3
3
0
H.L. Mencken is supposed to have said "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.". He didn't.
What he did say was "No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.". ['Notes On Journalism' in the Chicago Tribune (19 September 1926)].
Mind you, he also said "In the present case it is a little inaccurate to say I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible to any public office of trust or profit in the Republic. But I do not repine, for I am a subject of it only by force of arms." [(quoted in) LIFE magazine, Vol. 21, No. 6, (5 August 1946), p. 52].
My question is simply "Now that the politicians have REALLY discovered the advantages of having an electorate that consists of people who think and feel at the Grade Three level, how long is it going to take before we start seeing legislative action to outlaw intelligent thought in the name of 'National Security'?".
What he did say was "No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.". ['Notes On Journalism' in the Chicago Tribune (19 September 1926)].
Mind you, he also said "In the present case it is a little inaccurate to say I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible to any public office of trust or profit in the Republic. But I do not repine, for I am a subject of it only by force of arms." [(quoted in) LIFE magazine, Vol. 21, No. 6, (5 August 1946), p. 52].
My question is simply "Now that the politicians have REALLY discovered the advantages of having an electorate that consists of people who think and feel at the Grade Three level, how long is it going to take before we start seeing legislative action to outlaw intelligent thought in the name of 'National Security'?".
Donald Trump’s ‘Captain Underpants’ campaign
Posted from washingtonpost.com
Election 2016
Politics
Republicans
Government
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
Ah, Mencken. I grew up in his city, the one where he was a newspaper correspondent. Love his acid wit and wisdom. And, yes, his is a very apt observation. Trump is appealing to the anger, not the intellect of the American people and he's struck a cord like none other in years. Not since Reagan. However, Reagan's appeal was vastly different. Reagan appealed to our love of America. He taught us to believe in ourselves. He told us that We the People built this country and We could rebuild it. He then proceeded to do everything he could to get government out of the way. He didn't succeed very well, but We didn't need much. We pushed ahead and prospered because We believed in ourselves because he believed in us. Trump is a vastly different proposition. He is appealing to our anger with government. He is leading the charge against government, but promising to make America great by making its government great. And he can do that because he is great. Right? He is so successful in this message that not only are Republicans turning out in record numbers to vote, but also Democrats are staying away from the polls in record numbers, which makes it pretty safe to say that unless this train is derailed, it's carrying Trump to the White House. But, if you stop and listen to what Trump is saying, you'll realize that it's all about hope and change, and we've heard that somewhere before, haven't we?
(4)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
COL Ted Mc - Only three? Marx. Hitler. Musollini. So yes, Trump is in bad company. The sad truth is that no one took power away from the people they appealed to anymore than Americans have "lost" power. They gave it away. I am a great believer in the fundamental principles enumerated in the Declaration of Independence: "... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." and that we have the right to dissolve those that do not serve our purposes. In other words, everyone in all of the world in all of time has precisely the government they want and deserve. Here in America, there is no need to be angry. We dissolve our government every two years and establish a new one. Whose fault is it if we keep reelecting the same one?
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CPT Jack Durish - Captain; Considering that Marx came to power through an armed revolution sparked by the defeat of Russia, Marx didn't have to appeal to much of anything.
That being said, the difference between the results of Marx, and Hitler/Mussolini is that the government instituted by Marx DID NOT start a war but DID win a war.
That being said, the difference between the results of Marx, and Hitler/Mussolini is that the government instituted by Marx DID NOT start a war but DID win a war.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
COL Ted Mc - I think you'll find that the history of the rise of communism in Russia is a little more complex than you realize. To be fair, it was far more complex than I realized. I only realized much of it recently while reading an 8-volume biography of Winston Churchill. (He was violently opposed to communism and did everything in his power to help Russians resist it) The communists rose to power much the same as the Nazis and the Fascists. They were all minorities in nations caught in great upheaval. They filled vacuums left by the demise of monarchies. Each appealed to the masses with promises of power and bounty that had been previously denied by privileged classes (or at least that's the perception they helped spread).
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CPT Jack Durish - Captain; In Russia it was the "indigenous class enemy" that was "depriving the masses". In Germany it was the "foreign class enemy". In Italy it was "history". The Russians were as correct about it as the American colonists were.
Once Trotsky was out of the picture, there wasn't any real "communism" in Russia - what there was was a "crony state" that was a "bureaucratic monopoly state capitalism".
The minute you put "monopoly" and "capitalism" together you have a "Bad Thing" since "market forces" cease to have any meaning.
Once Trotsky was out of the picture, there wasn't any real "communism" in Russia - what there was was a "crony state" that was a "bureaucratic monopoly state capitalism".
The minute you put "monopoly" and "capitalism" together you have a "Bad Thing" since "market forces" cease to have any meaning.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
School Children sing mmm mmm mm Barack Hussein Obama
Indoctrination of Americas school children with propaganda about ANY president is should not take place. Particularly one in office. Teaching the children ab...
"... how long is it going to take before we start seeing legislative action to outlaw intelligent thought in the name of 'National Security'?"." We passed that goal line years ago -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp-ot_vChlU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp-ot_vChlU
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
The time was unavoidable for privacy to become subject to Gov't seizure - the IPhone taken from the terrorist in Calif. The ability to crack into any & all public forums means that public discourse simply can not be free. It goes from there to an enforced stifling of public debate. I view that Apple must provide a way for the government to break into the phone for murderers must not have a total protection from seizure of their records. The people that lose from this fight is not the government agents who will get more authority but the American public who lose a protection from unreasonable search & seizure.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google