On Credibility

by
 Image Source.

On year ago President Obama declared “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” Chemical weapons have been used. Some suggest that America will lose “credibility” if she does not honor the president’s promise and respond with military force.

One wonders what kind of ‘credibility’ they are thinking of. 

“You know,” he says,  “I think Americans are liars.”

She replied with a chortle. “How many have you met? I think I am honest enough.”

“You know I did not mean you. I was actually thinking about your government.”

“If it makes you feel any better, I think most important people in the U.S. government are liars too. It comes with the job description. But if you don’t mind me asking, what brought you to the same conclusion?”

His was a hollow laugh. “That is just it. You all think your politicians are liars but then America turns around and lectures the rest of the world on how great America’s government is and how we should all be like you. I am no fan of my government, but at least I acknowledge what kind of government my people have.”

“You are thinking about it the wrong way. If the American people want liars in charge, then liars there will be. The beauty of democracy is that if those liars don’t do what the people want then they get kicked out and new liars are put in.”

“Liars either way.”

“Oh I don’t care what a politician says. I care about what a politician does. All politicians will say this thing or that thing to justify their actions. What matters is if those actions are for his people or against them. This is why I love the U.S. Constitution. By design it keeps power out of one man’s hands. It forces politicians to take normal citizens seriously. It makes it very hard for one clique or class to impose its rule on the rest.”

“That is it. That is the lie. This idea that the United States government is “of the people” and “by the people” – that is the lie every American repeats. I am tired of it.”

“It cannot be a lie if most Americans believe it.”

“Do they? I cannot imagine them believing it. It seems so obviously false. There are too many examples….” he pauses, deep in thought. “No, they cannot believe it. It is just a veneer; a lie told to clothe naked ambition and greed.”

“Nah, they believe it. I believe it. And I say that truthfully.”

“But why? American democracy lacks integrity. Americans say their institutions are sound, but those same Americans seem to disagree with what the government actually does. Take the way the government treats the big banks. Where is the will of the American people there? Truth is, America is run by a small ruling class who cares about nothing but themselves. Just like every other country.”

“Look, our system is not perfect. More money is involved than ever should be. But I believe the structure is solid. This is is why we have grid-lock. The constitution balances power across many groups.“

“A fiction. Do you really think a ruling minority couldn’t drag the United States into a war if they wanted to?  Why they might want to does not matter – maybe the president is worried about his personal prestige or something. Look at all of these drone strikes in Yemen. Did ‘the people’ decide that one?”

“A majority of Americans support them. As long as terrorists are the ones targeted….“

“Ok then, let’s make this conversation simpler and pretend the target is not a terrorist. Say it is the camp of a war lord, a dictator, or some land that just suffered a military coup. Most Americans couldn’t find this place on a map if they had to. Odds of oppression or violence there spilling over to American shores is next to nil. Most of ‘the people’ have never thought about fighting there. If the president and his team wanted a war there, would they get it?” 

“Only if he could get a majority on his side.“

“Ha! Which majority? A majority of the entire people? Or a majority of the people that matter? Face it: a majority could care less about punishing dictators, or saving the banks, enforcing the drug war, or whatever policy has captured the fancy of the powerful and it would still happen. The American government only listens to its people during election years.”

“Well that is every other year. At least on the federal level.”

“On the international stage those elections don’t seem to matter. When it comes to America’s foreign policy that ‘separation of powers’ you talk about is long dead. In his party the president is the one who calls the shots; if his clique wants a war they could get it. They would probably even say they were waging war in the name of all humanity or something ridiculous like that.”

“They would also probably believe it.” 

“Then they believe their own lies. Hubris! I am so tired of American arrogance. Every year some American official or NGO criticizes us because we are not a democratic country. But look at them! To fight in the name of democracy and ignore a majority at home? To claim you act in the name of universal values but then fail to get other nations to support your actions? All of those things Americans like to preach – a sham.”

“You step too far. We get the kind of government we deserve. But let me propose my own counter-factual. Let us pretend, against the odds, the president actually went to Congress and asked them to authorize this war? Would that change how you see things?“

Another long pause. “I don’t think so. All I can imagine is Congress rolling over and doing as the president asked. That is how power works. All of those claims that American democracy is different just don’t have any…. credibility.”



Credibility? The world now wonders if the American government does whatever its most powerful members wish it to or if the American people truly have the power to tell war-hungry leaders “NO.” 

 Before the week is over they will know. 

Originally posted at The Scholar’s Stage on 2 September 2013.

37 thoughts on “On Credibility”

  1. We already know the answer. Institutional Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has announced that he will support Obama’s request for carte blanche to initiate a war of whatever size, against a cast of belligerents to be named later, in Syria at will. In every major dispute with the Democrats since he became Speaker he has ended up voting with the Democrats and against the Republican caucus. And he has a cadre of about 40 Republicans who will vote as he votes, giving the Democrats the victory.

    For the last 117 days we have known that:

    a) the Federal government has been spying on everybody with total access to all forms of communications, all supposedly private files and activities, and with the active and paid cooperation of the private institutions who used to maintain privacy.

    b) for the same period of time, we have had it rubbed in our faces that the Federal government has been acting to punish those who it considers to be political enemies; via IRS and other regulatory agencies. And that the information collected and collated in a) have been used in b). They ARE above the law, in practice.

    c) elected politicians are by their nature morally and legally suspect, have generations of history of considering themselves above the law, and the Congress has a lot in common with a personal services “House of Negotiable Virtue”. Up until now, with absolute impunity.

    d) Since the beginning of Buraq Hussein’s term, when the data collection began to be funneled through the White House political operation; politicians and judges have been …. unusually compliant …. with the wishes of the Obama regime. As in turning on their constituents, their background beliefs, the law, and the Constitution. The most likely explanations [I am a retired Peace Officer and have some small knowledge of human behavior] are bribery, blackmail, and/or extortion.

    e) to expect already compromised and complicit politicians to suddenly vote based on reality and the national interest as opposed to their personal benefit and safety makes Dr. Pangloss appear to be Machiavelli.

    Your notational “he” is absolutely correct. We are beyond the stage of Constitutional Republic, and well along the path to a one party state, now equipped with all the prerequisites of a police state.

    Subotai Bahadur

  2. Well I don’t think they’ll have the soldiers along with this police state Mr. SB. I don’t think the cops either, but perhaps you know better. I’m betting NO.

    You said something very interesting:
    “We are beyond the stage of Constitutional Republic, and well along the path to a one party state, now equipped with all the prerequisites of a police state.”

    If I may.

    Beyond the stage of a Constitutional Republic: Yes, since the New Deal. We have an administrative state that holds elections and does what it wants. Increasingly what it must to survive. Last point -See – our money.

    A one party state: The State is Progressive, with the possible exception of Sui Generis Reagan this has been the case since 1933 as well.

    All the Pre-Requisites of a police state: Yes. And there they are stuck. They don’t have the cops or the soldiers. And they have an armed populace, now in an open arms race with them. These three final requirements elude them.

    If this were Europe it would be over except for meaningless riots. When you’re rioting for more welfare, you’re not really rioting for freedom.

    Rather an interesting standoff is what we have. The People [those who count] seem ready to make their choice, the Police and the Military are ????

    The Progs have had all the organs of what they want for some time.

    But not the police, soldiers, or people. They’d get the police state going in a jiffy if they did.

  3. Syria: he doesn’t want war.

    He’s under enormous pressure, mainly from State to go to war.

    Our FP has been bought and paid for some time. Otherwise Saudi would have ceased to exist 12 years ago. This Syrian adventure is at the behest of Saudi.

    He deserves credit for the Rook he pulled Saturday with Congress.

    He Castled.

    The President is only Imperial in the sense of Chess. This one Castled.

    I can’t remember a President doing so, Bravo. I’m against this adventure.

  4. It has been impossible for a successful American politician to oppose alliance with Israel for the past fifty years. A clique,indeed,owns both parties.
    Israel wants the Assad-Baathist versus rebel war mired in stalemate, Obama springs into action, but you can bet none of his old Chicago Arab friends are surprised by now.

  5. Mr. Greer,

    We don’t have that government you are referring to since March 1st, 1933.

    It was solidified by the President for Life and with various SCOTUS decisions such as Humphrey’s Executors [the Bureaucracy can make Law], the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 [the President can’t fire people, although Harry Truman did] and by a bureaucracy that has 80 years to immunize itself from “politics”, which means of course democracy.

    The Liberties contained in that document still largely stand, to our benefit. The only power there is the Second Amendment. It slows them down.
    That’s all it does. Pause.

    Our Democracy [1830-1933]is still a powerful symbol and totem legitimizer.

    But WE THE PEOPLE: have no power. We haven’t all our lives. Other than the fear of us, the fear of pushing us too far, or too fast.

    What you seem to be referring to Mr. Greer is public opinion . Normally that can be manufactured. That is the function of the Press and Academe. If it does not succeed in this Syrian matter, well it’s not a matter of critical importance to the government.** If it was it would be disregarded, as it so often is, such as with TARP and the Bailouts. That was existential to the system, and they didn’t care. Continuing the war in Iraq in 2006 was important to Bush, so he pressed on. And so on…

    **It’s of critical importance to the Saudi lobby, by which you may understand our State Dept. It may be of some interest to the Israeli lobby, which pales in comparison. It’s difficult to tell without knowing all the money lines.

    Gay marriage for instance isn’t a winner politically except in certain rare quarters. However it’s happening. It’s important to them.

    Give at most 20 years and it’s logical follow-on of a relaxing of the pederstry laws [already in progress, same machine] will not seem a step too far. We have studies already you see demonstrating no real harm. Ceterus Paribus…and that’s why they’re at the Boy Scouts of course.

    I digress. I posit the people have not had democracy – the people rule – or their Constitutional Republic since the New Deal. That was the “Deal.”

    Now the burden of proof is on the prosecution, if you wish that can be me. You may defend that we still have the Republic referenced at the top of the stage.

    Take a quick quiz: When you think of “The Constitution” what do you think of? Is it the Bill of Rights? It probably is. Of course it is.

    Those are Amendments. Not the structure of our government.

    Which really has nothing to do with the document of 1787 or it’s 27 Amendments. Does it?

  6. It’d say that the Assad-Baathists VS the rebels mired in a stalemate works for me too, in the long run, regardless of how Israel feels.
    I’d make popcorn for that.
    Just doing a quick poll of the military veterans in my life, and those I know through the milblogosphere, no one is the least keen on being set dressing in our fearless chief executive’s little drama. Although I am deriving a lot of cynical amusement, watching John Francois Kerry mouth the very opposite of the sentiments which brought him into public awareness (like a particularly putrid rotten fish) as a member of the anti-war movement.

  7. Well Mr. Hoop the most interested party in the Syrian Adventure is not Israel, it’s Bandar.

    So unless you’re going to contend that Bandar Al-Sultan is Israeli**, then I would lean towards NO.

    Certainly the State Dept isn’t pro-Israel. Good Heavens.

    **oh do google the possiblity. It’s delicious. An Iraqi tipped me to it.**

    However Mr. Hoop I would suspect that you and I would differ more on what constitutes the government.

    Is it the 0.003% we elect?

    Or the rest, who are there for life? Like FDR, who put them there?

    535 Congress + POTUS, VP = 537.

    537/2,000,000 = 0.003%. I’m excluding contractors. Which isn’t honest math.

    537/2,000,000 + 2,000,000 plus contractors* = 0.001%.

    Don’t forget to vote.

  8. *by policy the Contractors aren’t counted. But equal to the actual Federal govt is the best estimate.

    I would love to have the job where you hire contractors without counting them.

    If it were one man, now that would be our King.

  9. But SGT Mom, more interesting is that it doesn’t appear to be his cynical adventure, that he doesn’t want to do it. He made the decision to go to Congress two days after Parliament turned us down.

    What was that flurry of last minute phone calls?

    Congress is in recess. He could have – as he noted – made the decision anyway but punted to Congress. He could have intervened at any time the last two years of atrocity.

    He’s being dragged to this.

    We have what appears to be a captured President.

    No President is ever quite Dictator, even in wartime. But this one…well it’s been remarked about Teleprompter and voting present. Very well. Pursue that in light of recent events.

    This is much more interesting than random Obama Bashing.

    He’s about as eager to do this as Bush was to do TARP. And yet. Now why?

    There’s some real popcorn.

  10. Seriously, I think he does whatever those who hold his strings tell him to do. Who they are, and what they have been telling him … well, that’s the $64,000 question, isn’t it?
    Somebody bought themselves a real American president. Not sure who at this point, or how they did it, or exactly how they got him where he was, and rolled over all opposition … but whatever they are doing, this little venture may be a step to far.
    What was that apocryphal Chinese curse, about interesting times, again?

  14. Fallacy of causation. The fact that many Jews are partisan Democrats who support the president doesn’t mean that the Jews are controlling the president. At least it doesn’t mean that on Planet Earth.

  15. Pat Buchanan, who I like in some times and areas, such as his eloquent tribute to Nixon, has it in for Israel in any and all occasions. The Israelis can deal with Syria; they can even deal with Iran. Obama is their present problem. He is the most hostile president to Jews and Israel in American history. Not even Carter was this hostile until after he was no longer president.

    Obama is totally about domestic politics and sees this as a ploy to hurt Republican and better his chances for a Democrat Congress in 2015. That is all.

  16. He’s being dragged to this.

    More likely he’s bungled himself into a disastrous position and is trying to jam Congress with the blame. If Congress votes no and Obama goes ahead he can later, after his poorly conceived and executed scheme falls apart, accuse them of obstruction. Alternately, if the Republicans support him, out of foolishness or a sincere desire to support the president for the good of the country, he can say the whole thing was their plan if it goes TU.

    It’s always domestic politics with this guy.

  17. It’s the Saudis.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-27/meet-saudi-arabias-bandar-bin-sultan-puppetmaster-behind-syrian-war

    I don’t like using ZH, but I think they’re right in this case.

    The Israelis don’t need an MB state to the North either. Status quo or Assad works for them fine.

    They’re also quite capable of destroying the stocks themselves, to the extent it’s possible.

    The Saudi man in the street is an non-entity.

    Note we’re debating on who bought our foreign policy. Which is the key point.

  18. The only Jewish conspiracy is among brain-dead Jewish voters who continue to support Democrats despite the Dems’ movement away from supporting Jewish interests and towards outright anti-Semitism.

  19. VXXC Says:
    September 3rd, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Well I don’t think they’ll have the soldiers along with this police state Mr. SB. I don’t think the cops either, but perhaps you know better. I’m betting NO.

    They will not have ALL of the soldiers or police, but they will have a significant fraction, biased towards the increasing politically correct subset that itself tends to be the command levels down to middle management, and aspirants thereto.

    I offer for your consideration Edward Luttwak’s seminal work on the mechanics of a coup d’ etat, titled unsurprisingly “Coup d’Etat“. Key to the success of such an effort is a minority using the machinery of the state against itself, and posing at first as a legitimate action by the government for the relatively short period while control is established. I assure you that at the moment of seizure of power; Buraq Hussein is not going to speak from the Oval Office and say, “You suckers are my slaves!”. It will be couched in terms of necessary actions to preserve the Constitution. Lies, but the goal is to delay a reaction for 24-48 hours. By which time they will either be in control, be dead or in custody, or there will be a civil war in progress.

    However, the police and military that side with the regime will not be the only forces arrayed against the people. Consider the DHS in all its forms. I do not know if you have encountered any of these … craithers. They seem to share one specific belief; that an order from the President takes precedence over the Constitution. I have heard, but cannot confirm with a copy of the syllabus, that such is part of the curriculum at the FLETC at Glynco, Georgia.

    DHS is not a police force. They are not cops. They have no intention of “serving and protecting”. Their mission is to protect the regime from any opposition. They are a paramilitary force taking its orders from the White House. If we are being generous, we could compare them to the French Gendarmerie nationale with a larger GIGN component. If we are being candid, perhaps a look at a paramilitary force on the other side of the Rhine and a bit back in time would be more on point.

    I am sure that the adversary understands the operational concept of “correlation of forces”, it being part of their underlying doctrine. That correlation is moving to their advantage, largely because of their success in bringing the institutions of government and society under their exclusive control.

    The time will come when they will make their move for total power. For the record, even though retired, I was a Peace Officer and swore the Oath which never expires. I will not be in the fraction that supports the regime.

    If it comes the point where open resistance is forced, the issue will be in doubt. Our very survival as a nation, as a people, and as the exemplar so derided [sadly accurately] by Mr. Greer’s “he” is doubtful, even if we win. For the people we will be, even after a victory, will be very different from anything we have seen before.

    Subotai Bahadur

  20. They do largely have the military at the flag rank and even below flag rank among those who aspire to be flag one day. Allen, Petraeus and Dempsey were all classmates and schooled throughout their careers similarly. Lots of progressive influence starting early on. Imbued with a rock solid conviction that they were smarter than everyone else, destined to order the world and that others need to be told what to do and what to think. All that is lacking to make the military an effective internal instrument is the repetition of the alleged increasing internal security threat posed by “fundamentalists”, “right wing nut jobs”, and other assorted “home grown terrorists” requiring military intervention and the troops will largely obey the commands for internal security operations once a crisis comes.

    Similar scenarios are funded by the Feds for local law enforcement, complete with training exercises. If you recall Waco, you see what military and law enforcement joint operations could be like.

    If we have a large semi “organized” plurality of the “people” who are primarily dependent upon and true believers in the entitlement society and that could be driven by catastrophic breakdown of access to consumer goods to take what they “need” and “deserve” by whatever means required, they have the “people”.

    It’s not that hard to see the trends in motion. In the face of a united law enforcement-military and a rampaging hoard, all those little guns maybe soon eliminated. The revolution is the vision. There is no end state beyond that. The useful idiots won’t figure that out until they are run over as well. All that power they thought they’d have will be gone.

    Perhaps the current trends won’t persist to this conclusion, but it is beyond me to figure out how that happens. Perhaps the exquisite timing and key prerequisites will not occur as needed. So how does the progression (pun intended) get turned around? Beats me, but I’m ready to do what I can for as long as I can.

    Mike

  21. I think a coup is very unlikely. Who would be behind it — An elite that’s already gaining power without a coup? Obama? There’s a huge amount of personal risk for coup participants. For Egyptian officers, who knew they faced eventual prison or worse, it made sense. For American officials with comfortable lives and jobs, unaccustomed to life-or-death authoritarian political environments, I don’t see it.

    OTOH, I think the odds that Obama will be impeached are significant — 10 percent? 25%? Who knows, but surely higher than they were a month ago.

  22. Yes I’ve read most of Luttwak [I think] including of course his Coup de Main.

    “the Oath”. Well that’s the key, isn’t it? Me too.

    Many have.

    DHS is a rather unknown quantity.

    It won’t be enough.

    I don’t fancy their chances in a fight.

    I don’t think the leadership has the stones for this, I think they are at best dimly aware of the intended Prog endstate of the Rule of the Saints.

    I mean let’s remember who were talking about. Obama?

    Luttwak’s coup is not for a Federalist state, which administratively we still are.

    The police are 12,000 agencies, the plenary powers are at the local level.

    I actually think there will be trouble, but I think it’s associated with the breakdown. We’re broke you see and on fiat fantasy finance.

    You saw how their gun control push worked out.

    [shh. SB. Maybe it would be better to read Luttwak to get him to work for you. Shh].

    Look all these doomsday the lights go out require Americans to play by script. Does the trend of America look that way?

    These people are financial con-artists, they didn’t sign up to be Stalins henchmen. Now if the New Dealers were doing this, instead of what they did we might have a problem.

    I mean [sb] work it like job from other side ..

    https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=li&q=Appalachian+Mountains&qscrl=1&biw=1241&bih=545&sei=B5cmUo7WKqKzsASkooDYBA#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=hJ4k7FdO2CUuGM%3A%3BIvpAPLfQpLhwrM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.icsd.k12.ny.us%252Fsabbatic%252Fimages%252Fstories%252Fgeography%252FAppalachians.png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.icsd.k12.ny.us%252Fsabbatic%252Findex.php%253Foption%253Dcom_content%2526task%253Dview%2526id%253D65%2526Itemid%253D75%3B637%3B424

  23. Funny where these conversations end up.

    Coups aren’t needed. Thrills and frills pacify the people well enough. Ipods do what bullets cannot.

    If you really must read a book to see where we are at and where we are headed, I recommend Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. More apt than all these 1984 analogies we hear day by day. He has the ipods and everything.

    -TG

  24. Another good book I’ve been thinking a lot about lately is Isaac Asimnov’s Foundation books. All sorts of passages keep jumping out at me:

    1. His descriptions of the decaying empire, including: a self obsessed leadership class, fawning courtiers, the decay of education and technological prowess, a worship of the past and amazement at their achievements, the secret police and suppression of political challengers.

    2. The rise of these same problems in the Foundation under the hereditary Mayors, especially the turning inward of the security forces to operate as forces of political repression and the rise of a stifling, repressive, bureaucratic political machine – especially its conflating of petty rules for ‘industry’ and achievement.

    On a more positive, whenever I break the social contract and talk about these thing at work, I’m often surprised at the number of people who see and think these same things, but think they’re the only ones. I recall that during a casual meeting recently I referred to the emergence of the police state, and was shocked by the number of wide-eyed knowing looks and nods of acknowledgement I received, all without a word being spoken, as if I had said something we all know, but wasn’t supposed to mention out loud.

    I think there are lots of people who know something is very, very wrong, but don’t know what to do.

  25. It was a few years ago that I realised the key characteristics of those aspects of his life that O wants to keep hidden. Those characteristics are (i) who knows what he’s hiding, and (ii) the price they will exact for keeping his secrets.

  26. Zbigniew Brzezinski is indirectly responsible for this mess we’re in now.
    He and his elitist/synarchist/anti-traditionalist pals have advocated the destruction of state sovereignty and self determination for decades.
    So now he wants “internationally sponsored elections” where the winner is determined by China and India. Otherwise Israel will be fatigued and demoralized.
    That’s a laugh. Israel has always been strongest when its neighbors have been divided and the indigenous Muslims within its borders outwardly looking such as during the Pan-Arabism movement during the 50s & 60s.
    His real goal is some group of noble savages/useful idiots to come to power so a strong central commission can control them.
    Lately that group is the Muslim Brotherhood but in the 70s it was the Mullahs in Iran.

  27. A coup may be at hand.

    0 only decided to submit this to Congress when the British Parliament said no thanks. The Tory MPs, who are supposed to be a rubber stamp for the PM voted with their constituents.

    Here, the Senate looks like it is lining up with 0. Likewise, the leadership of both parties in the House has lined up with 0. Ultimately it is the rank and file in the House, especially those in competitive districts, who are going to throw a monkey wrench into 0’s works. Because they’re listening to their constituents.

    What could be happening here is a rejection of the elite by the hoi polloi. They have the power, even if they rarely use it. If so, 2014 could be very interesting. The answer is blowing in the wind.

  30. VXXC Before you decide that gay marriage is only favored by a few, you may want to look at Washington state’s popular vote. It was approved by the voters in a referendum in November 2012.

    This marks a change in public opinion from an earlier Washington state initiative.

    Although Washington is somewhat more socially liberal than the nation as a whole (and somewhat more libertarian on economic issues), polls show that there have been similar shifts in other states.

    (For the record: I voted against the referendum, having decided some time ago that gay marriage was rather silly, and would almost certainly lead to legalized polygamy, but it isn’t an important issue for me.

    Recently, I have also realized that gay marriage is unscientific, something I should have recognized much earlier.)

    And if I may a general suggestion: Look up Hanlon’s razor. It isn’t always right, but it does tell you how to bet, in most cases.

  31. Arabs offered to pay us to knock off Assad, Sec State Testifies. Oh they’re paying already. Just not into the General Budget. I applaud the decision to buy American normally, but we really must stop at buying our government officials to then fight SAUDI’s Wars. This answers the question of which foreign power is pulling the strings. They’re not Jews.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/liveblog/the-houses-syria-hearing-live-updates/#e68f139f-e012-476c-876e-2467ba30e5e3

  32. Gay anything: manufactured consensus.
    And any consensus can be manufactured, almost.

    Not that I care. But I have no sons, never mind sons say 12 and up.

    Because that’s full gay rights. 12. They actually think that’s a compromise.

    “Theo Sandfort is a sex researcher in the Netherlands who has written extensively about man-boy relationships in the Netherlands (Sandfort, 1983, 1984). He was able, with the permission of the adult partners, to contact 25 boys. At that time, the climate in the Netherlands was very different than it was in the United States regarding adult-child sex. For example, in 7 out of 25 cases Sandfort studied, the boy’s parents were aware of the relationship and accepted it. Police generally didn’t prosecute when the boy was at least 12 years old. Sandfort’s research was harshly criticized and one seldom encounters it in the literature on the effects of child sexual abuse. Bauserman (1991) comments on the severe and unfair critiques of Sandfort’s research, and concludes the moral condemnation of such relationships means critics are unable to evaluate his research objectively: “It seems that the taboo against juvenile sexuality and particularly against adult-juvenile sex is still so strong that research which fails to support the prevailing ideology must be attacked and discredited, regardless of its actual validity”(p. 311).”

    http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume16/j16_2.htm

    You’ll eat that one too, as long as you can vote.
    ===================================

    If the referendum does not pass, there are courts.

    Vote away. When they want something, they get it. By all means Vote. It will keep you off the streets, literally. No policy of core or near core interests to the Ruling Class will be stopped by any combination of voting. See: Our finances 2008 forward. That being the core of core interests.

    Except for guns, where they seem to stop. Hmmm. I wonder if they realize how much is bluster, how much is real. Real is hard you know. It’s tough to tell.

    I only mention any of the above in case anyone who’s not retired is listening.

  35. }}} Beyond the stage of a Constitutional Republic: Yes, since the New Deal. We have an administrative state that holds elections and does what it wants. Increasingly what it must to survive. Last point -See – our money.

    Right Idea, Wrong Roosevelt.

    All this crap started, really, with Teddy. Yeah (sigh), the Republican. He’s the one who got the USA into the idea that the FEDERAL government should control and “fix” all these problems, rather than pushing for the States to do it properly. A whole host of the Alphabet agencies started under him, or eventually developed to support policies and ideas he initiated. Under him came the serious panic, of 1907, that set into motion the development of the Federal Reserve. In addition, the movement towards the popular Election of Senators started. It was under him that the Standard Oil BS started, and its related “Tax Free Foundations” that allowed the Income Tax to come into play while sold as a “soak the rich” scheme, even though the “out” (those Foundations — “The Rockefeller Foundation”?) had already been laid down for the uber-rich.

    No, the last truly great AMERICAN PotUS was Grover Cleveland — From the wiki:

    In 1887, Cleveland issued his most well-known veto, that of the Texas Seed Bill.[95] After a drought had ruined crops in several Texas counties, Congress appropriated $10,000 to purchase seed grain for farmers there.[95] Cleveland vetoed the expenditure. In his veto message, he espoused a theory of limited government:

    I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people. The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.[96]

    Can you even IMAGINE any PotUS saying this today?

  36. http://www.a-w-i-p.com/index.php/news/2013/09/05/chomsky-syria-strike-would

    Chomsky, the great anti-Zionist who Israel will not allow to travel within, along with Norm Finklestein, calls it right.

    Pat Buchanan asks a similar question he asked before the Iraq war.

    http://www.creators.com/conservative/pat-buchanan/just-whose-war-is-this.html

    “Does the U.S. Jewish community really want to be responsible for starting a war that ends with two million Christian Syrians facing a fate not unlike that of Poland’s Jews?”

  37. http://www.a-w-i-p.com/index.php/news/2013/09/05/chomsky-syria-strike-would

    Chomsky, the great anti-Zionist who Israel will not allow to travel within, along with Norm Finklestein, calls it right.

    Pat Buchanan asks a similar question he asked before the Iraq war.

    http://www.creators.com/conservative/pat-buchanan/just-whose-war-is-this.html

    “Does the U.S. Jewish community really want to be responsible for starting a war that ends with two million Christian Syrians facing a fate not unlike that of Poland’s Jews?”

Comments are closed.