Within the context of the American system, it’s not necessary for the parallels to be precise. A political party /movement in America doesn’t have to behave as brutally and egregiously as the Nazis to be way out of line by the standards we’re supposed to uphold. The reason why this point matters is because liberal critics all too easily dismiss alarmism if the acts of politicians fall far short of outright fascism or socialism. Our founders got very angry and rebelled against what, by comparison with what much of the 18th-century world put up with, was “not all that much.” Had they not gotten angry about those slights, we would now be the southermost part of Canada.

Obama does not have to be as bad as Hugo Chavez for us to think of him in the same terms.

I cannot help but to remember Clint Eastwood’s movie The Unforgiven when I hear of violence against the congressmen who voted for HCR. What did these people expect? When one opts to ignore the way democracy was set up to operate and in effect set up a one-party dictatorship, violence is what you should get. As of Tuesday the US is a one-party dictatorship. Isn’t violence is completely justified?

And I was a gun-control advocate.

A 10% flat tax is NOT a good argument against monarchy.

This has crossed my mind as well. In the long history of human government, very, very few have been “of the people, by the people and for the people.” Most have been tyrants or worse.

We may be a blip in history, a brief flash of liberty.

Ancient Israel was granted tremendous liberty upon entering the Promised Land but soon lusted for a king:

1 Sam 8:4-20
4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah,
5 and said to him, “Look, you are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.”
6 But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” So Samuel prayed to the LORD.
7 And the LORD said to Samuel, “Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.
8 “According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even to this day– with which they have forsaken Me and served other gods– so they are doing to you also.
9 “Now therefore, heed their voice. However, you shall solemnly forewarn them, and show them the behavior of the king who will reign over them.”
10 So Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who asked him for a king.
11 And he said, “This will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for his own chariots and to be his horsemen, and some will run before his chariots.
12 “He will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties, will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and some to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.
13 “He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers.
14 “And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants.
15 “He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants.
16 “And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men, and your donkeys, and put them to his work.
17 “He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants.
18 “And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.”
19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, “No, but we will have a king over us,
20 that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.”
(NKJ)

Man seems destined to be ruled by tyrants, but most especially when they have rejected God.

America has never had a king. That could change. Who says a Constitution must be followed, anyway?

Obama himself has said he is dissatisfied with the limiting nature of the document…that it limits what government can do. This, from a so-called Constitutional professor who, as Commander In Chief and President, has sworn to protect and abide by that very document. Yet it means little to his ends.

Bribes, lies, unkept outlandish promises, corruption, intimidation, threats…these are not the ways of a free people, rather the beginnings of “one man, one vote, one time.”

It is not a stretch to say that the Weimar Republic never functioned as a democracy. For nearly two decades successive presidents ruled by decree using emergency powers, because almost nothing got done by the Reichstag.

Hitler and the Nazis actually campaigned on dictatorship. It was not a secret, what they planned to do, and about 40% of Germans thought it was a good idea. Hitler claimed that vesting all power, and all responsibility, in him was superior to the Weimar Republic. If things went well, you knew who was responsible, and if they went poorly you knew who to blame–Hitler could never dodge responsibility, unlike politicians in Parliament. (Think of “I voted for it before I voted against it”.)

What we are seeing in our country is more like hardening of the arteries, something like the Roman republic experienced. Eventually, they got a dictator, and when they did, it was not a secret what he intended to do and how he intended to do it.