Bob Just
Ten years ago, Newsweek
magazine shocked
mainstream America with a
cover story headlined
"Thought Police," a lengthy
report on a new
social/political movement
developed on college
campuses since the 1960s. Ironically, one year
after the Berlin wall came down and one year
before the fall of the Soviet Empire, Americans
were being seriously warned that liberal
academia had adopted a hybrid "Marxist"
philosophy often called "PC." This new
"Politically Correct" creed was being espoused,
according to Newsweek, at hundreds of colleges
and universities as a result of the growing
influence of "a generation of campus radicals."
If they no longer talk of taking to the
streets, it is because they now are gaining
access to the conventional weapons of
campus politics: social pressure, academic
perks (including tenure) and -- when they
have the administration on their side --
outright coercion ... where the PC reigns,
one defies it at one's peril.
(Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990)
After that, PC attitudes were heavily criticized,
and even mocked, by mainstream thinkers all
around the country, liberal and conservative.
And yet, in 1992 America elected into power an
administration that in many ways adhered to
the PC worldview, thus beginning a process of
"change" unforeseen not only by most
Americans, but by most Democrats as well. I
have known for a long time that there were
serious problems in my party, but I didn't fully
grasp the political nature of those problems.
Sometimes it takes a simple, symbolic moment
to cause an epiphany -- to bring clarity. That
happened to me this past May.
My awakening
When I read about people spitting on the Honor
Guard at the New York State Democratic
Convention May 16, I started to understand
what has happened to my party over the last
few years. I still can't get over the fact that
Democrats attending a formal convention would
so insult the American flag, but it happened. As
an Honor Guard of Albany police officers
entered the convention hall - with band playing
and lights shining - they were spit on and called
"Nazis" by a number of people on the delegate
floor. On top of that, no Democrat nearby
stopped the "spitters," or even reported them.
And the Democratic leadership expressed no
public outrage.
I was so outraged at my party's lack of outrage
that I started a reward fund to find the "spitters."
But I soon realized that I needed to address the
larger issue of what I had come to understand. I
direct this commentary to the mainstream
elected officials of my party - the "adults" as the
media often calls them. Whether you are still in
office or retired, you can have a profound effect
in waking up the party and the public. I see
clearly now that the path the party is taking will
eventually lead to its destruction and to the
destruction of liberty in America. It is practically
mathematical. And it won't take very long in
years if nothing is done to stop it.
I have been a Democrat all my life. I grew up in
New York City in a staunchly Democratic
middle class family. Although private-school
educated (I had financial assistance thanks to
Trinity School), my father was a union man, a
musician with the Metropolitan Opera. My
parents and stepparents were all "Roosevelt
Democrats." As a young English teacher in
Montclair, New Jersey, during the Richard
Nixon Watergate scandal, I drove around with a
bumper sticker saying, "Don't Blame Me I Voted
for McGovern." I was proud to be on the side of
"right" as I saw it. I was proud to stand against
corruption and the abuse of power.
Now, 25 years later, I am ashamed to be a
Democrat. More than that, I have come to fear
my own party. Hatred and corruption - the roots
of fascism - are on the march in America as they
have never been before, and leading this march
is the Democratic Party. Increasingly,
mainstream Democrats are uncomfortable with
what we see in our party. We may not have a
real name for it, but we know it is dangerous.
The totalitarian choice in Alabama
On Sunday, June 18, the headline of the
Washington Post read, "Political Dirty Tricks
Alleged in Alabama Trial," but the story
revealed something far more serious than "dirty
tricks." A Democrat lawyer and a private
investigator are now being tried for attempting
to defeat a Republican candidate in 1998 by
bribing a prostitute to accuse the Republican of
raping her. The prostitute recanted and turned
witness against the two "Democrats."
The Republican, Lt. Gov. Steve Windom, was
elected when the prostitute confessed, but let's
consider what his "political opponents" were
willing to do to him. This wasn't political rumor
mongering -- which is bad enough. These two
men allegedly took direct action to destroy
Windom's reputation in the community, shame
him before his family, and basically ruin his life.
We all know from history that when totalitarian
forces, driven by their dysfunctional fury, seek
to uproot the political establishment, they will
use any means necessary. Bribery and character
assassination are easy choices for them, even
murder, because civilized limits are
meaningless to the Stalins, Hitlers and Maos of
the world. Their goal is to grab power, and "The
Party" -- whether Communist or Nazi -- is the
highest good. Loyalty to the party is everything
because the party is the country.
These two "Democrats" were apparently willing
to destroy everything precious to a Republican
man because he stood between their party and
political power. It is the totalitarian choice. The
question is, how deep does it go into the party
and what motivates it?
No longer a political party
What we are dealing with here has nothing to
do with American politics. In fact, I worry that
as the Democrats increasingly adopt fascist
tactics they will cease being a genuine political
party, focused on honest debate and decision by
fair ballot. They could become one day
something more related to the fascists of 1930s
Germany. The SA "brown shirts" were not
interested in debate and civil rule; they wanted
power in order to force the democratic nation to
accept their Nazi agenda. If I am right about the
fanatical direction my party is taking, then
America has never faced a danger like this, and
real Democrats who stand by and watch will be
as guilty before history as the actual leaders of
this corruption movement.
When did the party start making its shift to this
strange other form? Some Democrats would say
the sexual revolution, abortion and other moral
issues were the beginning. However, I am not
talking here about party alignment over the
social issues, although they have been a major
contributing factor. There were many other
issues in dispute among Democrats during the
waning years of the Cold War, but, whether we
agreed or not, all issues were seen as debatable
opinions of the party's majority leadership.
Reagan Democrats just voted Republican and
hoped the liberal Democrats would come to
their senses. There was still freedom of thought
within the party, and in public debate. But
something happened which changed all that.
Suddenly, the traditional restraint of civilized
limits was gone. Gone was comity. Gone was
loyal opposition. It was somewhere in the
mid-nineties - perhaps around the time the
Republicans seized control of Congress for the
first time in 40 years. The panic among
Democrats and the panic within the Clinton
administration may have been the turning point.
Whenever it was that the dam cracked, it had
exploded by the end of 1998.
The year of living dangerously
As mainstream Democrats watched the
impeachment trials, we experienced a feeling of
vast separation. It was like watching actors on a
stage playing the famously recognizable roles
from Watergate but saying the wrong lines. We
heard that lying under oath and bold-faced
lying to the American people didn't "rise to the
level of an impeachable offense." Famous
phrases from the past appeared twisted beyond
recognition as we learned that the president of
the United States is not "below the law. ..."
Where were the lines we knew so well from our
youth? "Have you no shame, sir?" or later,
"What did the President know and when did he
know it?" Or how about the greater words that
inspired a generation of Democrats? Words that
put the very wind in our youthful sails: "Ask
not what your country can do for you..." or
"Judged not by the color of skin but by the
content of character. ..." Where were the words
of American tradition, duty, honor and country?
These were never just Republican words.
During the Clinton impeachment trial, we
listened to honored senators like Joseph
Lieberman of Connecticut and Daniel Patrick
Moynihan of New York. They spoke
high-sounding words of outrage, but, in the
end, actions betrayed words. In the end, even
these honorable men defended party over
principle. They rationalized, and let the party
fall. Everyone knows it. History will show it.
They let one man's behavior compromise the
integrity of the Democratic Party. In the process,
they turned their backs on the traditions of our
past symbolized by men like President Harry
Truman.
We looked for truth during the impeachment
and trial process and watched hopefully as the
"wise men" of the party in the House and the
Senate expressed "concern," then made excuses,
and finally voted lock-step to defend party
power. Sure they had their reasons. They also, I
believe, did not grasp the significance of the
vote - a symbolic alignment with the corrupt
elements in the party, an act of submission that
sent a message across America, from
Hollywood to Wall Street and beyond.
Anything goes.
The F-word fund-raiser and losing our souls
About a week after the spitting incident at the
New York Democratic Party Convention, there
was another incident that shocked me
profoundly. I still cannot believe this one
actually happened, but it is on videotape. At the
MCI Center fund-raiser in Washington, Robin
Williams performed before a crowd of corporate
and Democrat dignitaries, people who would
that very night raise the party over 26 million
dollars.
The fund-raiser, including Williams's
performance, was broadcast live on C-SPAN.
However, that didn't stop Robin Williams from
doing some kind of seedy nightclub act. He
used the F-word and other obscenities several
times (C-SPAN later cut this out when the event
was rebroadcast). Imagine. A grand room full of
powerful Democrats, representatives of
America's oldest political party, and the F-word
is being said, over and over again with cameras
recording!
As in the case of the harassment of the Honor
Guard at the Albany Democratic Convention,
the specific violation was bad enough, but the
most egregious violation was the passive,
cowardly acceptance of the audience. The
hardest thing to believe - for those of us who
remember America before 1992 - was that the
president, vice president and Mrs. Clinton were
at this fund-raiser. Did none of them think to
stand up and leave? Didn't anyone in the
audience consider booing the smutty language
spoken before the assembled dignitaries? No,
there was only laughter.
Even when Robin Williams noticed a child
present and joked about the "new words" he was
learning that night - even then - no one objected.
Not one Democrat dared step forward and
condemn the moment. Peer pressure is a
powerful and coercive thing, for adults as well
as children - one breaks rank at one's peril. And
I'm sure it wouldn't have been good for
"business" for the party leadership to create
embarrassment at such a high-level
Hollywood/corporate function. So everyone
laughed.
This is not about politics. This is about
corruption. Stop and think about it. Somehow
Robin Williams knew that no one would object
if he used the F-word and the S-word
continually - even on national TV! How did he
know no one would walk out on him?
Apparently, Williams knows something about
the Democratic Party that most "little guy"
Democrats like me don't know (not to mention
the "little guy" Republicans who are still
embarrassed by MTV, thank God). He knows
the party has become corrupt.
Democrat leaders have lost their way. They find
themselves at the head of a parade full of
people Harry Truman or even Jack Kennedy
wouldn't recognize - radicals of various kinds
who think that Western civilization began in
1969. Strangely, without meaning to,
mainstream Democrats find themselves
representing this "corruption movement."
However, for the "new fascists" in the party,
there is nothing so strange about it. Fascists
have always sought to leverage corruption for
the sake of power.
In William Shirer's seminal book, "The Rise and
Fall of the Third Reich," listen to his famous
description of Hitler: "He who was so
monumentally intolerant by his very nature,
was strangely tolerant of one human condition -
a man's morals. No other party in Germany
came near to attracting so many shady
characters." Shady characters, I should add, who
are useful because they will do "whatever it
takes" to win.
Carried to its extreme, this corruption
movement will destroy us all. It is compulsive
in its lust for power. It is an anti-establishment
lobby that is vast and very powerful. Right now
the specific labels don't matter, and there are too
many to name here, from corporate greed to
union greed to organized crime to "special
interest" causes. It is a long list. However, the
core desire of this group, conscious or
unconscious, is to tear down everything
traditional and decent in this country. Full of
personal anger and a desire for radical change at
whatever cost, these people wish to
"re-imagine" an America they have never
understood.
The Party uber alles
Fueled by anger, the New Fascists have
completely adopted the radical '60s notion of
the "honest con." In other words, they think that
because they are "correct in their beliefs" and
because in their minds what they fight is so
"evil," just about any act can be committed for
the sake of victory - and certainly, lying is no
problem. Loyalty to "the cause" is at the heart of
this mindset. And for the moment, at least, the
heart of their loyalty is President Clinton.
Allegiance to the Clintons personally has
become a key factor of the current corruptive
atmosphere. During the Starr investigation, this
allegiance took a particularly extreme form.
According to award-winning investigative
reporters, Susan Schmidt and Michael
Weisskopf, who worked together at the
Washington Post, throughout the Starr
investigation the Clintons "operated like a crime
family, expecting friends and aides to protect
them even against their own best interests."
And yet, despite this demand of personal
loyalty to the leader, blind loyalty to cause and
party is the larger problem. "This administration
sets their own standards of loyalty. If they don't
think you're 'one of them,' they don't want you
around," said one Secret Service agent I talked
to recently who has served under a number of
administrations at the national level, including
serving the current one. "It's something you
expect from a Nazi Germany - the party over all,
the Party 'uber alles.'"
"Sometimes party loyalty asks too much," said
President Kennedy in a different era, and yet,
these days loyalty to a "higher right" than the
party is apparently no longer an option among
inner circle Democrats. Even the FBI was used
by the Clinton administration to double check
people's loyalty to the cause, according to
25-year FBI veteran Gary Aldrich. Your
conscience is not yours to obey - the cause is
everything. Thus, traditionally neutral
governmental agencies, from Energy to Defense
to State to Justice to the IRS, increasingly, seem
to be loyal to something other than the
American people.
Recently, former prosecutor Charles LaBella
was interviewed on Fox News' "Hannity and
Colmes" about the fundraising scandal of 1996
and about LaBella's memo to Reno,
recommending an independent counsel. The
news had just broken that Robert Conrad, Jr.,
LaBella's successor as special prosecutor for the
Justice Department, had also recommended to
Attorney General Reno that there be an
independent counsel. "I know what he's going
through," said LaBella, talking about Conrad's
politically incorrect decision and the price he
would pay for disloyalty. "You're made to feel
radioactive, isolated like I was - like you're the
enemy and 'we're going to show you what team
sports are all about - you play with us or you
don't play.'" So much for Conrad's career and so
much for making decisions based on "the facts
and the law." LaBella paid a price too, famously
losing a plum federal job in San Diego.
Those who are "disloyal" pay a price, but those
who are "loyal" are rewarded. Consider the
White House Travel Office scandal that
occurred when Clinton took office. In what the
Washington Post called a "shabby episode,"
Mrs. Clinton had made it clear to White House
senior officials that she wanted to replace the
White House Travel Office employees (who had
served the American people faithfully) with
loyalists who would serve the Clintons
faithfully. Suddenly, Billy Dale, the head of the
travel office, was fired and accused of
"improper financial practices." The court cleared
him in "record time," according to Dale, but he
was nearly ruined. Sound familiar? Shades of
Alabama. And in the end, the goal was
accomplished: Dale and his staff were out and
"loyalists" were in.
Democrats can redeem the party from this kind
of "party first" fascism. But for that to happen,
mainstream Democrats must wake up,
including the 80 percent of the media who are
Democrats. Instinctively, we all know the
dangers of what I am describing. It is simply not
an American way of doing things. We must dare
to understand and communicate what is really
going on in our party, and in our country.
Understanding the fascist motive
People are essentially innocent and fair-minded.
They look for reasons in debate.
Power-grasping totalitarians know this, and, no
matter what the country, they always supply
some plausible response: They seek to
"empower the people"; they seek to "reestablish
national pride," or to correct "social injustice."
Consider the irony that "racial injustice" has
long been a popular cause with fascists. For the
Nazis it was white power, but for other fascists
it could be "black power." It doesn't matter what
the reasons are. America's Corruption
Movement may be politically empowered by
"reasons," but it is not truly motivated by them.
It is motivated by something far more basic.
On my radio show, I always like to demonstrate
a key principle with a current news story. The
principles of life are everywhere in the news.
One need only look for them. Famous
supermodel Naomi Campbell was recently
accused of attacking two former employees in
separate incidents. The story was covered June
23rd on ABC's "20/20." Ms. Campbell confessed
that her violent temper is rooted in her
childhood.
In one of the attacks, Campbell's irrational,
out-of-control temper led her to assault her
former assistant Georgina Galanis with a blunt
instrument. She pleaded guilty, but more than
that, she was brave enough to reveal to the
public exactly where her rage came from.
"There are a lot of issues that I have from
childhood," Campbell told Barbara Walters.
"For instance, not knowing your father, not
seeing your mother. It manifests a lot of
feelings. One of those feelings is anger." She
went on to talk about her insecurity, lack of
self-esteem and loneliness. Naomi Campbell is
not the only person whose father abandoned her
before she was born, and whose mother was a
distant presence in her life. Our neighborhoods
around the country, both minority and white,
are increasingly full of such children. The June
issue of the journal "Pediatrics" declares that
nearly three times as many U.S. children have
"emotional and behavioral" problems as did 20
years ago.
Rage is everywhere in our adult society too. Just
listen to the words of "Gangsta" rap music, or
the words spoken at some of the radical rallies
in Washington, D.C. Rage is the raw material of
the New Fascists. They know how to focus it -
and give it a cause - and how to direct it at their
enemies. This process has now become so
obvious that it's time we face up to it, and
identify it in our national political dialogue. In
fact, facing up to it is the only way we can save
ourselves, and save this "grand experiment" in
political and religious freedom we call America.
Confronting the gathering political storm
Increasingly, personal anger has a political face
in America. Millions of dysfunctional people
can create a very difficult situation in a free
society. They have a right to be wrong, but their
"wrong" can undermine our rights. They are
also our brothers and sisters.
Solving the problem, of course, begins with
seeing the problem. We know from incidents of
"road rage" or "workplace shootings" that angry,
hate-filled people are dangerous. They are also
hard to reason with; try reasoning with someone
who's attempting to run you off the road
because you forgot to signal. We are talking
here about "political road rage"; it's a slower
burn, but the intent is the same -- running you off
the road.
As we observe the political scene, the politics of
rage will become more and more obvious. Make
your own list of radicals and you'll see that rage
has many faces and many "reasons" to demand
justice. Watch those angry faces on talk
television. See how difficult it is for others to
reason with them and how rarely they accept
anyone else's point of view. Here's the secret:
For these political road ragers - in whatever
category of public or private life - it is no longer
about debate or logic. In that sense, we have
reached the end of debate, which is a civilized
method of dialogue involving two groups
seeking the truth. Fascists, as we know from
history, don't debate free thinkers. They choke
them out of existence.
Make no mistake: We are headed for what
President George Bush called "the silly season"
back in 1992. Of course, "silly" doesn't describe
it anymore than "tricks" are what the two
"Democrats" were up to in Alabama. The
election period will get more and more
emotionalized as we get close to the vote - by
whatever means necessary, from the race card,
to Christian bashing, to class warfare, to
corporation bashing, to fear-mongering of all
kinds. What Ronald Reagan called the "Iron
Triangle" will be in full gear: The angry special
interest groups will be out in force
demonstrating and calling press conferences;
the liberal media will cooperate with cameras
rolling; and hysterical Democrat politicians will
make outrageous statements like, "They're
coming for our children." All this, focused on
emotionalizing the atmosphere of the
presidential debates where Al Gore will do his
best to "rip the lungs out" of George W. Bush. It
is serious business, provoking anger and
fomenting hate - all with a purpose of getting
millions of Americans to fear Republicans, or
any other opposing party. Then, in this kind of
heated atmosphere, people will vote.
The technique of "legislation by hysteria" -
emotionalizing debate in Congress and rushing
a decision - now becomes "election by hysteria."
Fascists do not operate in a calm, considered
environment. Inflammatory language is an
essential tool in their kit. Already we are seeing
race-baiting Democrats calling on Americans to
"Stop the Lynching" because of the tragic
hanging death of a local black teenager in
Mississippi, which authorities so far have
indicated is a likely suicide and which, in any
event, is an isolated incident. Remember the
black church burning scare in the '96 election
cycle? That turned out to be a sham, but it made
headlines, created anger, caused fear and it
galvanized voters. That tactic is applied
aggressively to every issue in every political
arena, local, state or national. If you haven't
recognized it before, it will now be transparent.
Holding on to truth
The key to successfully confronting the New
Fascist movement is, first, to see it for what it is.
Fascism inspires an emotionalized, cultic
allegiance, and many of these people can't see
what they are trapped in. If we rage back at
them, it pushes them deeper into this alien
loyalty. So the second key is to be forceful but
remain calm - to understand that they need our
help. I don't mean a weak, simpering, "can't we
all get along" kind of help, but a focused,
forceful desire to draw the line for their own
sake as well as ours. They need us to resist them
with strength, but they don't need our rage. They
got that as children.
The principle here is something Mahatma
Gandhi, the great liberator of India, called "force
of righteousness," "love force," or "soul force."
Gandhi was a great admirer of Judeo-Christian
thinking and Americans will recognize the
wisdom. He coined a new Indian word for it,
Satyagraha. The root meaning is "holding on to
truth," and "not hating back" is one of the keys
to this truth.
Of course, fascists reject the idea of a truth
higher than the party, and hate is their driving
impulse. This puts them at odds with America's
"under God" religious heritage, and as a result,
America has suffered a great deal of pain and
confusion in recent decades. The fascist
corruption movement (which puts power,
material wealth, personal pleasure and
everything else above what's right) has all but
destroyed the social fabric of our society, much
to the horror of most Americans. In this respect,
mainstream Americans also deal with an anger
problem. Nevertheless, the hope for America's
future lies in love. It may sound corny, but in
the end, it is the only way to avoid civil conflict.
Permissive weakness will drive these "children"
crazy, but so will judgmental anger.
When the leaders of the corruption movement
understand that "the game is up" - that we see
them for what they are without hate - they may
hate and fear us all the more. At that point, they
must get the kind of love that good parents
deliver: Tough love. Consider a mother who
warns her son that he is getting too close to the
street, but the child gets closer. Does the mother
stop the child with a gentle voice? Of course
not. An aggressive shout is what's needed to
frighten the boy away from danger. Now let's
take it a step further. Despite the mother's shout,
the boy rebelliously runs toward the street
where there are cars coming. At that moment,
for the sake of the child, the mother rushes to
use force and yanks the child out of danger.
We must be as determined in our love for these
"unloved children" as they are absolutely
determined to get revenge on the
"establishment" they associate with the parents
who abandoned them in one way or another. I
confess I am talking about myself since in my
angry youth I was once on their side.
Most of us are reachable. Former radical leftist
David Horowitz is a classic example. Or
consider Jane Fonda's recent desire to turn her
life around, which has been reported in these
pages, and which Fonda now talks about with
Oprah Winfrey in the current issue of "O"
magazine. Fonda's mother committed suicide
when she was 12. That kind of shock is
inconceivable to most of us. What a lonely,
painful journey it must have been for that little
girl, especially since her father Henry Fonda
was aloof and incapable of giving her the love
she needed. Many of us remember her angry
youth in the 1970s. Now, we are coming to
understand it. Courageously facing the mistakes
of her past, Jane Fonda looks to the future with a
renewed determination to change. I believe
there are people like this in every political and
social sphere within my party. People who are
looking to do what is right - people who can
change their angry ways.
Coming home to America
When it comes to a dysfunctional, angry
childhood, Jane Fonda has lots of company.
Think of how many of other famous liberal
Democrats have already admitted serious
parental problems from sexual abuse to
alcoholism to abandonment, either physical or
emotional. It is a remarkably talented group of
people, from Barbara Streisand to Rosie
O'Donnell to Bill Clinton to Gloria Steinem. If
we truly knew the length and breadth of this list
of cultural and political leaders, and the details
of their personal suffering, we would all be
shocked - and touched. Don't be distracted by
their political labels. When they were children,
these people deserved love, and they didn't get
it. Can we blame them for being angry?
I know how they feel. My parents were divorced
when I was five. I spent some lonely years in
boarding school until I was 9 years old. You bet
I was afraid - and angry. The world is supposed
to be a safe place for 5-year-olds, not a hostile
environment. My suffering was small compared
to the list above, but I can tell you that by the
time I reached college age my anger manifested,
and not only politically. I was rebellious in my
moral behavior too. The "sex, drugs, and rock 'n'
roll" socialist creed of the 1960s and '70s didn't
just affect the Clintons and a few other famous
people. There were millions of us.
Some of us functionally recovered from our
anger, but some didn't - and there are many
angry children coming up in the generations
behind the "baby boomers," younger people
who don't remember the America we remember.
They need to believe in something and we need
to give them something genuinely good -
because the New Fascists have a dream to sell,
too. And it isn't the American dream.
How Democrats can reclaim the party
The following is especially important for the
mainstream Democratic leadership to read. The
corruption movement with its fascist tendencies
is not yet a determined majority in America.
However, its strength is threefold: Its adherents
have access to great combined wealth; they have
huge influence on our culture; and most
importantly, they have not yet been clearly
identified in the minds of average Americans.
Most Americans still think the Democratic Party
is "liberal," even "liberal to moderate." They
may distrust the president and the rest of the PC
crowd, but they don't see the larger problem.
Let me be clear. This is not about President
Clinton. The current corruption goes way
beyond him. It started before him and it will
undoubtedly survive him. Consider that
Newsweek's "Thought Police" issue was
published in December 1990, two years before
Clinton's presidency. Even then, Newsweek
raised the specter of what it called "New
McCarthyism," describing the "politically
correct" movement among liberal-leftists as
essentially "Marxist" and "totalitarian," an
extremist belief system determined to root out
and destroy all those in the mainstream who
oppose it.
If you are wondering how this belief system has
affected liberalism in the last decade, just read
the words of long-time, liberal Democrat
commentator Mark Shields writing in the
Washington Post last month: "Today to be a
liberal there is one test," said a frustrated
Shields. "Unqualified support for all legal
abortions ideally joined by an almost libertarian
commitment to no societal limits on individual
behavior or autonomy."
Although increasingly dominant in our culture,
this PC ethic is still only one element of the New
Fascism, and Bill Clinton's personal anger and
radical Sixties "no-limits" attitude is only the
most current catalyst to the dark impulse that
has risen before in human history. Remember,
Clinton is a victim too - and has the potential to
recover.
Once Democrats like Shields start to recognize
in large numbers what has happened to our
party, the fascist power base will be greatly
weakened - mainstream Democrats will all back
away from it. Catholic Democrats will certainly
run the other way. So will most teachers. I'm
sure church-going African Americans and
Latinos won't stand for it - and neither will
patriotic union workers. If that is a dream, it is a
good dream. And like the one of Dr. King's, it is
up to us to make the dream a reality.
Conclusion: Our awakening
Many middle-aged and older Americans will
remember the famous World War II movie,
"Bridge on the River Kwai," in which Japanese
prisoner Col. Nickolson, a British officer played
by Alec Guinness, is forced to lead his fellow
prisoners in building a bridge for the Japanese.
Under great hardship and to rally his men's
morale, Col. Nickolson sets out to prove the
superiority of British freedom over Japanese
tyranny by building a great bridge. Under his
leadership, the prisoners succeed marvelously.
They demonstrate to the Japanese what
inner-inspired free men can do. It's a
magnificent bridge. But there's a tragedy
coming in the story: Due to the pride he takes in
the impressive bridge, built to last long after the
war, Col. Nickolson ends up on the wrong side
when British commandos come to destroy the
bridge. For a moment he resists his own
countrymen, warning the Japanese.
After several of the commandos die in the
struggle to blow up the bridge, Col. Nickolson
realizes to his horror that his passionate
dedication to "the cause" has led him to forget
his first loyalty - his country. Severely
wounded, and with his last bit of energy, he
blows up the bridge himself.
It is time to detonate the lie the Democratic
Party is becoming. It's time to call on the people
who are the keepers of the flame in the party -
President Carter, Sen. Byrd, Sen. Moynihan, Sen.
Leiberman, Sen. Nunn and all the rest of you
who remember the true Democratic Party: We
need you and we need you now.
Stop this totalitarian "party first" madness! Stop
the moral decline, and help us return to the
values and traditions of our parents and those
of our once-great party. If you cannot change the
party, if the levers of power are totally
controlled by the New Fascists among us, from
Hollywood to Washington to Wall Street, then
please tell us. Talk to the people. Sound the
alarm so that America will know the danger it
truly faces. Yes, it will temporarily diminish the
Democratic Party, but like a beautiful garden,
once weeded and pruned, it will come back
stronger than ever as the patriotic party of "the
little guy."
When Newsweek reporters told Americans
about the growing totalitarian ethic on our
college campuses at the end of the Cold War,
they revealed a core ingredient of the New
Fascism, something impossible for most
Americans to even imagine:
The failure of Marxist systems throughout
the world has not noticeably dimmed the
allure of left-wing politics for American
academics. Even today, says David
Littlejohn of Berkeley's Graduate School of
Literature, "an overwhelming proportion
of our courses are taught by people who
really hate the system."
(Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990)
"Hate the system. ..." What if such people got
complete control of one of our two major
parties? I say they are very close to doing it. But
more, let's say they succeed. What if these New
Fascists go on to corrupt our military, our
police, our courts, and even our Congress and
our governmental agencies with this same
anti-American ethic? If that happens, then by
any analysis we will no longer have a "culture
war" in America, but rather a "cold civil war,"
ready to heat up the moment government
establishes laws that tyrannize the American
conscience.
Right now we have two parties that are
becoming like two different countries - which
are increasingly acting like enemies. God forbid
it, and please make us again one nation, a
shining city on a hill for all the world to see,
where love can reign and truth prevail, and
where freedom can be enjoyed by all.
Bob Just is a nationally syndicated talk show host and
vice president of Talk Radio Network.
© 2000 Bob Just
>
> [deleted]
>
> Regards, Harold
> -----
> "Why should we believe that you [AlGore] will tell the truth if
> you are president when you don't when you are a candidate?"
> -----Bill Bradley
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
