Interesting. the last great Democratic president was Andrew Johnson. On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Keith In Tampa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> A rather long read, but I encourage everyone to take a look! > > ======== > ** > ** > *The Once-Great Democratic Party > *By Mark Alexander > Friday, October 24, 2008 > > http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11d2f65ad6d51e25 > > Thomas Jefferson wrote, "The government is best which governs least," and > that sentiment was thematic in all of his writing about the role of > government. So what happened to the Party of Jefferson, the once-great > Democratic Party, the champion of limited government? > > Jefferson, who authored our Declaration of Independence, led the > Anti-Federalist movement against the ratification of the Constitution, > because he feared that those elected to lead our nation would forgo their > higher calling to "support and defend the Constitution," and become pawns > for special interests, using those constituencies to perpetuate their office > and further centralize government power. > > Nowhere was he more concerned about this degradation of public integrity > than in regard to the judiciary. Jefferson feared it would become the > "despotic branch,", undermining and altering the proposed constitution by > judicial diktat rather than its prescribed method. > > Jefferson's opponent, James Madison, arguing for ratification of our > Constitution, which he authored, believed that individual and states' rights > would endure: "Ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the > authority of the State governments... would be signals of general alarm... > But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such > an extremity." (Federalist No. 46) > > By 1792, however, Madison himself had joined his fellow Virginian, > Jefferson, in opposition to the Federalist Party. > > Jefferson's intellect and his insights into the nature of man were > astounding, so much so that 170 years later another famous Democrat, John F. > Kennedy, welcomed the 49 Nobel Prize recipients to the White House saying, > "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human > knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House—with the > possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone." > > Jefferson's concerns about the degraded integrity of public men have never > been clearer than in the current presidential cycle. At no point in history > has the differential in "Presidential Character" between the two leading > candidates been more clear. > > But this election is much more than a referendum on the two candidates, > John Sidney McCain and Barack Hussein Obama; it is a referendum on the > ability of a majority of Americans voters to discern between one candidate > who possesses the presidential character and integrity of a statesman, and > one who does not. > > In fact, Obama could not even qualify for a basic security clearance if he > was applying for a government job because of his close association with > unrepentant terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. These "useful > idiots," apologists for socialist political and economic agendas, used their > radical celebrity to launch Barack Obama's political career and are his > mentors to this day. > > No issue is more pressing in this election cycle than the one that > concerned Jefferson most—that of the "Despotic Branch." > > Consider this: Five Supreme Court justices will be over 70 years of age in > the first year of the next presidential term. Two of them, the most liberal, > will be 76 and 89. The next president will thus determine whether the > Supreme Court will abide by leftist ideology, or by their oath to support > and defend our Constitution. It's no exaggeration to say that the future of > our nation hangs in the balance. > > If we are not a nation governed by a firm Constitution of laws, but a > "Living Constitution," which, as Jefferson noted, would be a "mere thing of > wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any > form they please," then we are a nation of men. > > Conservatives and liberals can argue various policy points ad nauseum, but > the real question is this: Are we a nation of laws or a nation of men? The > terminus of nations that are governed by men rather than laws has, for the > entirety of recorded history, been tyranny. In the last century alone, the > plight of hundreds of millions under dictators such as Lenin, Stalin, > Mussolini, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam and, who would be next... > > Jefferson understood this, as once did his Democratic Party. > > The Patriot's mission is to advocate for individual liberty and > responsibility, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and > the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and > traditional American values. > > These principles used to be the centerpiece of the Democratic Party; they > are now its antithesis. > > A colleague recently sent me a parody on why we should elect Democrats: "I > think the government will do a better job of spending my money than I could. > When we pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq, I know the Islamic terrorists will > stop trying to kill us. I believe people who can't tell us if it will rain > in two or three days can now tell us the polar ice caps will disappear in a > century if we don't comply with Orwellian government economic oversight. > English has no place being the official language in America. I'd rather pay > $4 for a gallon of gas than allow drilling for oil off the coasts of America > or in that vast Alaskan wasteland, ANWR. 'Big Oil's' five-percent profit on > a gallon of gas is obscene, but the government tax of 18 to 35 percent on > the same gallon of gas is just fine." > > The parody continues: "I believe businesses in America should not be > allowed to make profit—it should be confiscated by the government so > politicians and bureaucrats can redistribute that profit as they see fit. I > believe guns cause crimes and murder, not the sociopaths using them, and, > thus, should be confiscated. Besides, when someone threatens my family, I > know the government can respond faster with a call to 911 than I can with a > gun in my hand. It's a right to kill millions of babies while objecting to > the death penalty for murderers. I believe five elitist liberal judges > should rewrite the Constitution by diktat to suit Leftist agendas that could > never pass proper amendment." > > This caricature of the Democratic Party would be humorous if it did not, in > fact, reflect its actual platform. > > In his keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention this year, > Virginia Senate candidate Mark Warner described the Republican Party: "It is > made up of the Christian Coalition... It is made up of the > right-to-lifers... It's made up of the NRA... It is made up of the home > schoolers... It's made up of a whole coalition of people that have all sorts > of differing views that I think most of us in this room would find > threatening to what it means to be an American." > > A few decades ago, that list of folks would have been welcome in the > Democratic Party, not "threatening to what it means to be an American." > > But today, that Party is fundamentally flawed in its platform, and it > co-opts voter constituencies who, though they may be good people in general, > are fundamentally disabled in their understanding of our nation's founding > principles and their civic roles and responsibilities. > > The real question is not so much what has happened to the Party of > Jefferson, but what has happened to "the people" who now call themselves > Democrats? > > Obama is not the problem, just its manifestation. The problem is that we > are a nation with a collapsing foundation of broken families, where the > faith of our founders has been replaced with the real "opiate of the > masses," the mass media, and where ignorance has been institutionalized > through our "public education apparatchiks." > > Perhaps we are a nation where a majority of the electorate now identifies > with the dysfunctional pathology of Obama than with the individual character > and institutional principles that are the foundation of our Democratic > Republic. > > The good news is that in my home, and tens of millions like it, we still > model for our children the principle of "third person" living: God first, > others (including family, neighbors and country) second, and self third. It > is our highest ambition for our children that they will invest their lives > in service to others, that they will honor the blood and sacrifice of > generations of Patriots before them and be steadfast in their determination > to defend our Constitution and the liberties it embodies in order to extend > freedom to the next generation. > > We have not surrendered this political battle, any more than we have > surrendered the cultural war in which we are now engaged. > > Thomas Jefferson wrote, for posterity, "Honor, justice, and humanity, > forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our > gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive > from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding > generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely > entail hereditary bondage on them." > > Today, tragically, his once-noble Democratic Party has embraced bondage and > servitude. > > > > -- *~@):~{> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
