Ozymandias Part 2 or Thank The Stars For Trump !

” I am Ozymandias,King of Kings.Look upon my works ye mighty and beware…” or something like that,is a quote from English romantic poet Shelley in the early 19th century.It came to mind as I watched “Ethos” a 1980s ” docuhistory” movie narrated by Woody Harrelson and featuring the likes of Daniel Ellsberg,Michael Moore,Lt. Col.Patricia Koskiuosky,Former VPs Al Gore&Dick Cheney( via quotes if not in person.
It starts by asking how much we know about how we are governed,”is the Federal Reserve Board part of the Federal Government?” Because the head of the Reserve is appointed by the President of the U.S.,(4 yr. term)I had assumed it was.But,it isn’t it is a private banking cartel that controls the money supply by lending money to the government at a specified interest rate( subject to change ).It originated in 1913 on the acceptance of a plan by JP Morgan to then President Wilson,who warned simultaneously about a power elite representing a military industrial complex.On and on we go with control and manipulation of the masses with control of resources undermining of the essentials of constitutional democracy,the inevitability of war after war and the evolution of a supreme oligarch.This was written in the time of GW Bush but it makes the emergence of a Trump seem inevitable.Why thank the stars for Trump? Because he is so unable to moderate his egomania and his disdain for Congress,the Judiciary and democratic process,that he gives us the chance to reevaluate and alter course.So long as his finger is kept off the nuclear trigger,we have a chance for both his unseating and restoration of the aims of our Democracy.Ethos is available on Amazon and is free for Prime members.Take a look and tell us what you think.

Categories:

4 Comments

  1. Could Daedal2207 provide specific examples of Presidential actions that support his declaration that Trump has “disdain for Congress, the judiciary and democratic process”? I agree that he has disdain for the Democrat’s side of Congress, the side that wants to take the idea of “America” to a place unintended by the founders – this by not only trying to obstruct his policies, but by relentlessly trying to blame him (and appointees) for crimes they likely did not commit. (With so many hysterical examples of the left’s extreme hatred directed at Trump and all things conservative there is a growing suspicion that “intent to frame” is the more accurate way to describe the opposition’s agenda.) There is danger here. James Comey revealed that major news sources cannot be trusted to be objective. Knowing that many are willing to deceive means that whatever happens there will be reason to distrust the honesty of procedure – that shifts our “civil war” of conflicting ideas into a more hostile category.
    Trump is working with the Republican side of Congress.
    Nominating judge Gorsuch demonstrates a shining example of high respect for what a judiciary should be. It seems that it would be mind-sets who believe in a “living constitution” and want to give judges the power to reinterpret (alter) the laws passed by Congress who have “disdain” for the highest value performed by the Courts.
    If the democratic process is that of maximizing individual liberties, as opposed to making more individuals subject to the whims and dictates of central authorities, the Constitution as originally written structured for us the democratic-republic by which this rarest of “rights” has been achieved. For advancing this purpose Trump and the Republicans are showing themselves to be strong supporters of the democratic process.

    1. DS: ” I agree that he has disdain for the Democrat’s side of Congress, the side that wants to take the idea of “America” to a place unintended by the founders – ”

      Ah, the fangs are showing! Thank you, DS, you’re so deliciously transparent (“deliciously” borrowed from George Bernard Shaw’s “Pygmalion”) in your self-aggrandizement, so full of your own entitlement. For the benefit of the followers of this blog, pray tell and concisely clarify … the “original intent” by the Founding Fathers … though enlightened, the examples of their 18th century mentality (slave owners amongst them). As an aside, you DO believe in evolution, right?

      ” I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.1 Unsuccesful rebellions indeed generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medecine necessary for the sound health of government.” – Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Paris, January 30, 17872
      https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/little-rebellionquotation

      DS: “… this by not only trying to obstruct his policies, but by relentlessly trying to blame him (and appointees) for crimes they likely did not commit.”

      Really? Your naïveté is difficult to believe for such a sophisticated individual. What is your definition of “crimes?” Again, the debate is not on policy … it is on personal behavior and the rule of law.

      DS: “… growing suspicion that ‘intent to frame’ is the more accurate way to describe the opposition’s agenda.”

      When a statement can be flipped to represent either side, it definitely does not define a specific position.

      DS: “Knowing that many are willing to deceive means that whatever happens there will be reason to distrust the honesty of procedure …”

      We have common ground here. However, you choose to trust lies, whereas I opt for facts. Instead of hope, now we live in fear … and fear paralyses, works against your stated desires to conserve. Instead of conserving, it rots.

      DS: “… give judges the power to reinterpret (alter) the laws passed by Congress.”

      Laws are subject to interpretation … it’s the nature of the legal system (unless you have totalitarianism). Have you been around lawyers in your life’s experience? Lawyers are advocates for a position. The strongest (or wiliest) argument defines the issue … until a challenge occurs for further interpretation (otherwise, you’d still have the Dred Scott case as the law of the land, right?).

      DS: “Trump and the Republicans are showing themselves to be strong supporters of the democratic process.”

      This is your cult … your religion. Delusional in its absolutism.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s