Pat Oliphant for April 11, 2012

Didn’t you know? It’s all Obama’s fault!

Well Eryx, here’s the first one. (We know walruscarver was kidding.)

Oh-oh, déjà vu! My ancestors proudly proclaimed themselves great Discoverers while ignoring the pestilence they brought along. Oh when, oh when will the Amerindians learn.Tch..- "A pestilence on him for a mad rogue! This same skull, sir, was Yankee’s skull, the king’s jester.- Alas, poor Yankee! I knew him, Gocomic-ers, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy (if of little science).

Hans Christian Andersen wrote a story in 1852, “In a Thousand Years,” that begins –

“Yes, in a thousand years people will fly on the wings of steam through the air, over the ocean! The young inhabitants of American will become visitors of old Europe. They will come over to see the monuments and the great cities, which will then be in ruins, just as we in our time make pilgrimages to the tottering splendors of Southern Asia. In a thousand years they will come!

“The Thames, the Danube, and the Rhine still roll their course, Mont Blanc stands firm with its snow-capped summit, and the Northern Lights gleam over the land of the North; but generation after generation has become dust, whole rows of the mighty of the moment are forgotten, like those who already slumber under the hill on which the rich trader, whose ground it is, has built a bench, on which he can sit and look out across his waving corn fields…”

This might take less than a thousand years, and it might not literally be Americans who visit.

How the Europeans have disdained America, even to this day. It was the general opinion that little good came from here, and we were a dumping ground for societal rejects. An affront to racial purity. How the elite sneered.

But the rigid social structures of European society and chauvinism of the individual nations delayed gradual useful change, and then it came all at once like the release of seismic energy.

I wish I had at hand a quote (in THE VIRTUOSI) from Ignaz Paderewski in 1920 that well represented this disdain. Within the next 30 years, those “rejects” had essentially rescued rational European civilization.

Now the Europeans have serious financial and immigration problems and again reach for help to their former colonies. How ironic. Unfortunately, finances are so tightly international now that all economies are affected.

I know that infectious disease was meant as a metaphor in today’s cartoon, but even epidemics can potentially go global with chilling speed. The best movie I’ve seen in a while is the recent “Contagion.” A good book about this is THE COMING PLAGUE.

I think that isolationists have somewhat the right idea. But is it possible anymore in modern societies?

Ah yes, chauvinism & jingoism, also great exports from Old Europe and happily embraced in the New World. :-|

… maybe I’m full of it but I thinks whats wrong with the America, is we’re thinking whats in it for me and not whats in it for us. At the end of Eisenhowers second term the tax rate for the ultra rich was 92 percent and our modern highway system was being started. Medicare was signed in to law in 1964 then the moon landing in 1969. The success of those years so long ago was our leaders were thinking as we not as me…

So much for the “global economy”. I’m glad to see it stinking like the alga on a stagnant pond.

I have to wonder how many of the people complaining about “failing Europe” have ever even been here; if you are just getting your picture from Faux News, then trust me, you have no idea of reality.Sure, Greece is a mess. Germany and France are actually doing ok. Scandinavia, the most heavily socialist countries, are in fact doing very well. The economics and politics over here rise and fall on the backs of a number of issues; socialism is not the determining factor. Oh, and I live in the UK — and I can assure you that as a middle-class taxpayer, my quality of life over here is so much better that I do not intend to return to the US. That would be crazy. I regard you all as insanely brainwashed.

You confuse “bone-headed” with “bone-breaking”. Read my last comment and/or get an education.

Could be. But, if so, it’s really like coal to Newcastle.

Cato are an ideologically explicit “think tank” who have traditionally had far more motivation to find justifications to support their pre-existing beliefs than to report facts accurately and in an unbiased fashion. Looking at reports adjusted for inequality of distribution and the genuine standard of living for the majority of people, we find a very different picture from more unbiased sources. 1. http://www.mercer.com/articles/quality-of-living-survey-report-20112. http://internationalliving.com/2010/02/quality-of-life-2010/3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDIGiven that you apparently equal the right to own a guns with quality of life, I am tempted to ask why you are not in Africa or S. America, where guns are largely not unregulated at all. Could it possibly be, that there is more to quality of life (and even being “free of tinpot dictators”) than that??!

For those who have never been to a farm,Righty is an example of the phrase “a chicken with its head cut off’”.

In other words, unless a source agrees with you, ti must be either wrong or corrupt in some way. Yeah, handy that. And the irrational bias isn’t evident there at all.>sigh<

“Here in America, the rights which enable a desirable quality of life come from God (or if you prefer, Nature), not government.”-————————————————————And that, Dear Friends, is why God instituted the Patriot Act, the TSA, the pepper-spraying of peaceful protesters, the SCOTUS decision to strip-search you if you have been issued a parking ticket, etc. etc. etc.GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!

“The Founding Faddas weren’t fools, they divided the powers of guvmint in thirds because men weren’t angels. There’s no point cherry-picking what you dislike about the system. The socialist left is trying to make the POTUS a dictator and the Supemes his servants.”-—————————————I see several flaws in your argumentation:1) No one here is claiming that the Founding Fathers were fools or that men are angels.2) No one is “cherry-picking” the system.3) The POTUS is (supposedly) a Democrat and disconnected from the “socialist left” (whoever that might be).4) You will have a very difficult time substantiating that ANYONE desires a “dictator” for the United States (socialist left or otherwise).5) The “Supremes” (SCOTUS?) are far from becoming “servants” of Obama, since the majority are conservative.But, be that as it may, how is it again that our “rights” come from “God …, not government”? I’m still looking for you to explain that bit of intelligent erudition.

“Freedom and natural human rights come from The Creator (or Creation itself) which you are free to define as you see fit. Government is not the source of rights, it’s there to protect rights with the powers given it by the consent of the governed.

Europe has this backwards. Over there, “rights” are issued by the government and can be revoked with the same ease. Maybe today in France you have a “right” to free health care, but who knows, maybe in a few decades a law will be passed barring anyone over age 80 from receiving free care. Do you see the difference?"-————————————————I really am tryng to understand your point, but I already have a problem with your first sentence. For example, I take a look at history and see that “freedom and natural human rights” (even though originating from “The Creator” or “Creation itself”) were denied to the slaves who were kidnapped from their native Africa (and elsewhere) and delivered to the United States (as well as to other countries) for involuntary servitude. Is that the work of the “Creator” to whom you refer? What happened there? Was he asleep at the wheel? Or did He just not give a hoot about those folks? What did He do with their “freedom and natural rights”? It was only when the “government” (there to protect rights with the powers given it by the consent of the governed) acted that the Africans were entitled to ANY rights! And we’re still fighting for their rights today! Where is this Creator in all this????I won’t bother to address your second paragraph, because it is based entirely upon your assumptions in the first one – and if the premise is flawed, the conclusion is invalid. By the way, I’ve lived in Europe (six years) and I currently reside in Mexico (five years). I can speak with first-hand knowledge of their systems. I draw my conclusions from what I’ve lived and seen – not from some fantasy world where Tinkerbell waves a magic wand for the benefit of all.

@emptc12 : The Greeks, the Romans, the Renaissance,Magellan, Columbus, Voltaire, Diderot, Locke, Hume, Newton, Darwin, Galileo, Spinoza, Adam Smith, the list is endless…all Europeans, the foundation of what we now proudly call not American civilization, but Western Civilization.And, to quote Kipling (no slouch himself!) “Lest we forget…lest we forget.”

1) “…. The Founding Fathers were not perfect by any means.”

I find this to be another non-sequitur distraction, since the perfection of the Founding Fathers has not been advocated by me or by anyone else. This premise is irrelevant and lends nothing to your position, nor detracts anything from mine.

2) “It’s easy to sit and judge from 2012…perhaps in 2112, a group of people (and robots) will be arguing over how evil it was for man to use gasoline engines that harmed the environment. They would have no more right to judge us for our ‘obvious’ failings by not having invented fusion yet and living off of food and heat made possible by burning fossil fuels.”

Ditto my above comment. I fail to understand why you do not address the issues at hand, rather than discussing tangential matters that have nothing to do with them.

3) “BTW, America has no special claim to slavery. It’s still being practiced in North Africa today, and every race at one time or another has been both enslavers and enslaved.”

Yet another inconsequential, irrelevant non-sequitur. As a matter of fact, it appears you overlooked this part of my post and assumed that I am ignorant of past and present world conditions: “… the slaves who were kidnapped from their native Africa (and elsewhere) and delivered to the United States (as well as to other countries) for involuntary servitude.” (You do read the entire post, don’t you?)

3) “I offer to you the idea that whether you believe in a Creator OR by virtue of natue and natural selection, man was meant to live free and it is his inalienable birthright.”

Removing all the modifying words, the core of your “idea” is: “… man was meant to live free and it is his inalienable birthright.” That is an unfounded statement of faith, rather than reason; it cannot be supported by fact. (inalienable = not alienable; not transferable to another or capable of being repudiated: inalienable rights) History proves the falsehood of this.

4) “Abolitionists ended slavery, and they were Christians. I can’t speak on behalf of the Creator and I don’t know what He’s thinking…the Problem of Evil remains: either God is All- Powerful but doesn’t care to end evil, or He cares but is unable to end evil.”

Two things:A) I seriously doubt that all abolitionists were Christians; it would be edifying to me if you could substantiate the claim.B) On the one hand, you admit that you “don’t know” what “the Creator” is thinking; yet, you proceed to provide only two possibilities for the existence of the “Problem of Evil”: Either Hei) “doesn’t care to end [it]” orii) “is unable to end evil”!The limitation, I find, is rather presumptuous – if one indeed accepts the premise that you’ve presented as representative of “the Creator.”

5) “Well, call me an American Exceptionalist, then. Because under socialism, the State, however benevolent, is the ultimate source of rights, and can revoke them at will. Our American government cannot EVER legitimately do that.”

Allow me to preface my response to this with my congratulations and recognition that you have conducted this discussion with decency and respect, rather than name-calling and venom. Thank you for that.

To address the statement, let me call attention to the fact that “socialism” is not the topic of discussion – therefore, not relevant.

Additionally, you have contradicted yourself by stating that “… the State … is the ultimate source of rights….” (rather than the Creator)!

Finally, the American government is now (and has been for some time) in the process of revoking the rights of the People (whether “legitimately” or not)! It is happening now. Examples: the Patriot Act; the TSA abuses; the SCOTUS decision to grant corporations the rights of individuals; the SCOTUS decision allowing strip searches of people arrested, regardless of the triviality for which they might find themselves in custody.

All that is evidence that it’s time for the People to “wake up and smell the coffee” (as Ann Landers used to say.)

There are a lot of things I’d like to say about this exchange, but Oliphant has moved on and I really don’t have much time anyway. But let me congratulate you both on the tone of your comments, if not the content. Specifically: “rightisright” made a pretty decent paraphrase of some of the first part of the Declaration of Independence “Freedom and natural human rights come from The Creator (or Creation itself) which you are free to define as you see fit. Government is not the source of rights, it’s there to protect rights with the powers given it by the consent of the governed.” Despite shortcomings in practice – slavery and even worse the treatment of native Americans – does not make the intent irrelevant. .Unfortunately, the following paragraph in his post, shows a complete lack of knowledge of modern European governments. Even Hitler (in his strange way) understood that the power to govern was granted by the people. That’s why he organized those mass pledges of allegiance. He insisted that rights and freedoms should be given to the government (him) for safe keeping until the “emergency” was over… which would be never. Americans when they are thinking about the unending “war on terrorism” and the resulting “Patriot Act” might want to reflect on that.