Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot - over.: Bush's argument echoes that of King Charles I

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot - over.

Buy Books, DVD's etc.

Click through here to browse and order Books, DVD's, etc.

Political Books

Religious Books -- Not Fundamentalist!

The Fundamentalist Xtians should not be allowed to hijack the language of Christianity. They are at least as much heretics to Christianity as the Arians and Gnostics of early Christian days.

Biblical inerrancy is not possible.

The books both above and below show the limitations of language and the impossibility of Biblical Inerrancy.

How can language be misused? Using General Semantics, this book was Written to explain Nazi propaganda and still used as a textbook

Books - Popular Math, Post Enlightenment & Science

This book explains why the above books on Christian Fundamentalism are politically important in America today.

Modern Society measures risk & predicts possible futures. The book below is a higly readable history of insurance, statistics and modern financial instruments.

Compare this to religion, in which it is presumed that the perfect society was known in the past and all that is necessary to do is to return to that perfect society.

Fascinating, highly readable and fun book on modern mathematics and its limitations. If you are interested in ideas, this is your book!

This is a collection of Hofstader's Scientific American articles. Again, a very fascinationg and highly readable book, requiring no mathematical background. (Buy it used - it is one of the books that will keep disappearing.)

Older, very fascinating book on mathematical ideas. Did you know there are three kinds of infinity?

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Bush's argument echoes that of King Charles I

Mark Kleiman goes back into British Pariamentary history for an earlier example of the argument that Bush is making about his absolute and unfettered "Constitutionsl" power as Commander-in-Chief in Wartime.

"In the debate over ship-money (a form of unParliamentary taxation claimed by Charles I as an emergency wartime measure encompassed by the royal prerogative) at the beginning of the Long Parliament, Lord Falkland made a simple argument. If, said Falkland, the king is the sole judge in necessity (i.e., has unlimited emergency powers) and at the same time the sole judge of necessity (with unreviewable discretion to decide what constitutes an emergency) then the monarchy is absolute."[Underlining mine - RB]

Charles I (as I recall) was a poor manager, but "strong-willed" (another term for stubborn with those who opposed him.) He forced a showdown with Parliament (which objected to his mismanagement of affairs) that resulted in the English Civil War and his own execution in 1649. (Britania - Monarchs of Britain.)

Bush 43, who also inherited his position, appears to mimic Charles I in that he is strong-willed and mismanages governmental affairs badly. Also Bush 43's argument that he is an absolute monarch is no better than the argument offered by Charles I.

posted by Richard @ 12:33 PM

1 Comments:

At 5/21/2006 1:55 PM, Rob said…

Ironic. I often find myself comparing Bush to Czar Nicholas II in his final days.

Links - Showcased

Links - Political

Texas Blogs

Group blogs

Template by

Counter by