What Difference Does It Make?

My Jesuit Confessor, Father de Casuist, tells me that if I am allowed to post links before Friday, I can post videos. This is the best one I have seen all year. I am puzzled that no GOP politician talks this way. Here is Bill Whittle:

And, if you have a little more time, here is Bill Whittle giving GOP politicians a lesson in how to talk and in how they should talk. It is long, but worthwhile, particularly the spirited defense of the Pole’s political courage, and the enormity of American betrayal of Poland, at about the 17 minute mark.

About John C Wright

John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
This entry was posted in Musings, Only Posting a Link. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to What Difference Does It Make?

  1. Tom Simon says:

    Of course no GOP politician talks like that. Telling the truth, especially if the truth is unpleasant, does not drive the positive-image polling numbers in the 90-second snap poll of the focus group. And you know, politics is all about the next 90 seconds.

    But it hardly matters at this point. You folks are living in a one-party state; you just don’t know it yet. The Republicans will never again be permitted to take any important executive office at the federal level; and based on what I have seen and heard from senior Republicans, they are pretty much resigned to that fate and determined to take it lying down.

    • Maryland when I lived there was a ‘de facto’ one party state, by which I mean there was no Republican officer holders on the country level where I lived, absolutely none. And the national scene here in America is not that.

      While it is fashionable to decry the two political parties as being the two heads of the same beast, I have seen the difference between life under Carter, life under Reagan, life under near-left Clinton and life under far-left Obama. If you want toe say that squishy RINO’s like the Bushes are indistinguishable from Dems, there I will not dispute you. But there are both policy differences and real world differences between these two parties, and I suggest that the differences are wide and getting wider.

      • Tom Simon says:

        I agree with you that the differences between the parties are wide and getting wider. However, I am growing steadily more convinced that you have seen your last Republican administration. In the executive branch at the federal level, the Democratic Party seems to be doing a very thorough job of putting itself in the position that the PRI used to hold in Mexico — the permanent governing party, which allowed opposition parties to exist more or less as pets, but never allowed them to actually win elections or take office. Between refusing ballots to soldiers overseas, stuffing ballot boxes on behalf of dead voters, and maintaining rotten precincts like the one recently observed in Philadelphia (100% voter turnout! 98% for Obama!), the Democrats are doing a pretty effective job of what I call ‘chavezing’ your presidential elections.

        With the presidency in hand, and a president who is arrogant enough to regard the Constitution as a nuisance to be swept aside or ignored, they don’t need the legislative branch or the states. Everything can be done by Presidential executive order. Note the recent case involving so-called recess appointments to the NLRB. The courts have ruled that the appointments were improper because the Senate was not in recess when they were made; the response of the NLRB has been to refuse to recognize the ruling, and carry on about its business just the same.

        The nearest parallel I can find in a country under common law is the period of ‘Personal Rule’ in the England of Charles I. You may recall how that turned out — but not before the King ruled the country for eleven years without a Parliament. Charles’ tyranny was limited by his lack of funds: there was no such thing as a National Debt in those days, and no such thing as fiat money. Your present administration operates under no such constraints.

      • The Deuce says:

        But there are both policy differences and real world differences between these two parties, and I suggest that the differences are wide and getting wider.

        Unfortunately, this is only because the Democrats are *accelerating* left while the Republicans are merely moving in that direction.

  2. Robert Mitchell Jr says:

    I think it’s obvious that Republicans do talk that way all the time. It’s just not reported unless there’s a useful gaffe (witness the “rape” gaffe used to such effect to destroy that senator talking about Abortion). The Press has played this game for a long time (see how they used the editing game to destroy McCarthy. See also Mrs. Palin). You know the Press is lying to you, as shown by your following post. Be a little kind to the Republicans. If someone as bright and logical as you can be sucked in by the endless stream of lies, the solution might just not be as binary as people are saying, yes?

    And I must point out that for all the doom and gloom, the Republicans, and the parts of the country they are caretakers of, are doing rather well. We have never had as many governors as we have now. The impulse to freedom shown by the Second Amendment is huge, and the gun control fascists are running scared. Look how poorly the terrible crime known as Unions are doing, in membership and in political power. Has the contrast between red and blue states ever been as large? It seems to me that what is going on is that the Republicans have written off D.C. as a rigged game, and so are working from the bottom up, while stalling at the “top”. Looked at that way, they seem to be doing pretty good. Not that the Press will say so, until it helps get Democrats get elected……

Leave a Reply