The Social Conservatives Safe House (3)

[Thunder Peel]

It occurred to me that the author is talking about punk rockers - but in truth, today's liberals - who are the parents of the current generation - are the ones who sold out to the status quo of their own failed "revolution." Be it sex, drugs, or entitlements, the "anti-establishment" survivors of their '60's "revolution" have settled themselves into the stale humdrum of obesience to an ideology that "failed to launch."

Try as they might to invigorate what energized them in the '60's, they've bought homes, taken jobs, started families and come to realize what real life is all about - individual responsibility.

Trouble is, they've taught their children their failed ideology and now, of a sudden, their children are beginning to realize just how hypocritical their parent's "revolution" truly was - which would otherwise be a good thing for us, but their indoctrination has entrenched the ideology without providing for it a necessary foundation for success - which is the impossible task, but their kids are left with no choices (irony at its height) - they can't adopt their parent's hypocrisy, but their indoctrination prevents them from acknowledging what actually works.

The "fields are ripe" - but there's a lot of work to do to bring in the harvest.

Great point. It's a lot like Occupy Wall Street: complain about corporations while taking pictures on your iPhone. The irony is stunning, much like those rich celebrities that expect us to put away our guns and share our wealth, yet they want to take private jets, own a dozen homes around the country and never once refund the hard-earned money we spend on them. The left wants to be generous with someone else's money while living however they please.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Great point. It's a lot like Occupy Wall Street: complain about corporations while taking pictures on your iPhone. The irony is stunning, much like those rich celebrities that expect us to put away our guns and share our wealth, yet they want to take private jets, own a dozen homes around the country and never once refund the hard-earned money we spend on them. The left wants to be generous with someone else's money while living however they please.

If one thinks about it, it's simply impossible not to exhibit ironic hypocrisy when consistently espousing an ideology that does not, cannot work.

It's like basing one's ideology on the concept of perpetual motion - a lot of seemingly cool inventions and gadgets can be proposed when one accepts the premise, but when the premise is impossible, why bother? Indeed, why pursue them at all, let alone with the characteristic rigidity, intolerance, and collectivization as we see?

What is striking is that despite espousing an ideology that does not, cannot work, the persistent and relentless promotion and pursuit of it, particularly when it's characterized with such rigidity, intolerance, and collectivization, does exhibit behavior as if the premise is valid.

The force and effect of relentless promotion and pursuit is arguably therefore cause perhaps for believing in the unbelievable - as long as there exists no opposing force to challenge it.

...and therein lie the rub and the why of its inevitable failure; an opposing force does exist and can only be denied for so long. In the end, truth and reality will always triumph.

 

[PopesFollower]

I am back. I guess I ruffled some Lefty feathers.

 

[Thunder Peel]

So those Lois Lerner emails: is the president still going to tell us there isn't "a smidgen of corruption?"

Lois Lerner email: Some in GOP 'crazies' - Rachael Bade - POLITICO.com

 

[EdwinWillers]

So those Lois Lerner emails: is the president still going to tell us there isn't "a smidgen of corruption?"

Lois Lerner email: Some in GOP 'crazies' - Rachael Bade - POLITICO.com

I thought this was choice:

Lerner, through her lawyer, maintains her innocence, and the new seemingly personal exchange does not prove that she allowed bias to infiltrate her job, merely that she had a number of opinions.​

"Seemingly personal" exchange?? LOL​

And no bias here - just... "opinion."

They really do think we're that stupid.​

 

[Thunder Peel]

The left seems to be suspiciously quiet on this story. I wonder why...

Bill Clinton, Hours Before 9/11 Attacks: 'I Could Have Killed' Osama bin Laden - ABC News

 

[EdwinWillers]

The left seems to be suspiciously quiet on this story. I wonder why...

Bill Clinton, Hours Before 9/11 Attacks: 'I Could Have Killed' Osama bin Laden - ABC News

Yeah, his excuse was he would've had to kill 300 women and children at the same time, which is a pretty transparently lame excuse by putting such a specific number to it. And then to follow it with "because if I did that, I'd be just like him" has some merit (maybe), but given our abilities to take these types of morons out with minimum collateral damage, it just rings altogether too hollow.

To put it bluntly, Clinton was more worried about his image, about what people thought about him rather than doing the right thing.

Consequently, 3,000 innocent men, women, and children are murdered.

...and his image isn't any less tarnished than it ever was.

 

[Thunder Peel]

Yeah, his excuse was he would've had to kill 300 women and children at the same time, which is a pretty transparently lame excuse by putting such a specific number to it. And then to follow it with "because if I did that, I'd be just like him" has some merit (maybe), but given our abilities to take these types of morons out with minimum collateral damage, it just rings altogether too hollow.

To put it bluntly, Clinton was more worried about his image, about what people thought about him rather than doing the right thing.

Consequently, 3,000 innocent men, women, and children are murdered.

...and his image isn't any less tarnished than it ever was.

Pretty much. In typical Washington fashion he failed upwards.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Pretty much. In typical Washington fashion he failed upwards.

Like algore, he took his viagra and added 3" to his height.

 

[MachZer0]

A CIA operative responsible for finding bin Laden was on the Kelly file calling Clinton a moral coward because he had many more opportunities to kill bin Laden than just the one he fessed up to and it could have been done without the concern over killing civilians. He was more concerned about the political ramifications than anything else. He also compared Hillary saying they are two of a kind in that respect

 

[EdwinWillers]

A CIA operative responsible for finding bin Laden was on the Kelly file calling Clinton a moral coward because he had many more opportunities to kill bin Laden than just the one he fessed up to and it could have been done without the concern over killing civilians. He was more concerned about the political ramifications than anything else. He also compared Hillary saying they are two of a kind in that respect

Exactly. Not exactly a paragon of "moral courage," Clinton (take your pick) couldn't do the right thing unless it would benefit them financially or politically - preferably both.

 

[Thunder Peel]

I so badly want to believe the left is waking up to who Obama is and what he's doing. Unfortunately people like this are a lost cause.

Creepy: Daily Beast Wants Corporations to Sign ‘Loyalty Oaths’ to Obama’s ‘Economic Patriotism’

 

[MachZer0]

I so badly want to believe the left is waking up to who Obama is and what he's doing. Unfortunately people like this are a lost cause.

Creepy: Daily Beast Wants Corporations to Sign ‘Loyalty Oaths’ to Obama’s ‘Economic Patriotism’

That is creepy

 

[EdwinWillers]

That is creepy

Creepy, but consistent. It's altogether amazing how otherwise intelligent people are unable to see the logical consequences of their ideology.

...though for people who are equally consistent in denying that ideology even exists, let alone how devoted they are to it, I guess it makes sense.

...which is in part why it's so creepy.

 

[Avid]

I so badly want to believe the left is waking up to who Obama is and what he's doing. Unfortunately people like this are a lost cause.

The thought crosses my mind on occasion as well, but I hear the well informed on the radio trying to keep me from falling for the tricks. The media will not turn on the guy - they will not even ask a hard question. It was with the MEDIA that Nixon was exposed, and it was with the Republicans in Congress that he was impeached. These clowns are obvious playing for the enemy of the country, or they would still be interested in keeping the politicians from getting away with such abuses.

Our recent two "Challengers" have not so much as ASKED a tough question during debates, or shown the record for us to consider. My contention is that they did not want to win. (Why run then?!?)

Late in '08, I got a knock at the door, and it was a Republican volunteer: "Just wanted to be sure you were going to vote for Mister McCain!" I had just seen how he REFUSED to do anything that would actually go toward WINNING, and concluded he did not want to win. I asked this woman, "If this country is determined to have a Black Man as president, why not someone like Herman Cain? Why does he have to be a COMMUNIST? What about Dr. Walter E. Williams or Dr. Thomas Sowell?"

She stood there with her mouth open, as I don't think she even knew who these men were. I have thought of a half dozen more names since, and more are coming forward for 2016. How is it these "Establishment Republicrats" cannot see how strongly a CONSERVATIVE does in these races, and how even their "base" cannot get excited about the ones they put forth?

.

 

[Thunder Peel]

The thought crosses my mind on occasion as well, but I hear the well informed on the radio trying to keep me from falling for the tricks. The media will not turn on the guy - they will not even ask a hard question. It was with the MEDIA that Nixon was exposed, and it was with the Republicans in Congress that he was impeached. These clowns are obvious playing for the enemy of the country, or they would still be interested in keeping the politicians from getting away with such abuses.

Our recent two "Challengers" have not so much as ASKED a tough question during debates, or shown the record for us to consider. My contention is that they did not want to win. (Why run then?!?)

Late in '08, I got a knock at the door, and it was a Republican volunteer: "Just wanted to be sure you were going to vote for Mister McCain!" I had just seen how he REFUSED to do anything that would actually go toward WINNING, and concluded he did not want to win. I asked this woman, "If this country is determined to have a Black Man as president, why not someone like Herman Cain? Why does he have to be a COMMUNIST? What about Dr. Walter E. Williams or Dr. Thomas Sowell?"

She stood there with her mouth open, as I don't think she even knew who these men were. I have thought of a half dozen more names since, and more are coming forward for 2016. How is it these "Establishment Republicrats" cannot see how strongly a CONSERVATIVE does in these races, and how even their "base" cannot get excited about the ones they put forth?

.

The GOP is so convinced that they must keep moving to the left in order to win elections, yet every time they run a moderate they get destroyed. It's like they're oblivious to their base and then they treat us with such distain, all while wondering why they're losing support. They will get steamrolled in 2016 if they go with another McCain or Romney and I have no doubt that they will.

If I wanted a moderate or liberal then I would just vote Democrat or third party. I used to respect the Republicans when they stood on conservative principles and didn't back down from a fight. Now they just give up and do nothing.

 

[MachZer0]

The GOP is so convinced that they must keep moving to the left in order to win elections, yet every time they run a moderate they get destroyed. It's like they're oblivious to their base and then they treat us with such distain, all while wondering why they're losing support. They will get steamrolled in 2016 if they go with another McCain or Romney and I have no doubt that they will.

If I wanted a moderate or liberal then I would just vote Democrat or third party. I used to respect the Republicans when they stood on conservative principles and didn't back down from a fight. Now they just give up and do nothing.

Truman referred to such Republicans as Dime Store Democrats. And he would say, why vote for a Dime Store Democrat when you can have the real thing. And he was right. Moreover, Republicans like McConnell and Boehner would do everyone a favor if they would simply switch parties

 

[Thunder Peel]

Truman referred to such Republicans as Dime Store Democrats. And he would say, why vote for a Dime Store Democrat when you can have the real thing. And he was right. Moreover, Republicans like McConnell and Boehner would do everyone a favor if they would simply switch parties

Yep. Either stand up against them or join them but stop leaving us stranded in the middle. They're not interested in compromising or playing fair, so why does the GOP think they can change that? It makes no sense.

 

[MachZer0]

Yep. Either stand up against them or join them but stop leaving us stranded in the middle. They're not interested in compromising or playing fair, so why does the GOP think they can change that? It makes no sense.

Oddly enough, The Tea Party is what the GOP is supposed to be. It's the GOP's stance against the Tea Party that caused me to leave the party or as Reagan put it, the GOP left me.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Guess who was not at a funeral.

I miss Bush.