Tag Archives: nsa
Neighbors and friends call you nosy? Always wanting to listen in to what other people are talking about? Well, the NSA has the career for you – just check out this commercial for more details!
What: Saturday nights were meant for cigars and politics.
Hear Taylor and his co-host Liz Harrison talk about everything from the past week – from politics, to news, to books, and entertainment. Whatever comes to mind, and of course, sobriety is not likely.
Tonight: Big, big week this week and we talk to Jackie Bodnar from FreedomWorks about it. Is Edward Snowden a hero, traitor or both? Is the US lying about what the NSA program goes? Are the companies allegedly tied to it doing the same thing?
When: Tuesday, June 11th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific
What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.
For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)
Tonight: George will be talking about Islam, National Security, Star Wars, TSA, NSA, and the liberals keeping up their war on guns. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.
Julie Borowski, the Token Libertarian Girl, explores the logic of NSA Surveillance, and the ridiculous response that if one is not a criminal, there shouldn’t be any concern about government watching what one is doing.
Call it “fundamental transformation.” Call it a “coup d’etat” (like one of the architects of opposition to the “evil empire” under Ronald Reagan). Call it a “revolution from above.” But don’t call it American.
The e-scandals or revelations about the NSA tapping the meta-data of Verizon, T-mobile, AT&T and Sprint and data-mining major Internet companies only confirm what we all knew about the U.S. government: All this spy stuff is not for “them,” it’s for “us.” Indeed, as Forbes reports, the Verizon order specifically targeted Americans, not foreigners.
Furthermore, the explosive report about Project PRISM and the nine major Internet companies involved shows not only that top U.S. intelligence officers lied repeatedly about surveillance on millions of Americans, but it belies that the everyday behavior of citizens was being analyzed.
This hearkens back to the words of Maxine Waters, the rambling socialist “liberal” that she is, who bragged about a data-mining operation run by the Obama campaign that would blow people’s minds:
“The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life,” Representative Maxine Waters told former CNN contributor Roland Martin. “That’s going to be very, very powerful. That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that.”
Maxine continued to give the game away. “They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”
The important point is that there is nothing ideologically that restrains a “progressive” from using and abusing the American government to achieve narrow political ends. Alinsky taught precisely that way of utilizing instruments of power; and Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both disciples of that master radical tactician.
The agencies of the DOJ, DHS, EPA, IRS, HHS, and NSA are seen by the radicals who comprise this government as mere appendages of their progressive machine; and as such, they are being custom-designed to control Americans and squelch political dissent. The Obama administration has gone after whistleblowers to an extent unseen before in American history. It has rewarded known liars and gone after ordinary, law-abiding citizens.
When progressives balk at the notion that they had anything to do with fabricating these totalitarian vestiges being thrown open before a dumb-founded public, it behooves us to remind them that they tailor-made them. It wasn’t George W. Bush or Barack Obama who foisted them upon an unwitting public, it was the artists and the entertainers, the professors and the schoolteachers, the lawyers and the judges, the unions and the activists, who made the notion of a government that controls the people mainstream.
Progressives can scapegoat Bush and deflect responsibility onto others, apologize to future generations and condescend to us that it is all for our own good, point the fingers at conservatives or launch irrelevant epithets like ‘racist’ and ‘sexist,’ or smear those who disagree with them and call them out for their delusions. But the fact remains that a big, all-powerful state has always been the progressives’ modus operandi.
So when the awesome force of the United States government comes untethered from its moorings, crashing through the countryside like a Leviathan unbound — don’t say you weren’t warned. There was ample warning all around the progressives; but in their haughty rush to foist their baseless utopia upon an unreceptive populace, they smashed the most prosperous, powerful, and just society known to man.
A nation that had rescued millions from tyranny and totalitarianism. One that had provided a port in the storm for the oppressed and the repressed. One that has stood as an exemplar to the world. And even now, in its crestfallen glory, it provides inspiration to billions around the world to lift themselves up from poverty and desperation to adopt free enterprise.
Just a few weeks ago, President Obama addressed young people at a college graduation ceremony. During his address, he downplayed all talk of impending “tyranny.” It was a signal foreshadowing that the scandals now being reported in the mainstream media were all but to be a temporary distraction and that soon everything would be “normalized.”
That is to say, politicians like himself would eventually come to be in control of every aspect of people’s lives and there would be nothing to worry about. In reality, the U.S. government is accruing power to become a de facto dictator over people’s lives, fortunes, and political opinions; and upon penalties like tax confiscation and medical denials, dissent could be smothered and the torch of freedom doused.
Anyone that has spent more than five minutes delving into the background of the progressive media’s appointed Messiah — the self-professed Marxist radical community organizer and “regular” attendee of the Jeremiah Wright school of America-hatred — a man so well-versed in the tactics of the leftist agitator Saul Alinsky that he was dubbed “the master” — current American president Barack Hussein Obama is wholly unsurprised by the borderline totalitarian trajectory of the nation.
As a student of Soviet history, a fluent speaker of Russian and a journalist who worked a short walk from Red Square in the old state press building of ITAR-TASS, I’ve always been impressed by the accounts of KGB defectors describing national politics in America. One such account is that of Yuri Bezmenov, who was a KGB propaganda specialist embedded in the Canadian press, who describes the open (i.e. non-clandestine) effort to ideologically subvert the United States:
The most fascinating thing about this interview is that there is no talk of grand conspiracies. No microphones in Coca-Cola bottles, no cloak-and-dagger exchanges of briefcases, no blowing up of bridges, and none of the “James Bond cliches” that animate the public imagination about espionage. What Bezmenov says is this:
“Ideological subversion is the process which is legitimate, overt and open. You can see it with your own eyes. All you have to do… all American mass media has to do… is to unplug their bananas from their ears, open up their eyes, and they can see it. There’s no mystery. There’s nothing to do with espionage. I know that espionage, intelligence gathering, looks more romantic. It sells more deodorants through their advertising, probably. That’s why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond type of thrillers.
But in reality, the main emphasis of the KGB is not in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion, and opinion of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process, which we call either ideological subversion or “active measures,” aktivniye meripriyatiye in the language of the KGB, or psychological warfare.
What it basically means is to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country. It’s a great brainwashing process, which goes very slow, and it’s divided in four basic stages.
The first one being demoralization — it takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years which it requires to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy, exposed to the ideology of the enemy. In other words, Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students without being challenged or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism or American patriotism.
The result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the 1960s, drop-outs or ‘half-baked intellectuals,’ are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern.
You cannot change their mind. Even if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. In other words, these people… the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To rid society of these people, you need another 15 to 20 years to educate a new generation of patriotically minded and commonsense people who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States society.”
During the last half of the previous decade, I attended an M.A. program in International Studies and then a PhD. program in Political Science, and I personally studied Marx & Marxism, Post-Soviet Russia, and also the intersection of civil liberties and the “war on terror.” I can say with certainty that the majority of professors on the faculty were one variant or another of Marxist; and tellingly, one professor claimed to be on the fence between Keynesianism and Marxist-Leninism. Far more common in academia than even the doctrinaire paleomarxist is the “neomarxist,” who believes in such things as “social justice” and spreading Marxist ideas through doubletalk and imbuing redistributionist values in the culture.
No… America having once been a free society, all those who would have sought to weaken the U.S. would have to have done to undermine it, or even turn it into a vehicle for advancing their own political agenda, would be to embed self-defeating ideas in the minds of the intelligentsia and have them indoctrinate teachers, journalists, and artists, all the way down to schoolchildren, and as a new initiative would have it about “free” daycare, toddlers.
“Progressive” ideas would be taught in school K-12 and their antitheses of liberty and individual rights stripped from the curriculum. Government would become in the minds of the misled a means of equalizing wealth and achieving the needs of the poor. The indispensable concept is that government as an intermediary between civil and economic relations would be deemed necessary in order to protect people from each other and themselves.
Bezmenov’s ideas are not fanciful relics of the Red Scare fears that many Americans felt during the Reagan-era generation. The left-wing program he described — demoralization, destablization, crisis, and normalization — is specific and relevant. Does anyone doubt that the Obama administration’s goal is to capitalize on crisis as a way of furthering its agenda? Both Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel have explicitly used language advocating never letting a good crisis go to waste.
The way to get both progressives and “conservatives” to cede to this concept that government is needed as an intermediary between all human relations is to spread the notion that it is needed to control others. On the leftist side, the idea that economic justice demands redistribution and government intervention would become the norm.
On the right side, the fear that Muslims are everywhere and likely to blow up a shopping mall near you would become widespread; and thus, the matrix-like government sweep of information to protect us from the ubiquitous threat of Islam writ large could be accepted as a necessary evil. Never mind that there are hundreds of millions of Americans who want nothing to do with Islam culturally, and an easy solution is to keep people from terrorist states out of the country to begin with.
Like socialized medicine. Anticipating the looming disaster of Obamacare, whose privacy-destroying implications are only now being grasped, along with the dismantling of Americans’ right to self-determination, former President Ronald Reagan had this to say (worth quoting at length):
“Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
There are many ways in which our government has invaded the precincts of private citizens, the method of earning a living. Our government is in business to the extent over owning more than 19,000 businesses covering different lines of activity. This amounts to a fifth of the total industrial capacity of the United States.
But at the moment I’d like to talk about another way. Because this threat is with us and at the moment is more imminent.
One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.
Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.”
The American people continue to reject socialized medicine, and so they protested against it in 2010. And as any reader of Saul Alinsky could have predicted, the government was turned against the protesters. The IRS’ tax exempt office acted as an instrument of political suppression and refused to authorize tea party, conservative and pro-Constitution groups in the manner it would rubberstamp progressive groups.
But why should we be surprised? Between 94% and 98% of the campaign contributions of the National Treasury Employees Union representing the IRS were given to Democrats in the last few national elections. Professors were major donors to the Obama campaign in the last election. The 90%-95% level of support given to Democrats by professors, teachers, artists, lawyers, bureaucrats and minorities is simply unnatural for a purportedly free society. It smacks of patron-client cronyism and a concerted program to select fellow-travelers for offices across the land.
It is highly disturbing to see political correctness seeping into the U.S. military. Todd Starnes reports that a soldier is being reprimanded for even reading Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. One can be sure if he were reading one of Barack Obama’s autobiographies, not a word would have been said to him.
But in one sense, one could understand why military brass who are sympathetic to the progressive agenda, having been educated in America’s universities, would be skittish about enlisted men reading such “reactionary” ideas as the ones animating the American Revolution of limited government, liberty and individual rights. Never mind that the entire military and the Commander-in-Chief swear loyalty to the U.S. Constitution. But “what difference does it make,” right?
The American people must not be fatigued by these scandals, and should see them for what they are: declarations that their government has been seized from them by a faction calling itself “progressive.” Unless something more serious than idle banter among the Washington political class is done, the government will only grow in its attacks upon the personal lives of Americans. The state will swell until it swallows society whole and the self-determination of the individual along with it.
The New York Times, Huffington Post, and the Atlantic are blasting the Obama administration for multiple NSA-related scandals. It is going to be hard for their readers to miss and not be impressed.
The current Internet environment is now such that those who were only tagging along in support of President Obama due to peer pressure may finally be peeled away. A breaking news story showing the NSA and FBI engaged in massive surveillance through 9 Internet programs should help spread this negativity towards the U.S. government in general like a contagion.
What is the latest scandal, which should toss even more fuel on the fire?
The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to track a person’s movements and contacts over time.
The highly classified program, code-named PRISM, has not been disclosed publicly before. Its establishment in 2007 and six years of exponential growth took place beneath the surface of a roiling debate over the boundaries of surveillance and privacy. Even late last year, when critics of the foreign intelligence statute argued for changes, the only members of Congress who know about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues. …
So with no further adieu, here’s the liberal paper-of-record on a sweeping NSA program that implies all American citizens are suspected of terrorist ties:
The Obama administration is secretly carrying out a domestic surveillance program under which it is collecting business communications records involving Americans under a hotly debated section of the Patriot Act, according to a highly classified court order disclosed on Wednesday night.
The order, signed by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in April, directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over “on an ongoing daily basis” to the National Security Agency all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”
The order does not apply to the content of the communications.
The left-wing blogosphere has gone nuts… wait, gone nutsier, after the New York Times reported what Glenn Greenwald of the left-wing Telegraph scooped them on. Huffington Post ran the feature image of this post on its front page, to the chagrin of hordes of lefty drones.
Here is one excerpt from the HuffPo-ran AP article that shows we are not talking about a mere conflation of Obama and Bush:
James Bamford, a journalist and author of several books on the NSA, said it’s very surprising to see that the agency tracks domestic calls, including local calls. In 2006, USA Today reported that the NSA was secretly collecting a database of domestic call information. However, some phone companies denied any involvement in such a program.
Bamford’s assumption was that the uproar over a separate, post-9/11 warrantless wiretapping program and the departure of the Bush administration meant that the NSA had been reined in.
“Here we are, under the Obama administration, doing it sort of like the Bush administration on steroids,” he said in an interview with the Associated Press. “This order here is about as broad as it can possibly get, when it comes to focusing on personal communications. There’s no warrant, there’s no suspicion, there’s no probable cause … it sounds like something from East Germany.”
Assuming that at least some HuffPo readers think East Germany was bad, that’s pretty strong criticism to publish on the big blog’s pages. Another non-righty site Atlantic Wire also had some caustic words for the Obama admin in a piece called “Phone Sex, Banks & Google for Emails: The NSA Spying Is Bigger Than Verizon”:
And the NSA isn’t just collecting the things we say. It’s also tracking what we buy and where we go. In 2008, The Wall Street Journal‘s Siobhan Gorman reported that the NSA’s domestic data collection “have evolved to reach more broadly into data about people’s communications, travel and finances in the U.S. than the domestic surveillance programs brought to light since the 2001 terrorist attacks.” That means emails records, bank transfers, phone records, travel records.
…And the NSA would never abuse its awesome surveillance power, right? Wrong. In 2008, NSA workers told ABC News that they routinely eavesdropped on phone sex between troops serving overseas and their loved ones in America. They listened in on both satellite phone calls and calls from the phone banks in Iraq’s Green Zone where soldiers call home. Former Navy Arab linguist, David Murfee Faulk described how a coworker would say, “Hey, check this out… there’s good phone sex or there’s some pillow talk, pull up this call, it’s really funny, go check it out.” Faulk explained they would gossip about the best calls during breaks. “It would be some colonel making pillow talk and we would say, ‘Wow, this was crazy.'”
The coup-de-grace is an opinion piece from the tissified New York Times that has to be seen to be believed. Here’s just a taste of what the editorial board had to say:
Within hours of the disclosure that the federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.
Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability. The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.
John Nolte is quite right about the mainstream media not breaking one of the big scandal stories; but if there is a time for anything, it is for the conservative right to coax the left into unifying with them on civil liberties issues. It is outstanding that the left-wing punditocracy has turned to this extent on not just the President, but also acknowledges some basic principles the American right have been clamoring about for years! There is not a ‘but’ coming… take it and appreciate it for a change.
If right and left can agree on the importance of civil liberties, and see through the transparent abuse of the “war on terror” as a justification to deprive citizens of rights, then not all is lost. Maybe lefties will eventually be much more open to truths that were discovered hundreds of years ago with the founding of this country.
Quite simply, the Founders had it right. Citizens own the government and should be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It is the police’s job to investigate crimes with tools respecting the rights of citizens and to prevent crimes based on publicly acquired knowledge.
Police do not have a mandate to trample the rights of citizens and to treat them as if their lives are open books for ‘authorized’ bureaucrats or officials to read. In a bit of coincidence, Orwell’s 1984 was written 64 years ago. It should be taken as a warning.
When every American citizen is suspected of being a terrorist, there can be no privacy and no respite from the state’s intrusions. Democrats who say they care about civil liberties: Can you hear me now?
This article was adapted and extended from an IJReview article.
“Let us disappoint the men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country.”
— John Adams
The number of scandals involving the encroachment of the Obama Administration into – and onto – the constitutional rights of American citizens is beyond stunning. And it is without question criminal in many cases. But with an Attorney General seated who – as a practice – routinely tries to manipulate the limits of the law to affect an ideological agenda, and a federal “classification system” that keeps those elected to represent us in Congress from bringing issues of government instituted malfeasance to light, what recourse is left the American citizen?
These encroachments against the United States Constitution are the product of over one-hundred years of Progressive political advances in the area of government. Put succinctly, two of the founding principles of the Progressive Movement; two of the “givens” held in understanding by each and every Progressive, are that: a) Progressives are enlightened; intellectually superior to the masses; and, b) that through centralized government, Progressives can help the masses help themselves to a better life, regardless of whether they want it or not. Once these two facts are understood, you can begin to understand some of the declarations made by Mr. Obama and his spokespeople about the many scandals – or what We the People perceive to be scandals – surrounding the Obama Administration.
According to R.J. Pestritto, the Charles & Lucia Shipley Chair in the American Constitution at Hillsdale College and author of American Progressivism, ““America’s original Progressives were also its original, big-government liberals.”
Jonah Goldberg writes of Pestritto’s examination of the Progressive Movement in Liberal Fascism:
“They set the stage for the New Deal principles of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who cited the progressives – especially Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson – as the major influences on his ideas about government. The progressives, Pestritto says, wanted ‘a thorough transformation in America’s principles of government, from a government permanently dedicated to securing individual liberty to one whose ends and scope would change to take on any and all social and economic ills.’
“In the progressive worldview, the proper role of government was not to confine itself to regulating a limited range of human activities as the founders had stipulated, but rather to inject itself into whatever realms the times seemed to demand.
“…progressives called for a more activist government whose regulation of people’s lives was properly determined not by the outdated words of an anachronistic Constitution, but by whatever the American people seemed to need at any given time.
“This perspective dovetailed with the progressives’ notion of an ‘evolving’ or ‘living’ government, which, like all living beings, could rightfully be expected to grow and to adapt to changing circumstances. Similarly, progressives also coined the term ‘living Constitution,’ connoting the idea that the US Constitution is a malleable document with no permanent guiding principles — a document that must, of necessity, change with the times.”
On the subject of the Obama “scandals” the key words here are “…progressives called for a more activist government whose regulation of people’s lives” and “…whatever the American people seemed to need at any given time.”
In each of the perceived scandals, the Progressives of the Obama Administration justify their actions through those eyes. They see the situations as being too complex for the average American to understand, too emotionally disturbing for them to fathom; the need for constitutional transgression in their quest for the “fundamental transformation” of America too great. And so they deceive their political opposition – and the American public – about their actions, reasons, intentions and goals.
This understood, it is easy to see why, after myriad transgressions against the Constitution and the mission of the Justice Department itself, Mr. Obama declares that he still has “confidence” in Eric Holder. He needs Eric Holder in the senior-most law enforcement position so that he can unilaterally achieve his Progressive agenda through a totalitarian Executive Branch; so he can achieve the “fundamental transformation” of our country through, Executive Order and regulation, especially regulation – legislation through regulation.
It is for this reason – unilateral fundamental transformation – that Progressives have sought to grow our federal government to its current behemoth size; a bureaucratic labyrinth filled with “career” public servants (an oxymoron?) and interminable political appointees whose entire existence is to move the American political center incrementally to the Left; a task they have been achieving with regularity since the days of Wilson and Roosevelt.
It is for this particular reason – it is for this particular governmental mechanism: the bureaucracy – that Mr. Obama will not be directly linked to any of these so-called scandals (scandals in the eyes of all those who revere the Constitution and the rule of law, yes, but not as much to Progressives). The entire Progressive Movement has culminated in this moment in time. They truly believe it is their time. Progressives believe that because they have achieved a twice elected hyper-Progressive president – disregarding the retention of the US House of Representatives by Republicans and ignoring the many governorships that went “Red” last election – that they have a mandate, not for Mr. Obama’s “programs,” but for the complete transformation of our governmental system from that of a Constitutional Republic to a Socialist Democracy based on the now failed models of Europe.
In each scandal there is a bureaucratic figurehead that insulates Mr. Obama from direct responsibility. In the IRS scandal we have Lois Lerner and Douglas Schulman. In the Fast & Furious and AP/FOX scandal there is Eric Holder. In Benghazi there were Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton…and dead men tell no tales. In each instance, Mr. Obama has a dedicated and loyal “useful idiot” who will fall on his/her sword for the “good of the movement.” It is assumed they will, just as it was assumed they would execute their actions of transgressions against the Constitution and liberty itself, with fidelity to “the cause” and without a direct order ever being given.
As We the People watch the “scandals” of the Obama reign unfold, we need to understand that even though Progressives believe this is “their time,” it would have been “their time” regardless of who was in the White House. Was it easier to execute with the first “Black” president in the White House, someone whose constitutionally destructive actions Progressives could defend with a claim of “racism” toward his detractors? Sure, it made it easier, but it would have happened anyway, and it would have happened because of two reasons: a) the public has become apathetic towards their duty to be accurately informed and engaged, and b) the bureaucracy was in place.
Unless We the People insist on the decentralization of government, a viciously executed reduction in the size of the federal government and a radical transformation of the federal tax code to a limited flat tax, FAIR tax or consumption tax, nothing will change with the 2016 elections, regardless of which party captures the White House and holds sway in Congress. Our country – our Constitutional Republic – will continue to be “nudged” to the Left; continue to be fundamentally transformed away from liberty and self-reliance and toward servitude and dependence.
Barack Obama was correct about one thing all those years back in 2008, our nation – the United States of America – is in need of fundamental transformation. That transformation, though, needs to be from a culture of bureaucratic elitism in a centralized government where no one is able to be held accountable, to a nation dedicated to justice for all and the rule of law under the constraints of the United States Constitution.
Or, as John Adams so eloquently wrote in Novanglus Essay, No. 7:
“[Aristotle, Livy, and Harrington] define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men.”
We, my fellow Americans, are a Republic and not a Democracy, for precisely that reason.