Extinction indeed.

"As Alexis de Tocqueville, the famous French historian, political observer and classical liberal once observed:“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”"

Alexis de Tocqueville didn't write that. If you think he did, you don't know much about Tocqueville. It is often attributed, probably falsely, to a Scottish historian, Alexander Tytler. Not to mention that the assertion is nonsense.

and how many democracies had there been when whoever made that first statement?

and we don't talk about the 'largesse from the public treasury' that the wealthy have baked into the pie?

democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury

This crock of @!$%# is often used as intellectual justification for the idea that our government should actually not do anything on the behalf of the people who vote to give it power. In other words, government should not derive power from the consent of the governed. It's a thin, feeble attempt to re-legitimize royalty and aristocracy. I don't think I could crap enough stinky @!$%# on that quote to express my true feelings about that sentiment.

and how many democracies had there been when whoever made that first statement?

Exactly. The whole idea of people voting for their own leadership was scary and almost heretical at the time this quote was supposedly written.

Let's finish with, this idea is not proven, is not relevant, and is not an excuse to cut off the process of Democracy and if you delusionally think it is, your opinion will be changed for you. Promise.

Republicans for some unknown reason love to mis-quote Tocqueville Reagan did it often. Perhaps it's lazy speech writers. Shooter sure didn't research his mis-quote.

Actually, the quote isn't even from Alexander Fraser Tytler, (aka: Lord Woodhouselee). It first appeared in an op-ed on December 9, 1951, in "The Daily Oklahoman" by somebody named Elmer T. Peterson, possibly the professor of Education at the University of Iowa, but I'm not sure if anybody really knows. It is definitely not the product of Alexis de Tocqueville and runs counter to everything he ever wrote about Democracy in America. This has not stopped it from circulating on the internet in the form of postings to conservative chat rooms or chain emails since at least the 2000 election, routinely falsely attributed to him.

There does seem to be a peculiar desire by internet posters, especially of the teabaggy variety, to attribute made up quotes to famous people they remember once reading about in high school. The "historian" David Barton has made something of a career out of it.

On top of that, look how fast somebody like shot goes from being vaguely libertarianish (I guess) to making a royalist argument when his resentments take over. What's the best adjective for this? I'll go with the all-purpose "pathetic."

Yep, shooter's comment equates to David Barton scholarship, in other words total nonsense.

On the other hand, it is ironic that so many republican's are coming down against Romney's statements when they still support Paul Ryan who has said, and continues to say much the same thing when he talks about "makers" and "takers." Then there are Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity who all said pretty much the same thing in the right wing media. Nobody in the republican party seems to be willing to disavow their comments.

"On the other hand, it is ironic that so many republican's are coming down against Romney's statements when they still support Paul Ryan..."

They never liked FUBARRomney. He was the last turd floating so they pinned their Obama hatin' hopes on him. The r's are still shaking their pin heads at how they ended up with that magic underwear wearing .001%er. He was never one of them. FUBARRomney's main deal was to get a mormon in the Oval Office. The r's main deal was to get an autopen for their agenda.

Without that potential mutual assistance, they don't want to be in the same room. He won't be back. The derision from all sides would be deafening.

I don't think it's actually fair to excoriate the original post too much since the quote is often so attributed to de Tocqueville or Tytler, but for more info on the source there's this bit from the Wiki on de Tocqueville:

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

• This is a variant expression of a sentiment which is often attributed to Tocqueville or Alexander Fraser Tytler, but the earliest known occurrence is as an unsourced attribution to Tytler in "This is the Hard Core of Freedom" by Elmer T. Peterson in The Daily Oklahoman (9 December 1951): "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."
• Variant: The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.

The key phrases here are "the public treasury" and "their own money." Since the money comes from the people in the first place, it SHOULD be the people who determine where that money is spent, shouldn't it? The Republican mantra that has sought to justify lowering taxes by "letting the people decide how to spend their own money" glosses over this very fact. What they're saying, in effect, is that "if there is such as thing as 'the common good,' which many religious and secular philosophers say there is, then people should be able voluntarily to support it rather than to be forced to do so." What this affirms is more like a narcissistic society in which people can receive benefits without contributing anything like a fair share, rather than a community-oriented society in which all contribute and all benefit, because what benefits one benefits all, and what benefits all benefits one, especially when the most vulnerable are supported sufficiently. (And by "supported," I mean, "given the resources by which to improve their situation, where possible," such as access to affordable healthcare, access to education, etc.)

I would go further by suggesting that anyone seriously advocating the erosion of the legitimacy of our democratically elected government is engaging in behavior bordering on that of "enemies both foreign and domestic".

This loose talk is, in my book, seditious, if not outright treasonous.

"...attribute made up quotes to famous people they remember once reading about in high school."

False memory syndrome. Conveniently false.

Once again, basketball boy misses his shot from the free-throw line.

I think it more appropriate to say democracy will die when a small group figures how to buy representatives and steal or 'privatize' the treasury without being made accountable for their actions. Didn't Esienhour say that or something close with his "...military/industrial/ arms complex etc..." since that is where tax payer money mostly goes to...the war profiteers..er..defense budget..against...ah you know...terrorists...yeah that's the ticket.

Romney just had too much money for repubs to just come out and say they didn't like him but...they just didn't like him. Look at him...what's to like? It was all the dislike for dems and Obama that his supporters... supported.

Try again: The trouble with quotes is that they can be checked,

Alexander Fraser Tyler, Cycle Of Democracy (1770) http://www.famousquotessite.com/famous-quotes-6934-alexander-fraser-tyler-cycle-of-democracy-1770.html

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over lousy fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to Complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage.

RichM-- Unfortunately, quotes on famousquotessite are uploaded by users, and the site doesn't guarantee the accuracy of anything posted there, so something often attributed incorrectly is bound to infiltrate that site's content.

Here is another source regarding the, er, source of those quotationS:
http://www.lorencollins.net/tytler.html

Spot on!

Notice no one is criticizing Romney for lying, flip-flopping from audience to audience, or failure to provide details for his magic solutions to real problems. Apparently, he just did't do these things well enough.

Mr. Romney is providing "One Last Service" for his party. And unlike the very smart lady on Mr. O'Donnel's show who's name escapes me as I write this, I do think this is intentional. I could be wrong.

But it just seems to feel like someone told Mr. Romney, "Okay, you lost. But you can still be of one last service to the Party and Cause. We need you to fall on your sword in such a way that we can disavow you and make it look like we are changing our views without changing our policies." And poor delusional Mr. Romney, in his never ending quest to change himself and his positions to fit in with the GOP, said, "Yes. I can do that."

Shooter242 you lost, Idiot

Shooter242...Obama just barely had to make a statement this candidacy. He just had to point out Romney's lies. However he did make statements that were meant to be the truth, until the GOP in the House oppose everything he tries to do, so Fox news twists the issues around to make it as Obama lied, he's not trying to fix the issues he made promises on. But they fail to point out the filibusters and blatant blocks, no matter what is on the table (another originally Republican idea/plan....nope, we can't have a Dem bringing that idea forward).

Exactly so. Obama is much better at it.

Cheap shots: all the GOP has left. Even worse, they're stupid, weak cheap shots.

Pretty sad, Shooter, when your entire rhetorical range stretches between "I know you are" to "but what am I?"

Pretty sad, indeed.

The GOP is trying to now make it look like they are no longer the party of the rich by eating one of their own.

Personally, I hope they have learned nothing and continue to double down on utter nonsense.

Not impressed. What a bunch of back-stabbing yellow feathered cowards fills the ranks of the moral right.

They went along with Romney pre-election day well enough and continued to donate gobs of money to him.

How can the right fault him now? Romney catered beautifully to his base, which these days means displays of wealth and telling conservatives only that which they want to hear. Given how the man campaigned, I'd say they in turn told him only what he wanted to hear as well.

Mitt and the Republican Party were mutually destructive, only cowards would blame him for the loss they all had a hand in. 

"It's been well said that you have a political problem when the voters don't like you, but you've got a real problem when the voters think you don't like them.... Quit despising the American people."

That is advice the entire Republican Party needs to heed...

You are so right oncearepublican. I was just over at red state reading almost exactly what we are discussing. No examination of the ideas, only of the candidates and the media. According to the pundits, if only the Republican party had fully supported the candidates - even with those few "misspoken" words about oh, just about everything - and if only the media hadn't hypnotized the rest of us, if only they hadn't distanced themselves from true religious conservatism... It's really a site to see. Nothing about examining the turn the party has made to lunacy. Cries for "true" conservatives and more religious frenzy. Of course, there is a bit of talk of "branding" to see how they could actually trick more voters into voting for the candidates. And they still aren't talking about women, African Americans, or college students/youth, only Latinos. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for any group of people who get the beneficent attention of the grand old party. Amazing.

Beaumont- That was the much under appreciated Alex Wagner who made that observation.

There has been a growing chorus that is saying, "Aha- he repeats the 47% sentiments after the election so this must be the real Romney". It may be that this is simply a Sprachregelung- a set of conventions of speech that is used for a particular sub-community. When speaking to a conservative crowd, he would exercise the "president is 'foreign'", "doesn't understand America", "welfare queen", "illegals" Sprachregelung set of code words. He couldn't use the N word- he's running for office for peat sake. As a Governor of Massachusetts, he had a different set of terms that would allow him to appear to "speak the language of conservative", but encoded in a way that would not offend moderates with harsh terms of intolerance, exploitation or radical denial of the social contract.

Romney is able to clothe himself in alternate Sprachregelung's as easily as he would changing from his stone washed jeans to his Jack Victor cheap suits.

Who is Romney? But for that matter, who is "principled" conservatives like George Will who solemnly and confidently were telling us that Romney would be chosen in a landslide, yet barely a week later is now telling us why Romney was a deeply flawed candidate who would never fool the US public.

Which is it George?

For all his polysyllabic posturing, I have doubts whether George knows who he is any more than Mitt does. They just wear the Sprachregelung outfits that speak to some truth that the public seeks to have confirmed. They do so in such a convincing way that the people believe that this is a leader who has their finger on the pulse of some deep truth they hold in common.

The essential difference between the two is that George still has his job, and Mitt will never again have credibility on the national stage. The essential commonality is that these individuals are chameleons with no real character.

Like Eichmann, they pick up and ape the terms of the Sprachregelung without considering the worthiness of the ideas behind those euphemisms. They are not especially racist or unfair, but their Sprachregelung normalizes sentiments and behaviors that otherwise would be shunned.

Such normalization of the unthinkable allows Americans to be contemplate the unthinkable- that the US would start a war of aggression on another country- a country that had something that the US wanted. Eichmann was not a monster- nor were the individuals who knew the truth about Jerry Sandusky but did nothing. The truth was unspoken. Instead we clothe ourselves in self deception. We wear suits to achieve a comfort with others. We want to be liked, we want everything to be nice, we want the ugliness behind those masks to not exist.

The truth is that we all are Romney's. We are all are Eichmann's who unthinkingly accept the normalization of social evils because the truth about them are hidden in the language we agree to use about them. In New Zealand, companies don't fire thousands of loyal workers. The company is undertaking redundancy measures. People go along with this, because it masks the damage to the sense of self worth. It is not that they are worthless to the organization- they still have self worth, it is just that the company has duplicates of your skill set and must remove the duplication in order to stay competitive.

The person serving your Starbucks coffee or taking your money at the convenience store, or helping you find something at Walmart. They are minimum wage workers who have no career path upwards. They live under a mountain of debt and are hounded by debt collectors.

They are not minimum wage workers, they are indentured serfs. Those are the workers we see. And what of the workers conveniently hidden from view? What about the latino working in the warehouse at 120 degrees with no water, broken equipment who is working as a temp and will not have work if he is injured or questions the conditions? The manager shrugs his shoulders- "better 'them' than me". There are plenty more of such workers because the bulk of labor is globally frangibile meaning that they can be shipped out as the economy efficiently seeks a better price for it. The great surplus of US labor means there are lots of eager workers.

There is not much difference between this indentured servitude and slavery.

But that would be an indelicate way of putting it. So we resort to a Romneyism. A Sprachregelung way of telling us why this is all normal and acceptable.

To : oncearepublican Agreed ... GOP is upset with Romney, because he speaks "out loud" what they feel !! They "assume" that the people are too dumb to realize this on our own, and how dare he (Romney) give away their secrets !!!

Thank you for reminding me of her name John. I will admit to having a memory that is absolutely awful at remembering names.

I find myself agreeing with almost everything you say, especially about the self delusions.

The only point I would contest is that I do believe it does in fact make us monsters when we continue to go along with the delusion for our own comfort at the cost of the suffering of others.

And at times I have to wonder who is the bigger monster, the pedophile who's just doing what is in it's nature or the people who cover up the crimes of the pedophile by simply ignoring the problem. I find myself not in any doubt as to who's the bigger monster when they cover up the crimes actively or ignoring the problem because it's too much trouble and inconvenience to do something about it.

I would like to make the supposition that some of these delusions are required just to make society work and that like most delusions and lies we tell ourselves, there is at least the possibility of a grain of truth in them.

I'd start with the premise that no small amount of self delusion is required just to get past the fact that humans are animals at the end of the day and as such are subject to all kind of emotions and impulses that make society as a whole difficult if not impossible to begin without deluding ourselves into believing we can get past them or are not whole subject to them.

Things like law and order or the concept of consent of the governed are possible without the self delusion that we can have law and order or that governments actually need our consent to govern us. After all it's not like we have the police department of the city of Detroit saying that they have lost the ability to maintain law and order there or junta's and dictatorships in the world. But the concept is real and so we strive and try and work towards law and order and consent of the governed knowing we will never be able to actually achieve either, but deluding ourselves into believing we can.

Then there is the lay off thing. We do delude ourselves into believing that we are still valuable to the company when they do "redundancy reductions" be we can do that because we know that it might very well be true... but likely for only a small number of the actual layoffs. And so to spare ourselves the blow we tell ourselves these 'little lies' to keep our spirits up. It's what we have to do to keep on living.

Wow, basketball boy misses his shots from the free-throw line twice in succession.

In addition to every other time he steps up.

So I'm reading this thread, and I'm struck with how relentlessly spiteful you folks are... even in victory. It's been two weeks and you're still hating on Romney and the Republicans. I often say liberals can never be happy, and this group never disappoints.

Shouldn't you all be concentrating on all the new free stuff coming your way? Doesn't that make you happy?

Discard the Romney Card, Republicans will keep the rest, Draw again erase later.

see, Shooter's a perfect example of your typical Republican who just doesn't get it. There's no spite, there's pure contempt for the depth of your delusion. Republicans are manipulators, they exploit their supporters' ignorance and bait them with false information and political add-ons to get their vote. If people decided to think for themselves, and research the issues, nobody would vote for the Republican party. It's a shame the name has to go down with the team....republic/republican, it was a good name, but lacks substance with outdated ideas of what's important to Americans. Bye-bye R party, it's been....interesting.

The best abortion possible for this country's future.

Romney played them, they fell for it hook, line and sinker.

Paul of the new testament was called the "Spouter of lies"

by the Essenes, one passage clearly describes Paul and Romney

both trying to win the favor of all. Read carefully, would you trust this guy?

“1 Corinthians 9:19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

When you transform yourself to become all things to all men,

how can you truly be anything to anyone.

All these Republican who were shocked , shocked I tell you crack me up. It is obvious they did not watch their own primary process that made the clown car disgorging participants at the circus seem like a study in serious debate.

They should be forced to watch the tapes like a football coach and team who get beat 70-0

Neither Ike nor Reagan could possibly win the Republican primary process today. Not a chance!

If anything, we should encourage and embolden the nuts to cut their own throats with even greater zeal. Infiltrate, and egg them on. They're hungry for a savior.

"Insanity, as you know, is like gravity; it only needs a little push".

Fugudaddy, you nailed it.

You are correct, sir!

If Romney made this statement 2 weeks ago the people who cheered at the 47% video would have done the same for this comment. Some would have said he could have stated it more delicately, but few or none of the GOP would have attacked him for it then. In fact, I bet Fox would have come up with some graphic about how Obama was trying to buy the election through such gifts and "entitlements." If they had the time, Romney or one of the super pacs might have run an ad showing these groups (women, college kids, blacks - although he would probably show black women, and black college kids) with a narrator stating that "Obama is trying to buy the election, using your tax dollars to give gifts back to his voters..."

True.
It's only now that the election is over that they're calling "sour grapes" and saying he doesn't speak for the rest of them. Perhaps they need a reminder of their own etch-a-sketches?

Remember when Mitt said there were certain things that should only be talked about "In quiet rooms, behind closed doors." Now we know why.

ok, it's about halfway through the first page here and i'm getting nervous. i read all sorts of analysis about how the republicans could do better and run viable candidates so...

SHUDDUPABOUTIT!!!!!

let them hang themselves for, at least, two more elections. that'll give the democrats enough time to get the economy running better, the jobs increased and the social safety net patched (assuming the republicans aren't completely nuts). we could even slide single-payer through if we're clever.

c'mon folks, those well-meaning evil bastiches have done their level best to ruin the social contract that has made this country great while enriching themselves at both the public and private troughs. it's going to take a while to do some, even minimal, damage control.

my only hope here is that they, after eating the few remaining reasonable people over there, don't change one iota of their policies and continue just as they are. they bought it and paid for it - let them have it.

and don't ever say the name jon huntsman, above a whisper, ever again, please.

If anything, we should encourage and embolden the nuts to cut their own throats with even greater zeal. Infiltrate, and egg them on. They're hungry for a savior.

"Insanity, as you know, is like gravity; it only needs a little push".

TERRIFIC comment, Temporary! Thanks!

thank you, so much.

i just noticed that somehow i got a gold star (slightly tarnished, but i'm not complaining).

and it's my birthday, too. wow!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, Temporary, and many, many more healthy and happy ones with under DEMOCRATIC presidents and Congresses!

Unless the Dems totally screw things up, I don't see a rebound in 2014. They haven't learned that it wasn't the candidate, it was the ever-changing message. The fact that they didn't seem to really have one solid message really threw a lot of voters.

What they dont realize is if they just let go of the social stuff, they would still pull much of the freak right wingers and get some democratic votes too. Lay off the anti gay, abortion stuff and just stick to fiscal stuff and smart regulation.

Michael - The problem with your advice to them is they don't have any valid, intelligent fiscal stuff or any smart regulation to put forth.

Yes....but wasn't that their whole campaign strategy, to distance themselves from what they truly believe? At least it was Romney's... everytime he discovered that what he said (and truly believed) didn't look so good in writing, he would have to change his tune...."What I really meant was......"

And again, the Republican party HAS to distance themselves from their core beliefs if they want to continue to dupe the average gun totin' joe the plumber to be on their side!

pretty sure they got the gun-totin' Joe the Plumber vote....it's the majority they failed

While it is covered in obscure crowing I think I read some shadowy group of hackers is trying to claim credit for sabotaging Orca, the Romney get out the vote computer program that bombed on election day. Unless they can prove Orca was involved in direct vote manipulation, sabotaging Orca is nothing to be proud of. If that is true the people crowing should go to jail. That is as bad as anything the Republicans are accused of.

That's true. I have thought that Anonymous may be trying to gather some street cred for not doing much, if anything, in this situation.

Perhaps you need to check your source...All Anonymous said was they sabotaged the Illegal hack they found between Orca and the Official ohio vote tabulating software.The only way their claim Could affect anything is if the Repugnicans...through Orca...attempted to steal the election....So WHO should be going to jail?

And that would be the right thing for them (Anonymous) to say. Whether they actually did it is the question.

The tabulating software that Ohio used was new, uncertified and untested. Husted actually managed to get it ok'd to use right before the election (which many were highly suspicious of). Are you saying that there actually was a plan to manipulate the tabulations to Romneys favor by software that Romneys campaign was using? And that Anonymous averted that?

Exactly , When I read what george said I could just hear him making a remark about obama being the food stamp president 5 minutes later , these people will be forever clue less , but highly qualified as corporate msm puppets telling the executives what they want to hear , selling their brand of snake oil

I agree. The leaders of the party didn't want him there. He was just the "best" of a particularly weak group of candidates - all with their own set of problems. He survived to run because his faults got exposed early on ("he's a blatant liar who flips positions and his behavior financially may be criminal, oh and don't bother checking his work history, it's not worth it") and for some reason (he's rich, successful, and white... or it was just the hair) right wing voters still accepted him.

They did it knowing what kind of person he is, and still thinking that kind of person was acceptable for the White House - says a lot about half the U.S.

well this just makes the big money donors look like idiots, doesn't it? They bought the same line as the uninformed voters...he has business savvy, so he'll be a good spokesperson for our agenda. How can they be SO wrong, and still think they're right? It's pretty sad if you think about it. Romney looks like a stooge and Rove has lost all credibility. Trump is an idiot (not just my opinion), Rush is a dinosaur, FOX News is comprised of infotainers, and nobody but Sheldon Adelson thinks Newt has a clue. They should really just go underground and figure it out. And then today one of their young guns, Rubio, said he doesn't know how old earth is, because "I'm not a science guy." I don't see any hope for this party in the future...not near or far future.

oh and Ryan's been castrated....I doubt we'll hear much from him in the future either, in fact, I'd wager his bid is up in 2014.

When they get on Fox and discuss how the white man is no longer in charge, but the 2010 census showed 78% of Americans are white and 50% of those are men, well, it's a tad bit disingenuous.

It wasn't just liberals or progressives who voted. The GOP's own core groups came out in record numbers this year. They just didn't choose to hire a bad employee simply because he was white.

No. The party panders to and relies on the crazy, willfully ignorant and arrogant crusaders so that they will vote for them, because the party actually works for the 1% and the 1% can't win the vote by themselves.