Cynicism, Apathy, and Pragmatic Political Parties

Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD
Article Type: 
Editor's Corner
Fall 1997
Volume Number: 
Issue Number: 

The middle of the road leads to socialism.
Ludwig von Mises
Planning For Freedom, 1962

From Ancient Rome to Karl Marx

Just like in ancient Rome, at the time of the Ides of March and the death knell of the Republic --- when the Roman populace's votes were being bought by populist political demagogues who either promised warring mobs what did not belong to them (legalized plunder) or distracted them with panem et circenses (bread and circuses) --- the American people today are being politically distracted by the media which focuses on the insignificant differences between the two major political parties (led by the moderates of the GOP in cahoots with the liberal wing of

US Political Party logos the Democratic party). And so the American electorate are getting only beltway politics-as-usual --- in the form of watered-down welfare reform, non-existent reductions in educational spending, and legerdemain Medicare cuts* --- while the time of reckoning for balancing the budget continues to be postponed. The truth is government spending continues to rise, and our duty to discharge the national debt, the future enslavement of our children, poorly educated in the public schools as automatons, is not even being discussed. This topic is outside the liberal media's artificial frame of "respectable" political discourse --- and thus, censored from public discussion.

And so with this ongoing political charade, it is no wonder only 25% of the eligible population voted in our last presidential election (1996) to reelect the president, again, with less than a majority (49%). The truth is the last presidential election offered no real choice between the two major candidates, and in Congress, despite the "conservative" Republicans retaining control, except for a band of principled, courageous House Republicans of the freshman and sophomore classes, the conservative agenda for government reform has been discarded, and the leadership and the old guard are frequently nowhere to be found.

Remember candidate Bob Dole stating there was a difference between him and President Clinton? During the debate, Bob Dole vociferated, "I want to reduce government by 20%, President Clinton by 16%." Wow! Great philosophical and moral choices in political philosophy! The pundits ask why the apathy and low turn-out at the voting booth: Again, there appears to be no significant difference between Democrats and Republicans. Just a little less of the same --- an ever-growing leviathan.

Unbeknownst to the general public, because of compromise after compromise, and betrayal after betrayal (particularly by the moderate Republicans caving-in to liberal Democrats), we have complied, in part or in toto, with all 10 planks of Marx's Communist Manifesto:**

Communist Manifesto· Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.

 Consider the application of environmental laws and expansion of eminent domain by the government and regulatory agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management to confiscate private property, not to mention the use of the RICO statues in asset forfeiture proceedings to rob citizens of the fruits of their labors, citizens accused but not necessarily convicted of any crime, to subsidize the plunder of others. The War on drugs has also been used towards the same end of expropriating private property from the people without due process of law

· A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

The graduated income tax formerly prohibited by the Constitution was authorized by the passage of the 16th Amendment under the false pretenses  (such as that only the super-rich would be taxed). It was part of the freedom-eroding troika along with the establishment of the Federal Reserve (allowing the political manipulation of interest rates and the printing of fiat money) and the 17th Amendment (i.e., the popular election of U.S Senators that virtually eliminated the representation of the states in the federal government and tilted the balance of power toward the federal government at the expense of the states.

· Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

The current federal estate and gift tax has been reduced to 40% from the 55%, only a few years ago. Some states have additional inheritance taxes on top of all the other taxes mentioned. Why should the federal government be authorized in a free society to tax and determine the disposition of property upon a person’s death?

· Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

One wonders why expatriate tax provisions were included surreptitiously in the purportedly medical insurance proposals of the Kassebaum-Kennedy Law. Why should federal agencies such as the IRS, the EPA, or even law enforcement be authorized to confiscate private property from suspected (not convicted) Americans under the Patriot Act without due process of law? 

· Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

The existence of the Federal Reserve System, IMF, and World Bank are well known. These interrelated agencies have the power to manipulate interest rates, to print currency, to lend money, and use this financial controls to exert political and economic power in the the U.S. as well as throughout the world

· Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state

Agencies such as the FCC regulates the airwaves; the government subsidizes railroad monopolies such as Amtrak and ConRail, etc.

· Equal liability of all to labor; establishment of industrial armies...(i.e., unions controlled by their political bosses contribute heavily to political candidates using forced union dues; push for minimum wage laws; employer mandates; onerous regulations stifling business and  commerce.

· Free education for all children in public schools... (i.e., requires no comment; government schools are crime ridden, have debased academic curricula, and teach political correctness, self-esteem ehnancement, neglecting math, science, history, civics, and the moral virtues.

Yes, just like in ancient Rome, at the time of the Ides of March and the death knell of the Republic, Americans, like their ancient Roman counterparts, have become distracted with panen et circenses and satiated with politics-as-usual, totally imbued with either cynicism or apathy.

Now the "conservative" revolution of 1994 has fizzled; and the republican leadership scrambling toward the purported center of American politics, and I am sorry to say, abandoning principle for political expediency, is positioning itself as to be swept out of power by an irate American electorate unless it quickly changes course, reasserts itself and finds its lost courage.

One of the great maxims we learned from the German philosopher Georg Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), is that man seldom learns lessons from history. Much has been said and written about the meaning and course of the November '94 "conservative" revolution and we are still analyzing what happened in the '96 election, but given the direction U.S. politics has taken, I find it astonishing that relatively little has been said and learned from the very meaningful U.S. election of 1992 and that of our northern neighbors in Canada in 1993. And more recently, as far as the May 1st British election, the media pundits have already spun their own distracting web to explain its meaning: centered around the looks, youth, and Clinton-like "New Democrat" moderation and charms of newly elected Prime Minister Tony Blair. [To my pleasant and satisfying surprise as he maaured in his administration, Blair turned out to be an exemplary leader, just as margaret thatcher had predicted.]Great Britain flag

Great Britain

In view of the importance of the British elections and the parallels and similarities of the U.S. Republican party since the years of President Bush with that of the British Tories since the days of the coup against Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, it may be of interest to study these similitudes and understand what they may portend to the future of the U.S. Republican Party and conservatism. Also what, for instance, is the meaning of the recurring phenomenon of landslide dismissals of ostensibly "conservative" ruling parties, not just in the U.S., but, as we have intimated, also in Canada, Great Britain, France, New Zealand, etc., while creeping socialism continues to crawl steadily over all our institutions.

After the longest-lasting British Parliamentary (conservative) 18-year rule of this century, the re-invented, new "moderate" British Labor Party and its leader (the Clinton counterpart of British politics 43-year-old Tony Blair), have been swept into power in Britain, largely as a result of "conservative" indecision, flip-flops, and the dissatisfaction of British voters who have been ignored (i.e., taxes were raised and regulations increased under Prime Minister John Majors) and virtually left out of the equation of British sovereignty (i.e., while the majority of the British people oppose joining the European Monetary Union, the British elite of both parties support European unification and refuse to have a referendum on the issue).

U.S.A.US Flag

But, we don't even have to look to Europe. In 1992, the liberal democrats retained control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate, and sent President George H.W. Bush, the proponent of a "kinder, gentler nation," packing out of the White House. It was said to be the economy ("it's the economy, stupid"), as in any event, the pundits pontificated that "conservatives had no other place to go," and would have to vote for the reelection of George Herbert Walker Bush.

The fact remained that after repeatedly squandering the legacy of Ronald Reagan and disbanding his carefully-crafted conservative coalition, a citizen's coalition bent on genuinely decreasing the size and scope of government, the GOP faltered. President Bush and his administration, in concert with the liberal, Democrat-controlled Congress, broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge and signed the quota bill ("I will not sign a quota bill"), instituted unprecedented civil asset forfeitures against U.S. citizens, implemented stifling red-tape bureaucracies and crushing government regulations, and strangulated entrepreneurs with such onerous and flawed acts as the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and the superfluous but terribly expensive Clean Air Bill, all the while strengthening intrusive alphabet-soup agencies such as the EPA, OSHA, FDA, and BATF.

Needless to say, when you pile up insult after insult discouraging your passionate conservative base, that base erodes away and stays home on election day. The liberal left retains its base and then carries the bewildered and volatile center (depending on the state of the economy and the perception of what freebies they are getting or will be getting from government).

CanadaCanadian Flag

Likewise, in October 1993, the Canadian parliamentary elections reconfirmed the truism that when the conservative base is insulted and the line between conservatives and liberals become blurred and indistinct, support for ostensibly "conservative" parties evaporates. You see, all being equal, the liberals are believed "to feel everyone's pain!" So, I repeat, everything being equal, and with no foreign threat to our national security, the liberal left with the volatile center carries the day.

In Canada, the Progressive "Conservative" Party of Brian Mulroney, after repeatedly offending and betraying the conservative Canadian electorate and eroding its base (i.e., taxes were raised 71 times and a 7 percent value-added tax was levied), lost in an unprecedented landmark election; and after years in power, the party was literally wiped from the Canadian political landscape. The "conservatives" were severely drubbed, dropping from 153 seats to 2 seats; and the Liberal Party of Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien was swept to victory, resurging from 79 seats in Parliament to 178 seats. A new, western conservative party emerged, the Reform Party led by Preston Manning, which went from 1 seat to 56 seats, and has now become the real opposition to socialism in Canada. The Separatist Bloc Quebecois Party gained 46 seats (from 8 to 54) and remains a formidable political force. (This year's elections in France and Canada do not change the picture, except for the fact the Reform Party has consolidated its gains, and has become the de facto loyal opposition.)

Are There Political Lessons to be Learned?

Regardless of the conservatism and enthusiasm (i.e., reducing the size and scope of government) of the candidates, once in office, democratic socialism is perceived as an ineluctable historic force that can not be stopped, and this attitude appears to foster politics-as-usual in the "conservative leadership" and demoralization on the rank-and-file members of Congress. Except for a band of maverick conservative Republicans in the House, the Republicans, led by Speaker Newt Gingrich (and in the Senate by the underwhelming, disappointing Trent Lott), have lost their nerve, become scared of their own shadow, and continue to play by the rules of the Democrats to the tune of the liberal media unable to wield power and save the Republic.

Third party logoAre there lessons to be learned? Hegel also wrote, again correctly in my view, "nothing in this world has ever been accomplished without passion." As the American Republican Party has apparently lost its moral courage --- and its passion --- and continues its present pusillanimous course, no one should be surprised, perhaps regrettably, if a third party forging, despite their overt differences, genuine Republicans, civil libertarians, and religious conservatives, materializes.

Despite the astounding and unprecedented lapses in moral judgment (and concurrent political vulnerabilities) of the present administration in the White House, and the unparalleled corruption with campaign fund-raising scandals implicating both the Democratic National Committee and the White House (and their damaging, concomitant illegalities affecting our national security via COSCO, the Lippo group, and Communist China), no one should be surprised if the GOP fails to regain the Presidency and even loses the nominal governance of a fizzled and neutered GOP-led Congress.


* Last year during the Medicare debate much was made of the Democrats' litany: "The Republicans are seeking to cut Medicare by $270 billion to pay for tax breaks for the rich"; the reality was that the differences in the cuts (i.e., not cuts but reduction in rate of Medicare growth) between the Republicans and Democrats, in terms of beltway dollars, was insignificant.

** Much of this socialism became a fact of life during President H. W. Bush's "moderate" administration which also paved the way for the continuation of these policies under Bill Clinton. Both presidents increased taxes, supported Goals 2000 in education, increased regulations, and hailed the cryptic New World Order.

Dr. Faria is a consultant neurosurgeon and author of Vandals at the Gates of Medicine (1995) and the newly released Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine (Macon, Georgia, Hacienda Publishing, Inc., 1997). He is also the Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel.

This article may be cited as: Faria MA. Cynicism, Apathy, and Pragmatic Political Parties. Medical Sentinel 1997;2(4):123-125. Available from:

Your rating: None Average: 5 (8 votes)
Comments on this post

Democrats: Politics of envy & class warfare

The politics of envy and the Democratic Party

The news media report below is and example not only of liberal media bias as well as the use of the politics of envy and class warfare by the Obama administration and the Democrats, supported by the lapdog media:

AP-GfK Poll: Most back Obama plan to raise investment taxes by STEPHEN OHLEMACHER and EMILY SWANSON - Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The rich aren't taxed enough and the middle class is taxed too much. As for your taxes, you probably think they're too high as well.

Those are the results of an Associated Press-GfK poll that found that most people in the United States support President Barack Obama's proposal to raise investment taxes on high-income families.

The findings echo the populist messages of two liberal senators — Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont — being courted by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to run for president in 2016. The results also add weight to Obama's new push to raise taxes on the rich and use some of the revenue to lower taxes on the middle class.

Obama calls his approach "middle-class economics."It's not flying with Republicans in Congress, who oppose higher taxes.But Bob Montgomery of Martinsville, Virginia, said people with higher incomes should pay more.

"I think the more you make the more taxes you should pay," said Montgomery, who is retired after working 40 years at an auto dealership. "I can't see where a man makes $50,000 a year pays as much taxes as somebody that makes $300,000 a year."

According to the poll, 68 percent of those questioned said wealthy households pay too little in federal taxes; only 11 percent said the wealthy pay too much. Also, 60 percent said middle-class households pay too much in federal taxes, while 7 percent said they paid too little...
The reality is that "the rich" more than pay their fair share, while 47% of the population pay no taxes. Both the rich and the middle class pay their way and pull the cart in which the idle travel. Because we already have a "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax" because of the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This is a plank of the communist manifesto.

In fact, U.S. income taxation initially [16th Amendment] was directed to the super rich and was extremely progressive, not just because it was low but also because it exempted 98 percent of the population, but it rapidly rose to absurdly extortionary levels. From 1913 to 1921 (i.e., through World War I and beyond), the top tax rate escalated from 7 to 77 percent; then rose to over 90 percent in peace time. And despite the fact that the top (richest) 1 percent paid 30 percent of all taxes in 1998, ordinary Americans are no longer exempted from taxation and pay 40 percent of their income to Uncle Sam in taxes. The middle class, as in the Russian proverb, has not only fallen in the hole they intended for the super rich, but has also lost a significant amount of privacy and freedom in the process, veritably living in a land of IRS informers. Read: Death and Taxes at the turn of the millennium

Today nearly 50 percent of Americans pay no federal taxes, while the other 50 percent pay 97 percent, and the top 25 percent pay 86 percent of all taxes. And guess who that 25% is that pays 86% of all the taxes?— The rich that supposedly do not pay enough taxes! Read: Obama's Report card

American middle class remember the Russian proverb!

Pope Pius XII was the victim of a Soviet plot by Stalin?

Dr Faria,
I wasn't sure which forum to post this, but I wondered what you think about the claims made in an article written by Edward Pentin entitled Authors: Pope Pius XII Was Framed by KGB.

Former Romanian intelligence chief General Ion Mihai Pacepa (photo, right), who defected to the US in 1978, just wrote a new book entitled "Disinformation." In it he claims that Pope Pius XII was the victim of a Soviet plot by Stalin to frame him as a Nazi sympathizer. Naturally, discrediting Pope Pius XII would harm his relationship with the Ukrainian Catholic Church. Pacepa claims: “After persecuting the Church there, he [Stalin] set about trying to portray Pius XII as a Nazi collaborator, proclaiming on Radio Moscow in 1945 that Pius XII had been ‘Hitler’s Pope.’” Controlling or discrediting the Church was often a chosen path used by the KGB since outright elimination had not been accomplished. Early on the icons had been replaced with Stalin’s picture, literally.

In his book "Spy Handler," former KGB officer Cherkashin claimed in USSR that “most of the Orthodox hierarchy was in some way connected to the KGB” (200). However, he admits that in the Ukraine, this was not the case. The invasion of Western Ukraine by the Soviets in 1939 forced the populace to take a chance with the Nazis over communist USSR, who had starved approximately 5 million to death under Stalin, forced collectivization, and generally squashed any freedoms for Ukrainians. Additionally, the land taken under the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was primarily Catholic.

The KGB even had their own section for disinformation: FCD Section A (123). By using the threat of discrediting an individual, the choice for the victim was stark: spy and cooperate with the KGB or be exposed as a Nazi collaborator. Moreover, the US would be harmed either way, through espionage or damaged reputation. Cherkashin relates a particular case concerning how this was done to Constantine Warwariv, the US representative to UNESCO, in Georgia (formerly part of USSR ) in 1977. The story of Nazi collaboration was fictional, but Warwariv did live in the Ukraine before immigrating to the US, and the KGB made up a Nazi history for him. Warwariv did not cooperate and reported the attempt to the US State Dept; consequently, he was included in a book published by the Foreign Ministry. His reputation was hurt and he was eventually dismissed (122-29).

That Stalin had the motive—control of the Ukraine Catholic Church, who would naturally be uncooperative—is believable. That the KGB would use this method of claiming one who was so obviously NOT a NAZI sympathizer seems rather bold since so many knew otherwise, for example President Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and even Albert Einstein, who all praised him. Yet Pacepa’s makes a valid point when he claims that a later generation would be more gullible to this KGB deception. Remember the Che and Mao T-shirts worn by the useful idiots? Stalin died in 1953, so who was pushing this agenda after that?

I also realize that nothing is certain in Intelligence, even sources like Pacepa and Cherkashin. One seeks collaboration from different sources. Moreover, Pacepa is selling a book. My biggest problem is "Need to Know." Why would the Romanian Intelligence Chief be involved in USSR decisions at the highest level for the Ukraine. This decision would likely have been very strictly guarded in Moscow. Of course all ships leak. Perhaps reading the book and seeking collaboration is the best method. Critics are being won over. What is your take on this?

Canadian politics and history

A Conversation on Canadian politics

VC [a conservative from Georgia]: Susrum [a Canadian posting in the Macon Telegraph], you made several intriguing posts yesterday, for instance, "Afghanistan is where empires go to die." That is a verifiable historical assertion with many examples, but I would like to remark that Afghanistan, a country the U.S. was obligated to intervene in in a just war of self-defense for the atrocity of 9-11, is not where the U.S. would die. When the U.S. and Western culture are conquered, it will be a collapse from within, as in the Roman Republic and Empire, from the increasingly evident loss of at least two of the cardinal virtues that Aristotle, St Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke embraced – i.e., fortitude (courage) and temperance. A growing portion of the U.S. public is afflicted from the ills of creeping socialism and over-indulgence, moral cowardice and superficiality, deterioration in manners, civility, and deteriorating public education – in all of these the Democrats have led the way and the Republicans politically have not been able to stop them!

Susrum: "[Founding Fathers of Canada] ...The trouble is you guys got standards. Our founding fathers in comparison were bailiwick protecting, bigoted, divisive folks from 2 nationalities that had been fighting on and off since 1066, cobbled together by a man who drank too much, took bribes and sold the integrity of the fledgling nation for a railroad deal to the west coast. But he got the job done. We have no one-upmanship to parade nor was it intended as such."

VC: 1066, Yes the Battle of Hastings, Normans (French) vs Saxons (English), but I wish you would elaborate on Canadian history and politics. Winston Churchill touched on this in his masterpiece, History of the English Speaking People, as you know. I am laying no traps. I am just seeking knowledge about Canada's founding, history, and politics from a Canadian's perspective.

As it regards, the "man who drank too much" and his involvement with the railroads, I suppose you speak of Prime Minister Sir John Macdonald, but he did apply and succeeded in establishing a "manifest destiny" for Canada, creating one behemoth nation across the continent like the USA. And his dealings and controversy, which forged Canada, did in the end also precipitate his and the fall of the conservative government in the subsequent elections (1873).
I suppose you do instead admire Liberal Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King (i.e., a necromancer and creator of the welfare state, alter-ego to FDR, but also a great and worthy ally in World War II) as the foremost PM of Canada?

There are a number of historic "Alexander Mackenzies" in Canada, a prime minister, who followed Macdonald after "the railroad fiasco," another a great explorer, etc. In the Canadian wars (i.e., England vs France, US vs England, etc), Churchill stressed the St Lawrence River was the key to Canada – and usually Great Britain controlled the seas – as the Hudson River was the key to New England and New York. France, America's ally, briefly commanded the seas in 1781, and helped us win our independence after the surrender of the British at Yorktown (1781).

Susrum: "Liberal" has a different meaning depending on which side of the Great Lakes you go for a swim. It was the Liberals under Cretien who got us back from being a fiscal basket case in the 90's after a decade of Conservative governance under Mulroney. The latter emulated Reaganomics and was close personally, delivering the eulogy at the request of Nancy Reagan at the funeral. Churchill is another topic which I'll get in to one day save to say his father died of madness from syphilis, and one of his 2 stepfathers only a week older than him.“

VC: Churchill was very objective in his discussion of Canada, but he intimated that the U.S. could have remained part of the British empire if the "American radicals" and  King George III and his ministers could have come to terms.
Winston Churchill, a direct descendant of John Churchill, the Duke of Marlboro, was a great Englishman, a great historian, a great writer, great statesman - a great man!

Susrum: “The key to Canada were it's rivers navigated by the coureurs de bois who reached the hinterlands as traders followed by missionaries who opened up the heart of North America. I liked Mackenzie King, he served us well during WWII but Borden did as well in WWI. Most Americans do not know that Canadians left 50,000+ dead in Europe in both wars with a mean population of 8 million. But the best PM was Pierre Trudeau who delivered the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is still noted as such in polls. The most admired man, though, was Tommy Douglas a Baptist Minister from the Weyburn Bible College in Saskatchewan who first introduced the hallmarks of the socially liberal criteria with health care and universal pensions to his home Province, thence Nationally, though he never held prominence or power in Federal matters save as a 3rd party the minority Liberals where afraid to annoy, lest they loose power.

"Mulroney was your typical tax and spend Conservative but what he got canned for was NAFTA. The residue left the Bloc Quebecois, a party dedicated to the break up of the country, as the official opposition and it was the next election saw the Reform party emerge. The West has always brought forth "movements," the western Progressives joined with the Conservatives after the war and guessed it. The Reform party melded with the Progressive Conservatives and became the Conservatives.

"The Parliamentary system allows for this and the methodology of elections promotes it. One cannot spend more that 60 cents per voter in the riding up to $60,000.00 in a riding of say 100,000 folk and Elections Canada will match what you raise on your own if you need it. No union nor company may contribute and personal donations are held to $1100.00 annually. So quite literally the PM can hold onto his job if he can raise $30,000.00 and his party wins the most seats, meaning  a major party will spend $18 million to contest all 308 seats and it's all tightly audited. Another aspect is something called Question Period where any MP can get up an ask the government anything and the Minister responsible must answer for all Cabinet Members come from the ranks of the elected MPs. That is where the wit and repartee so well practiced by Winnie comes in. For most of the 140 years of this country, Liberals have been the government and in most cases more fiscally responsible than any right-wing Republican. What's in a name?"

VC: Brian Mulroney may have been a friend of Reagan and popular with many Republicans in the U.S., but in his later years in power he was far from being a "typical conservative" in the American or even Canadian sense. As I recall, after disappointing his conservative base with NAFTA, 71 tax increases, and a 7% value added tax levied on Canadians, he lost an unprecedented election and he brought about the destruction of his party in 1993. "A tax and spend conservative" is not a conservative!

Interestingly, George H. W. Bush (Bush #40) did almost about the same thing in the U.S (the GOP survived though), and it was his son who regrouped the party because of fear Sen. John McCain (R-Az) winning the nomination in 2000; John Majors did about exactly the same thing in Great Britain as Bush #40! It was as if these moderates, impersonating conservatives, were birds of a feather who flock together in the political winds of the 1990s.

But returning to Canada, Mulroney destroyed his Progressive Conservative [a telling oxymoron] Party, which was wiped out from Canadian politics – dropping from 153 seats and two seats! The Liberal party won, but most interesting were the gains of the conservative, western-based Canadian Reform party, which became the opposition. I understand the present Conservative Party of Canada today is made up of an alliance of parties led by the old Reform Party of Preston Manning.

In general, as the lessons of the U.S., Great Britain, and Canada in the 1990s demonstrate, when conservatives move too much to the center as "moderates" to preempt the modern liberals, they lose power.

Unfortunately, for most of the world, including Europe, Canada, Japan, even Russia today, "liberalism" has still the meaning of classical liberalism despite the new politics; while in the U.S., the modern liberals have little to do with the classical liberalism of William Gladstone and are big government lovers, proponents of statism and socialism, but most of them would deny it. And that is what most Americans mean by liberalism in politics today: socialism all but in name.

November election strategy!

Ben you are correct,

"As a certain President said once upon a time " this is the last stand for freedom, if we lose here there's no other place to go!" We need to be strong, fight, take it to them and stay on the offense, we don't need another laid back McCain type campaign!"

I saw Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fl) on Meet the Press last Sunday and he was very good. I just hope that whoever is chosen VP will be a help and not a hindrance.

And Ben even without a country music lesson, you are always armed!

Good post!

Romney's VP choices

Hello Ben, we are still in transit, but wanted to add my thoughts to the Romney VP discussion.

While I do like Marco Rubio, I think he is too young and probably has a lot to learn about politics, especially how to handle the media who are always trying to discredit young Republican upstarts.

I do believe that for the sake of unity, Ron Paul could be a good VP candidate choice for Romney. That will help energize the Republican Party and keep the Libertarians in our camp. I do still have some reservations about Paul's foreign policy ideas.

Another choice I would like is Mike Huckabee. Conservatives would have no reservations about him (as they have had with Romney), and Huckabee would make sure the South gets out the vote.

Chris Christie would make a good Cabinet choice, but sorry Ben, he is from the North too and also too fat, lol!

Wisconsin Recall election!

Exhilarating News!

Gov. Scott Walker (R) beat Tom Barrett (D) by seven points!
The truth is that Collecting bargaining has gone too far into the field of partisan politics while making this nation less competitive, worsening the deficit, and extending benefits beyond the fiscal capabilities of responsible local governments– and frankly, it is bankrupting the country. States and municipalities can no longer afford the government larguesse offered to state employees under the aegis of collective bargaining!

Government employees work less than private sector employees but protected by their unions can hardly be fired for negligence, sloppiness, or incompetence, and yet they make 20% to 30% more money (including benefits), than their counterparts in the private sector. This is not because of free market, but because of the unfair, intrusive hand of government, instigated and guided by the frequently corrupt unions. The movement needs to spread throughout the Midwest; Illinois should be next! MAF

Country music instructions...

Ben, that song, "When a man loves a woman, by Percy Sledge, I have heard before, and it is indeed a great tune!

You may then enjoy Billy Stewart's, "I do love you," and Peggy Lee's "why don't you do right"and the video is incredible!

A word about the Trayvon Martin- Zimmerman affair– I believe the Democrats are exploiting it for two reasons:

1) To foment racial strife even violence, as is usual for Democratic politics, particularly to reenergize their most reliable base for the polls this November (i.e., black Democrats) for the coming election.

2) To ignite opposition to state self-defense laws in Florida, Georgia, Texas and the rest of the South and West– i.e., " Stand your ground" (aka., "not duty to retreat"; this are the self-defense, legal concepts that susrum claimed he knew nothing about and called it "crap"!

They may succeed in the former (#1), but–and you are hearing this here first– it may cause the Democrats to lose the pivotal state of Florida (e.g., by losing not just the Cuban-American vote but the whole Latino-Hispanic vote (e.g., Mexicans, Nicaraguans, etc.).

There is a lot of friction in Florida between blacks and Hispanics and this may just tilt the balance again! Obama could conceivably even lose New Jersey, Colorado, and New Mexico, as well for picking up that fight and inciting racial hatred! If only we could find a way to also get Ohioans to go Republicans!

As far as #2, they may be able to slow down the spread of legal self defense laws in the mid-Atlantic states and the North, unfortunately, so that the thugs may continue to intimidate law abiding citizens, even in their homes.

Thanks for the Percy Sledge tune! And keep the teaching process going! Let me know if you have any further problems. We just began this process for alerting readers where comments are being posted. Ben, have a nice weekend.

The Latino vote... Jeb Bush-Romney ticket?

Update–According to a new McClatchy-Marist poll (March 26-2012):

Mitt Romney leads among men by 47-44, whites 51-40 and Latinos 48-37." Regarding the Hispanic (Latino) vote:
"The poll also measured what Jeb Bush or Mark Rubio would bring to a Romney ticket. An Obama-Joe Biden ticket ties Romney-Bush at 47-47 percent and leads Romney-Rubio at 49-44 among registered voters.

The country remains divided with no clear cut front-runner anywhere:

"Looking ahead to an Obama-Romney matchup, Obama holds 89 percent of Democrats, Romney gets 87 percent of Republicans and independents split 44-43 for Romney. MAF

"Bush's biggest strength is among Latinos, where he easily outperforms Rubio — despite Rubio's Cuban heritage — which leads many Republicans to dream of making inroads into the Hispanic vote not only in Florida but also nationwide. A Romney-Bush ticket beats Obama-Biden among Latinos by 57-39, a 18-point margin."

The only vote absolutely taken for granted by the Democrats are African-Americans and perhaps females:
"Obama leads among female voters by 48-42, and African-Americans by 91-6. "

Country music education!

Ben, you are giving me a good country music education. Do you like Jazz too? B.B. King, I believe, was supposed to come to Macon for a New Year's concert, but never heard anything else about it. I regret not going and taking the family, if it did take place. I am more of a Pink Floyd fan as you know, but keep the education going. MAF

Romney and Paul as the GOP ticket?

Great analytical Post Ben!

I fully agree with you. Santorum has now violated the 11th commandment out of frustration and that will help Romney. We are now in agreement with Chowder3, uneed, and Isabella; siding with the ladies who have stood with Mitt Romney should be a good thing!

I think that if Romney chooses Dr Paul as VP, it should be a good tactical ticket. Paul being a solid Christian from Texas would help with (1) the South against the charges of Romney's Mormonism; (2) the conservative base, not to mention; (3) the fastidious Libertarians; and the (4) energized youngsters who support him.

I think that is a reasonable compromise. In the election of 1800 Aaron Burr was Thomas Jefferson's vice-president, and the Republic survived that administration!

Given the fickle electorate and the unusual circumstances, I am beginning to think the Romney-Paul ticket is the best ticket for the GOP. Herman Cain with the right VP would have been the best candidate, but that is water under the bridge.

Like Koba says, "let the contest continue. We can all unite against the Red President in November." MAF

The Masses will show their heads

Ben I am convinced the Socialist minded Weekly Reader Club is sending out their instructions to their dutiful subjects.
You and I have discussed as the days draw nearer to this election the left will leave no stone unturned. They fully intend to wallow in the gutter. I am thankful Romney thus far has kept his eye on the goal and has not been distracted by the cheering or booing crowd. That's why I'm convinced he has Donald Trump to run interference for him...

I pray our country will follow the lead of Wisconsin. There is no turning back; turning back will mean America will become a memory.

"The Amateur"/ Wisconsin Recall election–good post!

My dear uneed,

"The Amateur" apparently should be a good book that needs to be read by those who still parrot, like the asinine girl in the political cartoon,"Obama is awesome!" and who plan to vote for Obama no matter what!

As far as the Wisconsin recall election, I was exhilarated beyond belief by the much salutary and necessary outcome! Just maybe we have not lost this country yet!

Gov. Scott Walker (R) bested Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett (D) by seven points! Collecting bargaining has gone too far into partisan politics as well as in making this nation less competitive, and it is bankrupting the country.

Government employees work less and make 20% more than private sector employees, not because of free market, but because of the unfair intrusive hand of government instigated and guided by the corrupt unions.

Thanks for the post, MAF

Ben, thank you for the update!

Hi Ben, thanks for the update in the local Macon newspaper Viewpoints debate– and your recapitulation of the (mis)deeds of the recent Democrat presidents. I fully concur. You may have noticed our friend Koba is back. He has been in Australia. Feel free to engage him in a political dialogue as he is another sagacious commentator in our small forum! MAF

Great Political Analysis!

Ben as usual you have written a very savvy political analysis. I agree that Romney will prevail barring a blunder or unforeseen circumstances. Keep up the country song titles. I am getting an education from that quarter as well, LOL!

And I read your article. Santorum, I suspect, has shot himself in the foot– fatally! MAF

Let the fight continue, and expect no quarter from media

Thanks for the updates. With Santorum doing so well in the south, it does seem to be a 2 man race. However, I am pleased that the base is allowed to vote their choice instead of meekly accepting the establishment Republican Line that we must accept Romney. They gave us the other moderate last time--McCain, and we know how that worked out. So I say let the contest continue. We can all unite against the Red President in November.

Note that the media will never be on our side since we serve antithetical interests: they serve the dictatorship of the socialist agenda and we serve the will of the people. They are the enemy, and I expect them to do all within their power to obscure or divert blame for Obama's economic failure by scare tactics, no matter how lame or inconsequential. They do not report the facts; They report THEIR facts.

Santorum vs Romney (and Ron Paul too)!

Ben, don't you agree with me now that with Santorum winning in the Alabama and Mississippi primaries, Newt should give it up and let the Northern boys, the Pennsylvania and Massachusetts kids have it out?

I think the two of them, Santorum and Romney (with Dr Paul in the background), all still fighting, helps maintain some needed publicity on the GOP contenders, rather than all centered exclusively and continuously on the "feats" of King Obama.

Moreover, the continued GOP nomination contention keeps the mainstream liberal media off guard as to who (of the two) finally set their cross-hairs of personal destruction as well. MAF

I too believe Newt should

I too believe Newt should give it up. That sort of turns me against Newt in many ways because he is being most self-centered and is not thinking about our great nation. No matter what the Republicans need to remain united in the Presidential election and clean house in the Senate ASAP.

The Liberals want to make the choice for us and as we see everyone on the left has an opinion on who it should be yet they continue to condone Obama on all he does to continually drag our nation to the floor.
We are weak with him and the longer he stays the weaker our image becomes.

The political fight is on...

Great posts, uneed, BenCat, Isabella, and Koba (Welcome back!)

I have also heard from Chowder3. She wrote me late last night:

"I voted for Mitt Romney without hesitation this past Tuesday. Why? He is the only candidate who has a business background. He would be a great leader, who would get things done — and America back on track! His Mormon beliefs do not bother me because Mormons have close, strong family units and missions with serious commitment required by their faith.

"Although I am in the health care business, RomneyCare in Massachusetts does not bother me either because it was a state initiative, not a national health care program like ObamacCare that mandates universal health care with no freedom of choice. But I must admit I have a nagging persistent concern — and that is Romney's troubling, dubious stand on the Second amendment.

"But in our perilous times, Rick Santorum may not be enough to stop Obama. Santorum's strong conservative social issues scare moderates, who unfortunately decide close elections. And if Romney chooses Senator Marco Rubio, they will be an unstoppable dynamite ticket.

"Koba, I sympathize with your sentiments, and I am also a social conservative, but in my opinion, we have a better chance to beat Obama with Romney than Santorum!

"Ben, I have read all you have written here, but I believe you wasted your vote with Newt. Get on the winning ticket in November, as you plan to do, so we can get Obama out of the White House! Isabella and uneed, I am with you too!"

And Koba, here is a good summation on the delegate count entitled "Reality Check: What do the 'real' Republican delegate numbers look like?" posted on

America's downward spiral

We received the following comment from Uneed to Dr. Faria's post above. Uneed wrote:

I too voted for Mitt Romney on Super Tuesday for all the same reasons. My hang-up remains with the Second Amendment. I do however know that Ted Nugent, a huge gun proponent, has endorsed Romney. Nugent told the Tribune that "one big thing that makes Romney attractive is that he has pledged to him that there would be no new gun laws in his administration."

In an interview with Mike Broomhead, a Phoenix radio host, Nugent argued that President Obama "hated America" and was out to "destroy freedom." He added that having Tim Geithner serve as Secretary of the Treasury was like having Jeffrey Dahmer run a children's playground.

“Basically, America is in a suicidal tailspin right now. Our government is out of control: The power abuse, the corruption, and the insanity of spending money that will never exist... The conclusion based on all the evidence I can find is that Mitt Romney has the best shot at bringing the U.S. Constitution, common sense, and the American way back to the White House.”

I pray this is true,

Thank you for getting that

Thank you for getting that posted for me;As we see for some reason there was just a glitch that day.

I'm back! So I'm thankful to know it wasn't a problem with my username etc.
Thanks Dr. Faria for posting my reply.

Combative spirit and optimism!


After yesterday's Super Tuesday, we find this morning no clear winner. Romney won Ohio by a thread and four other states, but Santorum won three states, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and N. Dakota in three different geographic areas!

I do like your optimism and combative spirit, but don't we need to rally by now behind a GOP standard bearer? Why is there so much skepticism about Romney's conservatism? And when is Obama's record going to be exposed and debated?

I am worried about Dr. Faria's comment and potential parallels with previous elections below as well.

I woke up this morning with a blue moon in my eyes

That's a few lyrics from the Soprano's theme song; but it rang clear to me this morning.

Isabella you ask 'when will Obama's record be exposed'?
That's what I too want to hear a lot more of. This week Sean Hannity exposed a 'coverup' of his background that was never exposed during the last election. And let me stop here and state Andrew Breitbart is actually the one that exposed it;Hannity reported it. Was it a smoking gun? No, but it showed and shows the media gives no attention to his record but they are willing to go to Texas and search under every stone for something on Rick Perry or send hundreds of people to Alaska to dig up whatever could be found on Sarah Palin... Four more years with a known end of our nation; or Vote for the Republican candidate no matter who he is and try to halt this run away locomotive.

Another lyric from that song;
"You have to burn to shine"!

Keep up the info on the race

I am in the land down under; hence, I have not kept abreast of who has won what states, nor of the delegate count. Yankee or no, I am still rooting for the social conservative Santorum. The battle against the socialist Obama is for later. Interesting that everyone here I work with brags on their government healthcare yet has private insurance due to the long wait for operations. Speaking of socialism, I ran across the oxymoron “benevolent socialism” while reading Witness (460). Benevolent socialism is like friendly cancer devouring its host.

Also any reference to the master George Jones’s songs cannot be in vain. He is the best. Does anyone have the Republican delegate count?

Here in Queensland they are having their state race. Labor is very strong here, but many grow weary, especially since Prime Minister Gillard and Labor helped pass a carbon tax, which passed the lower house. I am not sure if it has passed completely through the Parliament though. Her popularity is below even Obama’s due to this.
Forgive my divergence from the topic. Just needed to talk to some capitalists.

Deja vu all over again, the 1996 or 1980 Presidential election?

Deja vu all over again, 1996 (Bob Dole vs. Bill Clinton) with the result in 2012 that Obama wins again just like in Clinton's re-election?

As we approach the presidential election, the mainstream liberal media has no serious discussion about the need for drastically cutting government spending to balance the budget and reducing the massive government deficit.

And the real deficit is not $15 trillion– but between $60 and $120 trillion, over $400,000 per every citizen, children included, according to Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute. In George W. Bush's two-term presidency the deficit went up to $3 trillion; in Obama's single term it has gone over $5 trillion per year!

Where is the watch dog media to expose this travesty?

From the article here (Cynicism, Apathy, and Pragmatic Political Parties, 1997 above):

"while the time of reckoning for balancing the budget continues to be postponed. The truth is government spending continues to rise, and our duty to discharge the national debt, the future enslavement of our children, is not even being discussed. This topic is outside the liberal media's artificial frame of 'respectable' political debate ...

"And so with this ongoing political charade, it is no wonder only 25% of the eligible population voted in our last presidential election (1996) to reelect President Clinton, again, with less than a majority (49%). The truth is the last presidential election [1996] offered no real choice between the two major candidates, [Bob Dole and Bill Clinton]...

"Remember candidate Bob Dole stating there was a difference between him and President Clinton? During the debate, Bob Dole vociferated, 'I want to reduce government by 20%, President Clinton by 16%'... Wow! Great philosophical and moral choices in political philosophy!"

Yes, dear uneed, it will take a miracle indeed! Given the perception of conservative Republican voters that Romney may be another Bush 41 or a McCain, Obama may carry the day in November, and we may lose the country through a black hole of irresponsible government spending and socialism.

And if we win with Romney, there is a risk he might be another George W.H. Bush! We must risk the latter option supporting Romney– and hope for two miracles, that he might win and turn out to be another Reagan!

Great political advisers!

Dear Ben and Koba,

You guys would make excellent political advisers! I agree with much of what both of you say, and If you guys had advised George H. W. Bush #41, the president who derailed Reagan's legacy, perhaps we would not be where we are today. I blame George H. W. Bush for the downward spiral– morally, economically and socially– in which we find ourselves because of this horrible derailment off the Reagan path.

I am still reluctant, though, to place Romney at the same level as Bush #41 or John McCain, although the fact that McCain is one of Mitt Romney's advisers may be telling and scares me!

Another serious point that supports Koba's opinion is the fact that Romney's stand and record on the Second Amendment is murky and regrettable!

I am in accord with Isabella that today's Primaries in Michigan and Arizona will help decide the course of Romney and Santorum, but like uneed I remain deeply concerned. Thank you all for your great posts. MAF

Well Ben I believe that

Well Ben I believe that Romney will still be the nominee. I don't have any crystal balls but I am 'following the money' and the other numbers.

And it's going to take a load of $ to beat Obama. We must remember Obama has Soros and Buffet 'footing his bill' if he runs out of 'his own stash'. And Romney now has 'Trump' if he runs out of his own stash. It's going to take a lot of money to stay on the field with someone that is being funded by George Soros.
And I'm concerned that Romney isn't conservative enough,that even if he wins will we still have the same path to travel to a complete socialist nation? I'm concerned..
I try to believe that The Republican that gets the nomination will only be a 'catalyst' that slows that rate of travel ,,"UNTIL" the Best Conservative appears.
I am afraid if the brakes are not placed sooner than later; it's going to be too late..
I remain most concerned that Obama will be back. BUT I continue to pray for a miracle..because I do believe they exist.

I'm beginning to agree with you...


I don't believe Romney is a socialist, but I'm beginning to be convinced that Rick Santorum may be the right man for the GOP. If he wins in Michigan, a state Romney should easily win particularly with all the money he has spent campaigning, then it will speak volumes about the two men and what the American people are thinking.

I also agree with what you say about Ron Paul. Sometimes he's a conservative and sometimes a libertarian with some foreign policy opinions that I disagree with.

I have enjoyed reading your posts. Let's hope that whoever the GOP nominates will be able to beat Obama in the upcoming election.

Santorum surging ahead!

Rick Santorum is surging ahead, neck and neck with Mitt Romney!

But the American public continues to blame Congress (15% approval rating) for America's economic woes and not President Obama (48% approval rating).

Nevermind the U.S. House of Representatives was elected last November along with 1/3 of the U.S. Senate!

And Newt Gingrich is still battling for 3rd place with Dr Ron Paul but continues to be infused with money to continue his campaign!

Romney has won in New Hampshire (Jan 10), Florida (Jan 31), Maine (Feb 11).
Santorum has won in Iowa (Jan 3), and (Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri, Feb 7).
Gingrich was victorious in SC (Jan 21).

Gallop: "Santorum is now roughly tied with Romney for the lead, Gingrich has been relegated to third, and Paul is in a weakened fourth position. How long this scenario will last is anyone's guess, but will likely be dictated by the outcome of the next round of primaries at the end of February, in Arizona and Michigan."

If Obama gets re-elected there will be no pragmatism, but socialism will be pushed forward full steam ahead!

I remain most concerned

I'm concerned this clown will be re-elected and Obamacare won't be overturned. That one line item "obamacare" is what Concerns me a lot..
And as you state a full fledged socialist country will evolve from four more years of this..It can be down right depressing.

Romney was a socialist (Mass

Romney was a socialist (Mass healthcare) and a liberal on social issues. Now he says he has had a complete conversion to conservatism. We simply do not believe him.

Newt is for amnesty for illegal immigrants, the theory of man-made global warming (which = redistribution of wealth), and even worked with Clinton in the 1990s to pass gun control; moreover, he can be brilliant at times but also bizarre also, as when he made the pro-theory of man-made global warming advertisement with Comrade Pelosi.

Paul is libertarian, which sometimes puts him in the conservative camp and sometimes not. His foreign policy will likely be too hard for most Republicans to swallow.

Santorum is the only social conservative. His credentials are verifiable there, so his detractors will go after him on fiscal issues. I do not see any big vulnerability there, especially when compared to Romney, who was for state run health care before he was against it. Naturally the leftist media, who asked nothing of Obama when he ran for office in 2008 but to please love them, will continue to ask all Republicans absurd questions in an effort to glean some word or phrase which they can use against them, as with states banning contraceptives.

The real issue at this time should not be who can beat Obama; they all should be able to accomplish this. Now, we Republicans need to vote for which candidate represents us best. With amazing alacrity and acumen Obama has wrecked the US economy. People see this every time they try to find a job, buy gas, or attempt to buy virtually anything. We also see Obama saying no to jobs and to drilling in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and oil from Canada, while saying yes to rich donors at the wasted ½ billion dollars at Solyandra. But for now, we need to concentrate on who represents us best within the candidates running.

It is interesting that despite Romney’s millions, 5 years of running for office, the endorsement from the Republican establishment, and having been raised in Michigan there with his dad as governor that Santorum with his limited funds can even remain in the race with Romney, much less be even or ahead. Perhaps ideology trumps geography after all.

Like many voters, it did not set well with me when early on we were told to go with Romney as he was the only one we were told who could beat Obama. None sense. How can anyone make such an assumption? Moreover, the last time we went with the establishment moderate/liberal McCain, and look what happened. Why can the base and majority of the Republican Party not be allowed to vote for someone who represents us instead of the liberal, establishment choice? The Establishment Republicans would give us the choice between a liberal, socialist candidate who now says he is not vs the liberal, socialist Obama. What kind of choice is this? Let us decide, but let us not allow the liberal establishment to decide for us. We will talk unity and strategy once we have made our choice.

It is now legend the AAPS legally lanced the secret task force and pulled its secrets...into the sunshine. It destoyed the Health Security Act.

The Oath of Hippocrates
and the Transformation of Medical Ethics Through Time

Patients within a managed care system have the illusion there exists a doctor-patient relationship...But in reality, it is the managers who decide how medical care will be given.

Judicial activism...the capricious rule of man rather than the just rule of law.

The largest single problem facing American medicine today is the actions of government...

The lessons of history sagaciously reveal wherever governments have sought to control medical care and medical practice...the results have been as perverse as they have been disastrous.

Children are the centerpiece of the family, the treasure (and renewal) of countless civilizations, but they should not be used flagrantly to advance political agendas...

Prejudice against gun ownership by ordinary citizens is pervasive in the public health community, even when they profess objectivity and integrity in their scientific research.

The infusion of tax free money into the MSA of the working poor give this population tax equity with wealthier persons...

It was when Congress started dabbling in constitutionally forbidden activities that deficit spending produced a national debt!

Does the AMA have a secret pact with HCFA?

The lure of socialism is that it tells the people there is nothing they cannot have and that all social evils will be redressed by the state.

Canada's fatal error — Health Care as a Right!

The Cancer Risk from Low Level Radiation: A Review of Recent Evidence...

...Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of firearms.

Vandals at the Gates of Medicine — Have They Been Repulsed or Are They Over the Top?