Fool's Gold

I have had enough of the amoral criminals who are at present, in charge of the Democrat party in these United States of America.

With spiritual origins stemming from the gotcha journalism of Woodward & Bernstein, the Democrat party has since then steadily devolved away from traditional American values which have been historically shared by Democrats and Republicans alike.

There was once a day when Democrats like F.D.R. and Truman fought enemies such as Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo with dedication, passion and in full patriotic partnership with their opposition in the Republican party. And though the Republicans of that day fielded their candidates and campaigned with all due ardor, they never subverted the security of the Nation as a means to further their cause.

Just a few short decades ago, an American President, a Republican, was forced from office due to the fact that Articles of Impeachment against him were being brought to a vote in the United States House of Representatives. And rather than to inflict the greatest wound on the nation since the failed 1868 Johnson Impeachment, President Nixon, at the urging of Republican advisers and confidants and a delegation of senior Republican legislators, resigned the Office of the Presidency.

You will note the distinct difference in the response of the modern era's major parties relative to the conduct of their members and Chief Executive.

Both instances reflect that the prosecutions were for cover-ups, rather than for the petty crimes which underlaid the subsequent proceedings.

And in each case, officials, members and public support of both parties fought vociferously, passionately and with great dedication.

But where the Republicans eventually came to understand that a crime was indeed committed; that the cause of one man, one party or one term was just not worth the damage about to be wrought, they did the Honorable Thing. And after a hard-fought battle, they counseled the leader of their party to do likewise.

Which he did. And in so doing he left behind him a remnant; a vestige of honor upon which the Republican Party found solid ground and footing from which to ascend to where they are today.

Conversely, when the last Democrat President was similarly faced with Articles of Impeachment for a crime not at all unlike that of Richard M. Nixon; that is, a deliberate lie and orchestrated cover up of a petty-crime (and yes, sexual misconduct by Federal employees upon Federal property is indeed a crime), he failed to render the honor demanded of him by his country and history itself.

And in so doing, he left himself, his legacy and his party as soiled as the blue dress of the young intern he had so cynically used and then shamelessly discarded.

In times past, one's politics did not define one's party's entire scope of integrity, or the lack thereof.

Sadly though, such is the state of party politics in America today. In spite of each and every effort of the left to "hang" a scandal on George W. Bush, the truth has invariably come out in support of the current President's veracity.

Conversely the backfire from each attempt by the left to scandalize this administration has served to increasingly illustrate the Democrat party's perfidious failure of institutional character and integrity.

Gone is the day where the contentious yet committed camaraderie of a loyal opposition sharpened we opponents, as a brother sharpens a brother, or as iron sharpens iron.

Instead, what we've arrived at is a state where the far left has become so corrosive that it simply devours the traditionally good people, the historic base of the Democrat party. And in the same way that gold is refined from baser metals, that same corrosion separates that golden core from itself, leaving such precious metals to find and bond to it's kind.

This precious gold will, by nature, gravitate towards the Republicans, or at least, to like minded Americans of a more conservative nature.

And the dross which remains is at best, fools gold. Historically, Iron Pyrites on many occassions served the will of con-men, shysters and fly-by-night shills. Selling promises of rich strikes, lucrative claims and the effortless grasp of the easy life, the con-artists conned, and the dupes were duped.

Much as the class warriors of today's Democrat party sell false promises of taxing the rich, with lies to their constituents of a lucrative bounty to be had therefrom, and the allure of the easy life being within grasp, without merit nor effort.

They're selling fool's gold. To fools. So, just as the willingly incredulous were duped a century and a half ago, today's dupes blindly, willingly line up in droves, hands outstretched to eagerly pay for with their vote, their next load of Pyrite.

And it won't enrich them today, any more than it did then.

But they who peddle it make millions, and aquire power and influence far beyond their due or measure.

Of course, like any overly successful criminal, the hucksters of the left, the leaders and power brokers of the Democrat party are loath to relinquish that power or influence.

Knowing that if the fraud is exposed; if their ersatz Gold is revealed to be mere Pyrite that they will crumble as does the mineral at their core; they resort to any means imaginable to hide their crimes, to disguise their perfidy and to confuse the public which is by right, the jury of their peers.

Which is why the Berger Scandal is not a mere tempest in a teapot. Rather, it is or at least should be, the long overdue notice to the rest of America. It serves notice that the core of the Democrat party has, as a viable political force in America, completely and irrevocably lost it's soul, it's moral authority and it's very charter as the loyal opposition in this great land.

They are now only the opposition, having forfeited loyalty; that being defined as the Oath to Uphold and Defend the Constitution. Would that they would defend the principles of this precious document with the fervor and dedication they reserve to defending their figureheads, icons and candidates.

And their failed, collectivist philosophies.

This then is the field of war upon which the Democrats battle to forestall their rapidly encroaching demise.

It is at best, a rear-guard action, and it is doomed to fail.

Rats, when confronted with rising water within a sinking ship at least have the sense to try to save themselves, jumping overboard and clinging to whatever flotsam and jetsam remains.

Odd, isn't it, that the hard core of the Democrat left clings so stubbornly to the taffrail of their figurative Titanic. And it's not tragic that they go down in the denial of the vessel's demise, all the while loudly proclaiming her seaworthiness.

And curiously, in direct contradiction of their claims that it was a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy which laid the mortal iceberg in their foundering ship's path.

This then is an invitation to such remnants of the Democrat party who still hold honor dear. Who value fealty to Country and the Constitution to be of a higher value than a false loyalty to a failed Party.

Your ship is sinking, and I plead to you.

Release your grasp on the fool's gold, and have at least the sense of a rat and abandon ship!

Safe passage awaits, and you'll be pulled into the lifeboat by willing arms.

Comments

[Kim du Toit]

Damnit, Brother Jim, but that is one fine post.

[Rivrdog]

And those abandoning the foundered Ship of Fools will find that many of their rescuers are indeed past members of that failed Party.

[Guy S.]

It is a sweet thing when there is synchronicity between thought, pen, and the meditative action of the sea. And if not a eulogy for the Democratic Party, then a fine preface to same. Outstanding post.

[Jay G]

Jim,

If you're not a professional (i.e. paid) writer, you should be.

Any major newspaper would be lucky to have you aboard. (Except, of course, that you "bat for the wrong team", so to speak...)

[Patrick]

Damn fine writing, Jim. The sad part of the left's move leftward is that it forces weakminded Republicans to the center or left center, for political gain. So the screeching about the neocons and far right running the show now couldn't be further from the truth, and it's because the left has left everything except the waywayway left open for occupation. If mainstream Democrats would move back to left center, it'd force the true Conservatives out and we could really fix some of the mess we've made trying to keep a chicken in every pot.

[Scott]

Damn fine writing here. I fear any converts in the making have already done so. It was too late when Clinton looked us all in the eye, pointed his finger bold faced lied to us then got away with it. Now he's still getting tax payer money and making millions off speaking engagements and book deals. phreekin ridiculous. excuse me while I go break something.
Clinton Fibbed! Monica Shoulda Been Bibbed!

[A Recovering Liberal]

This post ranks right up there with "Hard Hats." I applaud you, Jim (c:

[geekWithA.45]

Whoa!

Damnit Jim, I had an essay on the same topic growing in the chute, and yours is way better than mine. This is an admission I do not make lightly. Well done!

Peace of mind comes from many sources: a loving family, a good dog, money in the safe, a .45 under the pillow, and a vast pile of formidable friends.

[Rumbear]

A well written and sound presentation. Good stuff, indeed.

[The Other Mike S.]

What a myopic drone. You think that by saying you own the high moral ground, it is so. Typical.

You attempt to equate Nixon ordering a break-in with Clinton getting a hummer?

Of course Nixon resigned. He would have been found guilty and removed from office. Obviously, the same couldn't be said for Clinton, despite your most deeply held hopes and desires.

And equating the current crop of Republicans in power as "conservatives" is laughable. They are Big Government whores of the same ilk as their Democratic brethren.

If you honestly want to affect change in our government, you'll vote Libertarian. But you won't, because you're too deeply embedded in the Repubs camp.

[W.R.X.]

Even when I was a die-hard Libertarian I wasn't that nutso. Tell me good sir, how do you plan to "affect change" in a two-party system?

[The Other Mike S.]

WRX: Look what happened in 2000. Nader arguably lost the election for Gore.

Had Perot not misplaced his backbone, he clearly would have impacted the election in 1996.

If you don't vote your conscience, you're right, nothing will ever change. Unless the boys in both parties see that America is truly sick and tired of "business as usual", they'll continue with their games. Why should they change?

I just can't believe that most Americans are satisfied with the candidates from either party. It's come down to the lesser of two evils in the voting booth.

It can be done. It just takes personal conviction.

[Idler]

"You attempt to equate Nixon ordering a break-in with Clinton getting a hummer?"

Not so fast. He equated the attempts at covering up, not the original crimes...... and oh by the way, Nixon's lil' break in pales in comparison to Clinton being caught with a couple hundred FBI files of potential political enemies.

Further, the "it's all about sex" meme- horseshite. An attempt by the chief law enforcement officer in the land to deny a citizen (Jones) her day in court- thinking there's some constitution trashing going on there. And lest you try the "Jones's case had no merit" defense, keep in mind Clinton settled out of court with Jones for much cash..... why do that if he didn't do anything wrong?

And now the latest travesty- the former NS adviser gets caught crotching top secret documents and lamely says it was inadvertent..... how in hell does one inadvertently shove documents down his pants? Multiple times? This is treasonous activity, yet where is the outrage? Where are the front page headlines calling for justice in our supposed "objective" newsrags? Pathetic.

[The Other Mike S.]

Idler:

Nixon's lil' break in pales in comparison to Clinton being caught with a couple hundred FBI files of potential political enemies.

That has got to be the saddest bid of revisionist history I may have ever witnessed. You need to join the real world.

Nixon was going to be impeached for ordering the break-ins. The cover-up charges would have been icing on the cake.

Clinton was not found guilty. He was not found guilty of anything with Jones.

Why the hard-on over Berger? Kerry isn't yet president, Berger was an aide/consultant. Oh, and this happened 7 months ago, and charges still have yet to be filed. Any idea why that might be? No evidence, perhaps. Sure makes for splashy headlines, though.

At least the Repubs aren't resorting to the gotcha journalism that Jim and all of you Repubs so despise.

[Mike7411]

"You attempt to equate Nixon ordering a break-in with Clinton getting a hummer?"

Quick, real life history lesson. Nixon did NOT order or at first know of the break in. He did what he thought was the job of a leader, he tried to cover for the people who did it, and lied doing it.

He did wrong, and in the end understood that and resigned.

Google can be your friend.

Mike7411

[The Other Mike S.]

Mike7411:

Really? Then why was this item included in his Articles of Impeachment (Article 2, Number 3):

He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.

[newscaper]

for The_Other_Mike,

Speaking as a small "l" libertarian (I was a big L one many years ago) -- the problem with your examples of Nader and Perot are that in BOTH cases they hurt the major party *closest* to them -- and helped put the one *furthest* from them in power.

How the hell is that a good thing?!? (in the real world, that is)

[The Other Mike S.]

News: Short-term, you're right, it doesn't do much, and may even seem counter-productive. I'm in this for the long-haul. Our political system has got to be shaken up, or it will collapse under it's own weight(sorry for the too often used phrase!).

People on both sides vote by party line, regardless of what their candidate says or does. I can't believe there are very many Repubs that approve of granting amnesty to illegals, inflating an already bloated Medicaid, and building a huge deficit for our kids. Yet they'll still vote for Bush.

"It's better than that commie wannabe war hero Kerry".

Dems can come up with a half dozen similar items about why Kerry sucks, but he'll still get their vote.

"The lesser of two evils."

That's just insane. The politicians know this, so nothing ever changes. Unless or until a third or fourth party emerges with some strength (10%+ of the vote) we're never going to see any change in our systems.

I'll cast my vote towards that cause.

[Jim]

Other Mike Asshole.

Myopic Drone?

At least unlike you, I can successfully read a legal document. I can also recall the history which I so ardently watched unfold before my eyes from that era.

From the actual Articles of Impeachment:

Following the Resolution of Article one, we find:

Article One, Paragraph Two

On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities.

(emphasis; mine)

And the passage you cited?

Article Two, Section No.3

He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.

(emphasis; mine, again)

Read the whole of the Articles of Impeachement, Other Mike Asshole.

In their entirety, they make no reference whatsoever to a Nixonian involvement in the original Watergate burglary. None!

The entire prosecution of the Watergate scandal in the House of Representatives was in regards to the failed cover up of the break in.

Not of the break in, itself.

And until you can learn to properly understand both history and a factual legal document, do not ever come onto my pages again and accuse me, or anyone here of myopia, you fucking witless, self-righteous contrarian shit.

Which disease you render laughable, having your head so far up your ass that total darkness is the brightest part of your world.

Your hypocrisy reeks to the skies, Other Mike Asshole. You have the gall to decry my "owning the moral high-road...", and all the while your very first words here were a direct, personal insult.

You claim to be a Libertarian. Bullshit. You are at the very best, a mere Contrarian., being much closer in all your writings to a mere Peroist Reform Party puke. That is, if you can't have it your way, you're again' it. That's clear as all hell from reading scores of your comments on sites clear throught the blogosphere.

Now, here's an insult for you, Other Mike Asshole;

Fuck Off and Die.

And don't come back and piss me off, either. In fact, just don't come back at all, unless you can do so without using an insult as your cherished "opening salvo".

Otherwise, I'll delete your bullshit and ban your ass so fast you'd think Steve H. is slow roasting you in Hell for Christmas.

Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX

[JJ]

Um...ok that settled that ;)

I thought this was beautifully written and expresses what's gone wrong within the Democratic party with a sincere motive. We should all be so eloquent.
Thank you,
~JJ

[A Recovering Liberal]

The Other Mike S. said Dems can come up with a half dozen similar items about why Kerry sucks, but he'll still get their vote.

Wrong again, darlin'.

I'm a registered Dem. In the California recall, Tom McClintock received my vote because he appeared to have a solid grasp of finances -- because, ya know, the recall was all about the budget.

And in the California primary, George Bush received my vote -- only because Joe Lieberman already dropped out of the race.

Some of us have the cojones to vote our conscience, not our party.

[Heywood]

Jim: as per your usual insight: Spot.On. Bravo.

[Val Prieto]

Gold, Jim. This post is pure gold.

[The Other Mike S.]

Are you saying that members of the Committee for the Re-election of the President – those that committed the break-in, were not members of the “secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities”? If not, I stand corrected.

do not ever come onto my pages again and accuse me, or anyone here of myopia,

If stating that

for crimes not at all unlike that of Richard M. Nixon isn't myopic, then we must be using different dictionaries for the definition. At best, Nixon lied, tried to influence the testimony of others, withheld papers, participated in a cover up, misused campaign funds, caused IRS audits to be conducted on his enemies and illegally used government resources, including the CIA, FBI and Secret Service. Clinton was accused of lying, withholding papers and trying to influence the testimony of others. Accused, and found not guilty. Nixon resigned in shame, a beaten, alcoholic shell of a man.

Yeah, they're the same alright. No myopia there.

You claim to be a Libertarian. Bullshit. You are at the very best, a mere Contrarian., being much closer in all your writings to a mere Peroist Reform Party puke. That is, if you can't have it your way, you're again' it. That's clear as all hell from reading scores of your comments on sites clear throught the blogosphere.

There goes that myopia again. Libertarianism is contrary to far right and far left dogma. You just happen to be so far to the right, you can't relate to anyone to the left of Pat Robertson. Fiscally conservative – something you Repubs claim to love but do nothing about, and socially liberal – so far removed from your conscientiousness as to be non-existent, are our hallmarks. If you've really read my comments and my site, you'll know I hold both of those principles in high regard.

And don't come back and piss me off, either. In fact, just don't come back at all, unless you can do so without using an insult as your cherished "opening salvo".

Fuck off and die back at ya, you myopic, sanctimonious prick

Otherwise, I'll delete your bullshit and ban your ass so fast you'd think Steve H. is slow roasting you in Hell for Christmas.

That would be very Ashcroft of you, and fully expected.

[Jim]

Other Mike S.

The only reason I'm going to leave your tripe on the screen, is to illustrate what a complete and total piece of shit you really, truly are.

You're now just trying to dance around the facts, which are:

1. Nowhere in the Articles of Impeachment was Nixon ever accused of planning, orchestrating, authorizing or overseeing the break in, itself. Period. End. Full-Stop.

2. Your precioius Libertarian party is now at best, a mere footnote in any electoral history. I'm not going to get into a huge debate about Libertarianism here, nor am I going to allow you to do so, either.

3. I'll glady debate such with a courteous proponent of Libertarianism, which you are not.

4. You are a complete boor, both here and at many other blogs where I watch you deposit your shit on other people's carpets.

5. You have your own blog on which to waste bandwidth. Go spin your shit over there where readers are few* and those who give a damn about you are fewer still. As evidenced by the Sitemeter stats (Apr.'04 to present) from your site. You can't seem to attract your own readers, so you try to leverage the readership of others?

So very weak and pathetic.

*VISITS

Total 259
Average Per Day 4
Average Visit Length 1:15
Last Hour 2
Today 4
This Week 30

PAGE VIEWS

Total 370
Average Per Day 6
Average Per Visit 1.4
Last Hour 2
Today 5
This Week 42

6. You may claim to hold our founding principles in high regard. I won't argue that you don't. But really, what you hold in the highest regard is your own overinflated opinion of yourself.

You are the worst enemy of your own cause.

7. And insofar as santimonious? Go look in the mirror, fuckwit. The very rhythim, cadence and meter of almost everything I've ever seen you write is phrased in the literary voice of one who is judging from upon high.

You've not a shred of humility in one word of your writings. And that, sir, shows you to be much less than the paragon of political or just plain human virtue than you hold yourself up to be.

8. Now, in the name of all that that you hide under your bed and piss your jammies in fear of, I do hereby and in the name of John Ashcroft, the Boogeyman General of the United States of America, ban your sorry ass.

Which is my polite way of ensuring that you indeed, Fuck Off And Die.

Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX

[Jay G]

Remind me never, ever, ever, under any circumstances, no matter how much tequila I've had to drink, ever get into an argument with Jim.

That was beautiful, sir.

A bit like watching a squirrel take 00 buck, but wonderful nonetheless... ;)

[Ironbear]

Nice analysis Jim. And thanks for taking the Contraian apart before I got to him. ;]

It's guys like the Other_Mike_S that give Libertarians a bad name.

Well... them and some of the nutcases that we nominate, but let's not go there, m'kay? ;)

[marcus]

like something that's stuck on your shoes.......like the smell of a 3 day old shirt....like the memory of a wound caused by someone hurting you for your own good. All unnecessary distractions when trying to make a simple point like Jim is doing here.

We NEED Bush, not Kerry.

I don't expect anyone to back me up on this, as usual. Keep it simple, keep it right. Bush.

[Raging_Dave]

As much as I hate to do so Marcus, I agree with you. We need Bush. Right now I'm not to fond of him, but if FATAC get into office, I expect to see an attack against a major US city not long afterwards.