By PRINCESS DI on Tuesday, August 14, 2001 - 10:31 pm:
Republicans: Cheerleaders for
the Brave New World
By Diane Alden
August 10, 2001
I like what David Limbaugh said in his recent column, that the Republicans talk a good game when they are running but something happens to them after they win. I don't know what that is and I don't care. The fact is that there is about a 6-inch difference between the two parties. One is aggressively fascist-socialist, the other is less so.
When I was 10 years old, my dad handed me a handful of brochures to pass out in a heavily DFL (Democratic-Farmer-Labor) area in Minnesota. It was for a Republican candidate's futile attempt at getting elected in a Democratic stronghold. We tried anyway. My dearly beloved mother was a Democrat up until 1972, when she said the party left her. As much as I love my mother, I was always a Republican. Mom was a legacy Democrat, but she was no dummy and knew that by '72 the party had taken a spin down the Hegel-Marx road toward a totalitarian state. That was enough for her and she became an independent.
Why would anyone defect from the "grand old party"? Perhaps because it is also the stupid party. Where do I begin? Should I begin with its lame handling of the government shutdown in '95? Or maybe it was allowing Trent Lott to cheerlead it to defeat after defeat. Or could it be for its complicity in creating an activist federal government where no department or agency or program is ever closed down? Is it because they continue to pour money into programs that don't work and in fact make things worse? Maybe it is because after promising change in '94 there has been precious little change. Blame the media, blame the Democrats, blame anyone but themselves. Rather than support grassroots Republicans and conservatives, the establishment party continues to spit in their faces.
Republican Governor Tom Ridge once said about Republicans, "Where else do they have to go?" Well, Tom, anywhere but in the same party with a bunch of oafish, lame, incompetent boobs who continually listen to the Scott Reeds and Gerald Fords of the world. Who never stop pushing the country leftward and their conservative base out.
When a dweeb leftist Clintonite like Dick Morris is patting Bush and company on the back because Bush is on a leftward march, it is time for conservatives to tell them where to go. When the New York Times reveals that "they" in the Bush White House are saying they will go to the "center" in order to capture votes of soccer moms and other miscreants, the establishment has dumped us, not vice versa.
The deal is that even when Republicans know where their problems are coming from, they don't do a darned thing about them. They have no fight, only fear about how they will be portrayed. They pass laws to please the media and the left, then they get no credit for them. They never get credit - only demonization. Well, deal with it.
From Richard Nixon and his various attempts at pleasing the left, which included the Endangered Species Act and the establishment of the EPA, to George Bush Sr. with the Americans with Disabilities Act, "read my lips" and more rotten environmental decisions, now we come to Bush Jr. The only change we are really getting is that he is not diddling interns in the Oval Office. However, he supports every program and policy anathema to conservatives. He had to have his arm twisted to avoid the pitfalls of Kyoto, and now he supports everything from amnesty for illegals to "limited" stem cell research to lack of support for conservative issues.
Neither Bush nor his father has any conception of history, that going left does not solidify your base and without the base you are not going to get the support in 2002 or 2004 that you need to win the Senate back or keep the House, let alone the presidency. There is not one single program instituted or funded by government that has been limited in any way, shape or form in any meaningful way. Tinker here and tinker there, give us welfare reform and step up cheap labor to make it more difficult for our own poor to get a living wage.
Republicans create more programs and agencies, compassionate conservatism, and institutionalize it, which in turn does nothing but grow government. The excuse I hear is that they are changing incrementally - horse hockey. Government does NOTHING but grow. I would say show me in what area that has not been the case and I will buy you coffee at McDonald's.
When Republicans know who their enemies are they do nothing about them. They don't even make an attempt at turning the tables on them. They don't lift a finger to educate people about what is happening. They expect conservative pundits and Rush Limbaugh to do it for them. Well, count me out.
After the '94 election they promised to take a look at the worst of the environmental laws. Then they quivered in their shoes as Pew Charitable Trust mounted a multimillion-dollar media campaign to portray conservatives as corporate despoilers of the environment. Actually, corporations don't suffer, but the people and small businesses in flyover surely do. The Republicans, I would suppose, would not seek to yank Pew and the other Foundations' 501(c)(3) or (4) status. Where were the taxmen the left uses consistently against conservatives? I guess the Repubs think conservatives deserve harassment, cause they do squat to stop it.
The mighty, corporate-backed foundations have pounded constitutional principles into the ground and called it education. The cowardly Republicans do nothing. Meanwhile, you have to learn from the Canadian National Post that "Republican" Colin Powell took a $1,000,000 grant from Pew, which is successfully cleansing rural America of its inhabitants via wildlands projects and the roadless initiative. Pew crossed the line, but our friends in the Stupid Party turn away. It makes me wonder what some of them have been promised.
From Waco to Ruby Ridge to Elian Gonzales to impeachment, the list of blindness and incompetence by Republicans and their leadership is endless Show me any bureaucrat who has been punished for the travesties at Waco or Ruby Ridge. You can't and they can't - they are complicit in the destruction of our freedoms and the drift toward a corporate police state.
After supporting Bush, there are battalions of us who have had enough. From immigration to the Klamath farmers, from the continued growth of government to an inability to use the bully pulpit to re-educate America about its own history and constitutional principles, enough is enough.
Linda Chavez may not be leaving the Republican Party, but she has the good grace to point out its contradictions and stupidities. Regarding racial quotas, she states in a recent column: "In addition to being morally repugnant, racial quotas and preferences are opposed by large majorities of Americans, as every public poll ever taken on the issue confirms. So why is the Bush Administration toying with defending one of the most egregious racial preferences ever adopted? A pending Supreme Court case, Adarand v. Mineta, forces the new administration to take sides in the quota wars. And indications are that the Bush Justice Department is about to come down on the wrong side - in favor of federal programs that penalize some people, while rewarding others, solely on the basis of their skin color."
Whatever happened to a color-blind America? Whatever happened to the Republican Party, which voted overwhelmingly for the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Republicans have left their principles for the sake of expediency and mistakenly believe people will love them and vote for them anyway. But they alienate their base as they become Dem Lite.
Leonard M. Scruggs is a former Republican county chairman. He is upset with Bush about immigration. Bush's stance, he concludes, speaks volumes about the death wish of the Republican Party. He says: "The liberal panacea of education has proven a vain hope. It is laughable naïveté to place our hope in changing their [immigrants'] vulnerability to pandering demagogues before generations have passed. It would be wise also to remember that much of what liberals refer to as education is not knowledge nor does it result in or encourage clear thinking. It is shallow propaganda designed to perpetuate the liberal world-view. It will not be reversed in a few election cycles.
"The mathematical calculations are simple. Legalizing and enfranchising millions of voters who will favor liberal Democrats by 60 to 75 percent will inflict enormous political, economic, and social damage on the nation that could last for generations. All hopes for lower taxes, reduced government spending and regulation, strengthened constitutional government would be out the window. But how will Republican and conservative causes be served by bringing in millions of new voters that will vote 60 percent or better for Democrats? President Bush and his advisers seem either to be short on mathematical aptitude or reasoning ability. Perhaps they are only looking at the short term. But can we afford national leaders who do not have the vision and courage to look beyond the next election cycle?"
I would add, look at California, you Republican establishment types. Once a solidly Republican state, California has been turned by immigration into El Norte offshoot of Mexico. Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, the Carolinas, and many Southern states are not far behind. New immigrants are not going to vote for Republicans - the facts show that they don't. Republicans are lucky if they get 30 percent of the vote. That is not enough to offset the minority votes from African-Americans, who vote 90 percent Democratic. Spare me the education and assimilation and we-are-a-nation-of-immigrants arguments. This is not 1901, and our education system produces dumbed-down sycophants for the brave new world of the one-world crowd.
Stem Cell and Life and the Outlook for Republicans
The National Catholic Bishops statement:
"President Bush has reaffirmed his support for a ban on human cloning and other policies that deserve support in their own right. However, the trade-off he has announced is morally unacceptable: The federal government, for the first time in history, will support research that relies on the destruction of some defenseless human beings for possible benefit to others. However such a decision is hedged about with qualifications, it allows our nation''s research enterprise to cultivate a disrespect for human life."
Regarding Bush's stem cell decision, the Center for Christian Medicine spokesman said recently, "But by casting such research in a positive light, [Bush] will encourage members of Congress to advocate additional research which kills additional embryos so that even more stem cell lines can be created and even more people can be helped by such killing. The President has by agreeing to underwrite such research embraced the logic of those who advocate such research. The issue will no longer be whether such research ought to be permitted, but rather how many cell lines are enough. Having introduced the camel's nose under the tent, soon we will have the whole beast.
"When Congress takes up this issue, as it surely will, this could give comfort and encouragement to those who will seek to expand embryonic research beyond that envisioned by the President."
Well, Bush says just a little research on cells that were to be destroyed anyway. Just a little research and a little funding. According to Bush, God forbid we should fund cloning and the further horrors in genetic engineering even more destructive of a respect for life. And of course this has nothing to do with eugenics. Yeah, sure, right! I repeat - when has government EVER stopped or limited itself to the parameters set by politicians when a bill, an agency, or a program is introduced? From Ted Kennedy's participation in the Immigration Act of '65 wherein he stated it would never allow illegal millions to come in year after year, to Hubert Humphrey's promise that the Wilderness Act would never amount to more than 30 million acres in the U.S., it never ever stops with the promises they make.
But Americans have the memory of a rock and never call lawmakers to account years later when they are paying for the very nightmare Washington promised wouldn't happen.
Huxley's Brave New World and Ours
In Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World," Mustpah Mond is the controller of Western Europe and one of 10 controllers, who lecture some chosen students on the present state of Earth. He tells the one known as the Savage, the last of the freemen, that the civilized world has decided to take happiness in exchange for freedom, art and religion Mond also speaks about the outdated concept of "family." In this Brave New World, family is spoken of as something dirty and forbidden, is spoken of in an almost vulgar tone.
Soon Mond mockingly imitates a mother cuddling and breastfeeding her baby, to the horror of the students, who don't even understand the concept of a mother. He says at one point, "Christianity without tears - that's what soma is. ... Soma - it makes people content without causing the sadness and guilt of Christianity. Wheels must turn steadily, but cannot turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as steady as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment."
This is the justification for totalitarian government. The reasoning is that government, not individuals, know best.
This new utopia starts with something called the Bokanovsky Process. It is a process in which many multiples of babies are genetically generated from one original cell. There are Alphas and Betas, the higher castes, and they are kept from the "process." The lower castes, the Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons, are further multiplied and thus their intelligence is diluted. The system is one of the major instruments of social stability. There is strict population control through centralized government, and the gender of each specimen" is predetermined.
There is also a caste system. Some of the embryos are purposefully given oxygen shortages to give them mental birth defects. These specimens, the Deltas and Epsilons, will do manual labor while the Alphas and Betas have leadership positions. "In Epsilons," Mr. Foster points out, "we don't need human intelligence."
Next there is conditioning. Many of the embryos are made to like the heat by conditioning them with cold temperatures. It's evident that the people have no freedom, but must submit to the will of the World Controllers. The Director adds, "that is the secret of happiness and virtue - liking what you've got to do. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their unescapable social destiny."
Toddlers are put in the sunlight, immersed in countless books and Flowers, when suddenly bells and sirens sound and electric shocks penetrate their tiny bodies. These lower-caste members, future factory workers, are made to hate books, since this would prove to be unnecessary and wasteful to their line of work. Flowers are also shunned, since factory workers need to be content with their urban environments. Any yearning to visit the countryside would hurt productivity. Even the term 'parent' is considered backward and outdated. This is because modern science has made everyone a test-tube baby. Government is the parent.
The last free man, the Savage, tells Mond eventually, "I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry; I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin."
Mr. Bush, Republicans, World Controllers, I don't want cloning, stem cell research, or cradle-to-grave security, taxation without end, no God, no family, no innocence. THAT is not your job, nor is it anywhere in the Constitution you have sworn to uphold. Neither do I want the corruption and societal destruction which the parties promote by funding those who would destroy our freedoms. Lastly, you give conservatives, Christians, sensible libertarians, reformers, constitutionalists, independents no place to go but out of both parties.
I never imagined I would enter the later years of my life and have to choose between two parties that offer no choice but the Brave New World and all the •••• waiting there.
Compromise with evil is still evil; a lesser evil wears no better face than the larger evil. As someone tried to tell me before the election, "we have to choose between the evil of two lessers." I would respond at this moment, "No, we have accepted the evil and blindly believe it is less."
By Humanist on Sunday, August 12, 2001 - 12:12 pm:
Today's New York Times has an article about the water supply in general and the Great Lakes in particular. I hope their predictions turn out to be wrong: Great Lakes might drop five feet this century.
