Scholars rate 10 worst presidential mistakes

5) So few people remember Nixon's abuse of executive power in using the CIA for domestic political profit. Erosion of the separation and balance of powers at the federal level is what should earn Nixon notoriety, as it should Bush jr. for the same reason.

Reagan's directive to the CIA to become drug dealers can be viewed in the same light, as misuse of executive power.

Anybody notice a trend ? Nixon. Reagan. Bush.

 

absolutely!

 

The march towards fascism continues. I am tempted to think America is in uncharted territory, but I do not have a long enough historical perspective to know if this is actually true, or if America has been here before and self-corrected.

'Trust me' will go down in infamy.

 

I thought that was cute too.

While Nancy Ray-Gun was blabbering "just say NO" the CIA and DEA were dealing heroin and cocaine on the streets of America to fund activities Congress would never approve.

Just like how some Federal Air Marshals are drug dealers. Gee, I feel SO much safer flying!

<_<

 

Didn't occur to me at all that you are advocating fascism in this thread (or ever, as much as remember all of your posts). Why did you think so ?

Regarding political parties: I have some understanding of american political parties that span the 20th century, not before. America has fasicst tendencies (as does every country I have read about or lived in). They had a voice in the Democratic party early in the 20th century, and for the past 30+ years have gained increasing traction in the Republican party.

Erosion of civil liberties is often used as a surrogate for erosion of democracy, and rightly so. But it is not identical to a breakdown in separation and balance of power in the government, which is the core feature of fascsim.

Hope this is a bit clearer

 

Notice a pattern:

Kennedy
Johnson
Clinton


Trouble caused by only chosing to go part way in the act, had they gone all the way, putting enough into to finish the job....

Oh, wait, maybe that's not what we are talking about??

 

I think this is a pretty good description of fascism --- taken from wikipedia:

Fascism is typified by:

* Totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic.
* The fascist state regulates and controls (as opposed to nationalizing) the means of production.
* Fascism exalts the nation, state, or race as superior to the individuals, institutions, or groups composing it.
* Fascism uses explicit populist rhetoric; calls for a heroic mass effort to restore past greatness;
* Demands loyalty to a single leader, often to the point of a cult of personality.

Fascism is associated by many scholars with one or more of the following characteristics:

* 1. A very high degree of nationalism,
* 2. Economic corporatism,
* 3. A powerful, dictatorial leader who portrays the nation, state or collective as superior to the individuals or groups composing it.

 

Could you post the URL to the origin of this article? (BTW to copy/paste the entire thing violates copyright)

I notice that each president is represented by a "moment". I think when looking at the current administration, historians will be hard pressed to select a single "moment" as there have been so many of them. And the worst may still be to come.

 

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini. (Who better would know?)

Danger signs of fascism:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.

*****************
1.Instability of capitalist relationships or markets

2.The existence of considerable declassed social elements

3.The stripping of rights and wealth focused upon a specific segment of the population, specifically the middle class and intellectuals within urban areas as this is the group with the means, intelligence and ability to stop fascism if given the opportunity.

4.Discontent among the rural lower middle class (clerks, secretaries, white collar labor). Consistent discontent among the general middle and lower middle classes against the oppressing upper-classes (haves vs have-nots).

5.Hate: Pronounced, perpetuated and accepted public disdain of a specific group defined by race, origin, theology or association. (How often have you heard the words "Homo", "Gay" or "Liberal" used in such a manner?)

6.Greed: The motivator of fascism, which is generally associated with land, space or scarce resources in the possession of those being oppressed.

7.Organized Propaganda:

a) The creation of social mythology that venerates (creates saints of) one element of society while concurrently vilifying (dehumanizing) another element of the population through misinformation, misdirection and the obscuring of factual matter through removal, destruction or social humiliation, (name-calling, false accusations, belittling and threats).
Homosexuals
Liberals

B) The squelching of public debate not agreeing with the popular agenda via slander, libel, threats, theft, destruction, historical revisionism and social humiliation. Journalists in particular are terrorized if they attempt to publish stories contrary to the agenda.

And some more quotes:

"It's not who casts the votes, it's who counts the votes." - J. Stalin

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." Joseph Goebbels

"We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -Franklin Roosevelt

"What difference does it make if a few political minorities are put in prison without due process, what difference does it make if some extremists are tortured into telling the truth, what difference does it make if a few of our freedoms are exchanged for state security? Its only a passing phase, these measures will be discarded sooner or later. Our country is at war, we need this protection for our people and our country." Joseph Goebbels.

"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no
religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation
is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived
from faith.... We need believing people."
-- Adolph Hitler, April 26, 1933

http://www.yuricareport.com/PoliticalAnaly...HappenHere.html
http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Pol.../Structure3.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7260.htm
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/The_14_cha...tics_030303.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRI411A.html
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

*******************

Personally, I've decided I'd rather live under Socialist Democrats than Fascist Republicans. I actually believe in some parts of both platforms (Pro-Choice and Capital Punishment) but if I have to fish or cut bait....I'll take Socialism over Fascism.

 

Godiva: no copyright is violated, this is wikipedia. Search for fascism in wikipedia. The topic is discussed in depth, with good references.

In regards to the current administration, again taken from wikipedia:

Particular allegations against the Bush Administration

Cases made to support the contention that the US is currently Fascist or moving towards fascism, or sometimes merely that it is moving towards a police state, include:

* Use of "administrative warrants" and other tools such as those in the Patriot Act which allow the administration to exercise police powers without judicial oversight.
* The designation of "enemy combatants" by the administration and the use of courts like the Combatant Status Review Tribunal to bypass the normal rule of law.
* The use of torture.
* Claims by the administration that it needs more and more powers.

* George W. Bush has recently admitted that he ordered domestic surveillance of US citizens without the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Courts as required by law. His Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza Rice has stated that the President's authority to take this action is derived from his status as Commander in Chief. This argument is considered outlandish by many constitutional scholars. Several members of Congress are considering investigations into this matter, citing that FISA only gives the President authority to use these powers with court approval. (Such approval can be gained within hours from the FISA court, and can also be gained retroactively within 72 hours, which runs counter claims that the process is too slow.) (Domestic Spying Incident)

* Connected to the FISA matter is the admission by The New York Times that they delayed reporting the information regarding domestic spying from the American public at the request of the Bush Administration. In the ninth paragraph of NYT article written by Risen and Lichtblau they state:

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted. (Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts}

* Decreasing openness in government: significant increases in the amount of information deemed classified, the introduction of "unclassified but sensitive" information, "sneak and peek" searches and gag orders on search targets (allowed by the Patriot Act), etc.

* Reports such as the Bush Administration paying journalists to promote the policies of the Administration. Also, self-censorship such as the sort practiced in open forums to prevent the spread of viewpoints that oppose the current administration may be considered evidence that the administration need not openly censor, but can rely on supporters to carry out the necessary censorship. (The Armstrong Williams incident)(The Balkans Website incident)

* The widespread use of religious motivations as a justification for many laws and policies (such as Faith Based Initiatives), and opposition to certain legislation on religious grounds (such as gay marriage and stem cell research). However, some argue that these are simply moral views informed by religion, rather than actual legislation of religious doctrine.
* Also the well-proven widespread use of religious rhetoric and symbolism in many speeches and appearances lend credibility to the allegation of religion being intertwined with Government. However, the use of religious rhetoric and symbolism has been present under many other governments; so the argument is one of degree rather than kind.

* Allegations of fraudulent elections in both of the last presidential elections. See, for example, the sworn testimony of Mr. Clint Curtis, and other allegations of deceptive election processes in Ohio and other locations, and allegations of conflicts of interest with Secretary of State of Ohio (i.e. Mr. Ken Blackwell also being the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign in Ohio).

* The "Bush v. Gore" ruling is often cited as further evidence of subversion of democratic processes. In this case five members of the Supreme Court voted to prevent a ballot recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court in the 2000 Presidential election. Two of those members (Thomas and Scalia) are alleged to have had conflicts of interest due to close relatives working on the Bush campaign. The ruling itself has been widely attacked by legal scholars (including the dissenting four members of the Court) as containing very weak legal arguments. The recount is said to have been delayed by disruptive actions performed by Bush campaign workers.

* The "no-fly" list, under which a list of people are prohibited from flying on commercial airplanes. No reasons are ever given to these people for being put on this list, and there is no standard way to challenge your placement on it; futhermore, the contents of the list are kept secret. The list is currently controlled entirely by the executive branch with no Congressional or judicial oversight. Anecdote: James Moore, The co-author of a book critical of Bush ("Bush's Brain") found himself on the list. Senator Edward Kennedy found himself on the list, but managed to get himself removed fairly quickly.

[edit]

Rebuttal

Critics of these claims about the Bush Administration argue that they do not add up to fascism, and that repression, election fraud, secrecy, deception, and other such acts have all happened in both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past, and did not result in fascism.

 

Erik. I was referring to Jack Dodge's original post. The top ten worst Presidential moments. It was not identified as being in Wikipedia. It looks like it's from an online news source. And it is.

Scholars pick Buchanan for worst presidential mistake.

Any of these URLS would have done as well:

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Internati...450665-sun.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?i...TC-RSSFeeds0312

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/72026...ss=bos&psp=news

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/18/president...tion=cnn_latest

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2006/2/19/144788.html

 

I see.

No, wikipedia would not have a "10 worse .." monograph

 

EricGo,
Care to site a reference for your Goebbels quote?

Somehow I doubt he said “Out country is at war . . .â€
And that makes me question the rest of the quote.

 

I think this list suffers from that problem. Even historians are affected by the "current thinking", and 50 years from now, this list may not have nearly as many things from the 20th century. Was Clinton's lying to a grand jury really in the top ten? I don't think so. While it affected his presidency, its hard to show that it had any lasting impact on America. I don't think that even his impeachment for that offense even matters; its a footnote in history, but the impact on us? Can it really be compared to Johnson's failure to help heal the country and expose us to years of Jim Crow laws? Or any of the public abuse scandels we have seen, such as the T-Pot Dome scandel?

I don't think Iran-Contra rises to that level either. There just isn't enough impact on the country to rank it that high.

Nixon resigned in disgrace when impeachment seemed certain, and will probably remain on the list. Lyndon Johnson's mishandling of the Vietnam war may remain on the list, but even that one may find its way off the list with a few more years (and historians that weren't of that Vietnam era generation).

 

I took it from Godiva's post, and just reposted because I thought it was so to the point, given what is happening in the US today.