Just in case anyone thought there would be unanimity among and/or between Canadian and or United States citizens ( and those who inhabit the aforementioned territories ) let him / her peruse the conversations about the quote. MY reaction to the quote was .. the Canadian Islamic Congress should take a democratic vote on the issue.

As with many ( indeed, most ) of the historic, esoteric and debatable political-legal issues, I read with interest and decide to leave the Aye or Nay to others. ( That's the problem with not being hard right or left ... wafflers like me have to take what's given by the "I'm right and you're wrong" crowd. Hmmm .. maybe there's a message in that: democracy --- or indeed a democratic republic is ruled by the strong-willed ?

AMEN !

When I complain about the lack of succinct-ness, I NEVER include Gandhi ! And those who make a long and convoluted argument about his wisdom usually have missed the point.

Another too long and convoluted thought but worth unwinding. If it has a fault of the thinkers of that period ( and there were many ) it is that they weren't often very succinct. ( BTW, many of us in THIS period also succumb to the same ill: e.g.; me. )

Had to struggle a bit to keep the antecedents aligned. Good thought, nonetheless.

"Equal" = what ? A total impossibility if ever there was one.

Even the best of twins have different characteristics and learn different facts and interpretations. Equality of good intentions, maybe .. but ... none of us have ever met his "equal."

Definition, sir, definition.

In short, since you elected him you should trust him to think and feel the same way you do. ( Caution: you could have been in error when you selected, voted for, elected him .. or .. he could have been lying just, only and simply for your vote. )

Can one "save" humanity other than by ruling it ? Humans "by nature" are animals; only via powers greater than the natural animalistic ones can he achieve his greatness. And what, do you suppose, Mencken thought of himself ... I wonder if he worried a lot about being humble .. no, I'd guess he thought he could "save" mankind .. how ? By ruling their thinking, NO ?

Maybe in describing the ugly non-compassionate ways of every animal I can think of, Founding Father John has hit on a true note: we need to concentrate .. and even more .. act on .. the statement ( Biblical, I believe ) that mankind is created to be above the animals. THINK on it: name an animal that's not "described to a t" by his multi-faceted description of what happens to man (and mankind) if he doesn't "nip the shoots of arbitrary power."

Second paragraph, second sentence: WHO'S conscience ? Mr. Thoreau would have been fun to chat with, no? Of course we'd have to find our way to his retreat at W.P. Breathes there a man ( or woman ) who at one point in life hasn't wished to step in the footsteps he left behind ? Earlier ( in my late teens or early 20's ) I said, "what a way to live !"

So the chink in the armor is not the system, but mankind's hubris ? ( I'd agree ... consider the source(s) of whatever system is devised -- and praised. )

The trouble is that the State also makes itself the source of all benefits, as well ... the construct, like most constructs, is not a one-way street, but a coin which may be viewed from two sides.

"Attribution" made, but "No reliable source found."

So how come this quote found a place on a site that regularly quotes lots of folk on lots of topics ?

At least, honesty prevailed ... but I wonder at the principle of "quoting" things that may not be "quotes." ?

I know not of others, so I won't speak for them, but I think I have a tendency to "boil down" issues into comfortable phrases and concepts ... Mr. Mencken says I'm not alone.

Only two sharply-defined positions ? Hate to break it to you, but there are more than two sides to this coin !

... and not impose themselves or their beliefs on others." He forgot to add that, so I will.

Henry David ought to move to a cabin in the woods !
( sarcasm )

The term "checks and balances" comes to my mind. I don't know where I saw or heard it, but they're essential conditions for laws.

"... equality in slavery, inequality in freedom .." pretty close to the historical record ( exception: U.S. slavery of the blacks ).

I find it difficult to think of ANYTHING "unrestrained" that has a good result ... or is that just me ?

True, but not just of beaurocrats (sp ?) .. true of mankind in general. The list is so broad as to include everyone -- except ME, of course !

.... as long as the truth isn't false. We too-often believe our opinion of our interpretation of the facts is best defined as "truth." In other words, beware the ego in all this.

IT'S A PARAPHASE OF AN EARLIER "SAW," WHICH GOES,
"TOBACCO IS AN AWFUL WEED .. I LIKE IT."'
I may have to research it .. know nothing of its origin, but part of my dad's appreciation of life, life's humor and life's foibles.

Argument for freedom -- or license ? Who HASN'T heard of a crime so heinous as to warrant killing him .. who ?