Thoughtful Conservatism Can Win Hearts and Minds
It takes effort to be a thoughtful conservative. It’s hard in this day and age to remain above the fray, especially when your opponent is calling you racist, or a fascist, or a hatemonger. It takes great aplomb to hear the insults and ignore them. In the days of our nation’s founding, it was one of the most recognizable attributes of a gentleman. In 1774, during the tumultuous days that came before the outbreak of violence in the American colonies, Benjamin Franklin was forced to confess that he had come into possession of certain letters from the royal governor of Massachusetts, and seen fit to give the letters to the Sons of Liberty in that state. Franklin lived in London, England, at the time, which meant he was well within the reach of the government. He was called before Parliament, where he was forced to stand silent while his character and name were destroyed by England’s solicitor-general, Lord Wedderburn. Franklin uttered not a word, and in fact never even moved, even as Wedderburn implored his fellow members of Parliament, “I hope, my Lords, you will mark and brand the man, for the honour of this country, of Europe, and of mankind. … He has forfeited all the respect of societies and of men. Into what companies will he hereafter go with an unembarrassed face, or the honest intrepidity of virtue?”
Franklin was secure enough in his virtue and pragmatic enough in his philosophic outlook to know he was on the defensive and that the best course of action was to remain quiet. Yet that didn’t mean he would remain quiet forever. Franklin continued writing his essays and papers in defense of the colonies until he was forced to leave London in 1775.
In addition to knowing when to argue, the thoughtful conservative has to know how to argue. We really don’t argue anymore, but instead try to come up with new and amusing names to call each other. People aren’t really protesting a government growing out of control; they’re just “teabaggers,” after all. Supporters of President Obama aren’t Americans who are yearning for something different; they’re merely “Obamatrons.” The thoughtful conservative, on the other hand, knows that arguing, not name calling, actually gets things done. You may not always be trying to convince the person you’re arguing with. You may very well be trying to convince your mutual audience. Take another look at Cliff May’s interview with Jon Stewart. Just a couple of minutes in, and it’s clear that May is the one in control of himself and the interview while Stewart who is grasping at straws. I doubt Stewart was convinced by May, but I have no doubt in my mind that some viewers were.
Once you know when and how to argue, you still need to be able to argue, and for that you have to be armed with knowledge. The thoughtful conservative is not an intellectual, at least not in the “squishy” sense of the word. Arthur Brooks, for example, recently wrote an article claiming that this current political fight goes much deeper and is an actual assault on capitalism. In order to make that argument, Brooks needs to know not only a thing or two about what’s going on in the world today. He has to have a solid grasp on the theories and history of capitalism, socialism, the welfare state. The reader may not be exposed to every scrap of knowledge that Brooks has accumulated over the years, but that knowledge was put to use when Brooks was making and framing his argument. Incidentally, I believe that Mr. Brooks is understating the scope of the battle, for I believe the cultural war we are fighting is for nothing less than the survival of Western civilization (but that is perhaps another column entirely). The more you know about what you’re fighting for, the more effective you’ll be as a fighter.
John Hawkins was right about one thing: it is time to fight back. But not, as he suggests, as a savage beast without moral compass or human dignity. Let’s leave the barbarism to our opponents.
I think your attacks on Michael Savage sound a little bitchy, and undermine your own argument. Just out of interest, have you read his works?
Bringing a hanky to a gun fight? “Smart thinking”, Clarendon. /s
Your words neither convince nor persuade me.
We should copy what the Democrats did. Savagely attack everything Republican in every venue possible but allow the leaders of our party to act like they’re above that kind of mud slinging.
TO: Clarendon, et al.
RE: Why….
…..should we limit our array of weapons in this battle of wills?
We don’t need to be all bitch and no pitch. But we certainly don’t need to be the opposite either. We SHOULD be an intelligent admixture of ALL aspects.
Sometimes we’re cerebral. Other times we’re heartfelt. As the saying goes….
The trick is to be as witty as possible at ALL times.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Wit makes its own welcome, and levels all distinctions. No dignity, no learning, no force of character, can make any stand against good wit. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]
Blackwater
I disagree. The Dems have become expert at turning that tactic against us as a sign of disarray. They draw attention to the attacks and away from the solid argument. We need to project more consistency and we need to repeat arguments so they get through the MSM sound barrier. We need to learn to put our own pet project on the back burner long enough to let the argument du jour set in. When we have internal differences of opinion, we should conduct our discussions as adults who are working hard to find the best solution because we all agree that the administration’s proposals are seriously flawed. We need to project adult thoughtfulness and competence in common sense language that will reach the voter who has a complicated life beyond politics. This doesn’t mean the Pelosi twists and turns of the truth go unnoticed. It means we take the VDH and Krauthammer arguments and continue to hammer with them until the distracted voter wants to hear her response and won’t be satisfied with evasions.
We should also be boning up on the next big issue, which is health care. When that gate opens, we need to emerge prepared with facts and questions and numbers.
Clarendon:
“I think it’s helpful if Hawkins recognizes a few things that are, not what we wish them to be. Firstly, conservatives do not, by and large, have the influence over popular culture that liberals have. Secondly, conservatives are not in power politically at the federal level. Thirdly, conservatives have been successfully labeled and framed by liberals.”
I appreciate where you’re coming from here, but your third point is what makes your approach doomed to failure if that be the only track taken.
Liberals did not successfully frame us by rational and calm discourse, but by the tactics of ridicule, smears and the most vile attacks unjustly launched on a sitting President.
The thing that must always be kept in mind about democracy is that it was born in the bloody No-Man’s Land between two heavily armed phalanxes, not in a poli-sci discussion group or an 18th century drawing room.
It can be an ugly business, and opting out of the ugly part means you have yielded the field.
It is quite possible that the odious McCain would have won, had he not kiboshed his campaign from aggresively exploiting the past personal, business, and religious associations of Barak Obama.
He didn’t…and he’s not President.
As the Left gets uglier and more vituperative in their rhetoric, and as it seems to work, then we are doing ourselves no favor to eschew similar tactics for fear of soiling our frock-coats.
The key to victory will lie in a combination of approaches, thoughtful conservatives taking the high road in explaining the message, and the “brass-knuckles and tire-irons” crew in defending it, and sometimes a combination of the two.
I would also put it to you that the Liberals’ own agenda, as it is realized in the form of this Democratic government, will do FAR more to advance our fortunes than anything we could say.
Bush, for all his faults, did try reaching out to the Left on some of his social policy initiatives, that he got kicked in the face from them for his troubles anyway indicates what kind of people they are…absolutists.
And their agenda since taking office has amply displayed that they are prisoners of their own dogma, passing legislation for policies that they must know will cripple this nation for years to come, but they do it regardless.
As Obama’s policies wreak their havoc upon our domestic tranquility and our foreign security, we simply need to point out that there exists an alternative.
Sometimes it should be whispered, and sometimes it should be shouted.
“It is quite possible that the odious McCain would have won, had he not kiboshed his campaign from aggresively exploiting the past personal, business, and religious associations of Barak Obama.”
I am convinced that this is the number one reason why the politically correct John McCain lost. One should also add that “aggresively exploiting the past personal, business, and religious associations of Barak Obama” would not be dirty politics! It is very fair—and laudable to do so. The public had a right to know about these matters. Obama should have been dead in the water by no later than September. The majority of voters would have concluded that he was too dangerous to be our elected national leader.
The Dems are expert at the “Politics of Personal Destruction” and are even better at accusing the GOP of it, even while they the Dems are doing it with great expertise.
What we should do is take back the debate, with as much force and fury as they use, but with LEGITIMATE TARGETS and with the truth. They have grown sloppy enough and corrupt enough (Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, to begin with) that the “mud” is their own output, their own wastes. It’s quite fair for us to send this back to them, and if it’s done with eloquence (which, these days, means a catchy turn of phrase) and force, it can succeed. It can even, slowly, get past the media gatekeepers, especially if we can find a few of them with a conscience.
Use truth, use their own corruption, sum it up in catchy-and-true statements, and keep up the volume and pressure.
Oh, and don’t go having sexual flings in public restrooms.
“Savage incivility didn’t win the White House for Democrats; Barack Obama did.”
Nonsense. The Left’s eight years of savage incivility, shrieking hate, and malignant slanders designed to stir up Bush Derangement Syndrome won it: to the point that the Dems were successfully able to label their opponent “McSame.”
Tell me: how is Ogabe deserving of anything *but* scorn and contempt? Our job is to make the electorate understand why they *should* hate his guts. God knows the analingual press won’t do it.
You can’t use reason against a Leftist any more than you can against a Talib: both are fundamentally irrational.
Well, I just finished watching an interesting interview with Megan Kelley, of Fox News, and a ACORN employee. I wish every American could have watched the interview, to see how corrupt ACORN is, along with their partners in crime, the Democrat party. She readily admitted that taxpayer funded ACORN, and the Democrat party have had a parternership for a long time. Her last statement in the interview was, “She believed that ACORN was a cancer on American society”.
It would be great if we could all be nice, and only discuss the issues. The left will not allow that, as Al Gore often states, “The debate is over”. Somehow, we are going to have to find a way to get our message out without being bullied.
When you are a good natured person you risk being suckered. When you wise up you can continue being good natured while you slice and dice the opposition with a sweet smile on your face. That was the Palin who brought big oil and the sleazy old boys in line in Alaska before she, as a team player, good sport, etc., tried to fit into the ridiculous McCain shoe box. We have the Constitution and common sense on our side. The Republic will come out of this building catastrophe wiser and smarter. Don’t forget, a lot of Democrats will reach their limit with the Obama posse long before the media notices a thing.
Bill,
We aren’t trying to win the committed leftists. We are trying to win the middle of the roaders who fell for the MSM line.
the obama voters knew all about him,they just didn’t care.at least the ones i talked to.for them it was emotion,that came heavaly in to play.argueing facts or sustance was a complete waste of time.
one of the main reasons why mcain lost was because it was too easy to simply put the blame of all our current woes on the republican administration.
another good reason why he lost was because mcain was a rino and the base couldn’t stand him.i personaly,will never vote the lesser of two evils again.
i think in the long run it is preferable for the american people to get the full dose of what progressives are pedaling and moderates are enabling.i know of no other way to get through to them.
of course i will continue to point out to my anointed brethern calmly and rationaly the negative aspects of the half baked,ill-formed policies of our current leaders.best to make good use of a bad situation.
when the time comes(which it will envaribly do),i will not say,”i told you so.”
In marketing, the main messages are always very brief and targeted towards benefit to the end user. “Make more money, Improve your score, Have more fun, etc.”
To market conservatism the same must be achieved – brief messaged targeted towards benefits to the voters. Unfortunately, the benefits of a free market, liberty, free speech, conservatism, etc. is not targeted towards those who got Obumble into office.
Maybe a new “Free Party” would appeal to both – socialists since they want everything for free and conservatives because they want a free market society.
The masses are asses.
Even though FDR’s pre-war policies did nothing to put the country back on solid economic footing, he most surely would have been re-elected had he not died in office. The asses are simply persuaded by slick politicians, not cerebral arguments. Even the Reagan/Carter election is a prime example of slickness vs. dunderheadedness. Besides, the electorate in this country is too worried about how hot the performers look on Dancing with the Stars or who Simon has most recently embarrassed on American Idol.
We live in a country where the average person is a boob. Where whites are ashamed of their skin color, and non-whites are proud of theirs. Where our new president says things like he’s the only one between the bankers and the pitchforks, and the popular press doesn’t even report it.
The asses aren’t outraged when Democrats tell them to hate the upper classes, instead they eat it up. But I don’t hear Dems lumping in Oprah or the founder of BET with “the rich” they so condemn. I’m a Christian and not a racist, but let’s face it, the winners in the Old World Order – us, white men and women – are the targets of the New World Order. If the Chinese were on top now, and the rest of the world were still fairly democratic, maybe they’d be the target. The fact is that we have been the winners and now the rest of the world wants to knock us off. Even those we’ve helped want to bite the hand that fed them.
Instead of advancing civilization, today’s tattooed and body-pierced, orange-haired morons are ushering in a new wave of tribalism. Right is wrong and wrong is right. Conservative values and accomplishments are too complex and take too long to explain to a population – white and non-white – whose attention span for such things is shorter than the time in between drum thumps of the latest rap music hit.
Keynes said that in the long run, we’re all dead. But, in the shorter run, white men and women are at the top of the endangered species list. Not necessarily because we’re white, but because we’ve been the winners for too long. Our successes in two world wars, and teaching the world about democracy, while being the 800-pound gorilla in world affairs have only served to make us the targets of those who now think it’s their turn to be on top.
It’s time that we all adopt the wealthy Kennedy family’s approach: go along with world’s desire for a Hegelian dialectic swing to a worker’s utopia and hope that you aren’t guillotined in the process.
Clarendon, I applaud your efforts to push back on the “we need to be bigger jerks” crowd. Unfortunately, most of the PJM audience are in John Hawkins’ corner on this one. Look at the comments posted before me.
To them, the Democrats aren’t an opposition party. They’re the enemy.
I mean, look at the hostility of their metaphors: “Bringing a hanky to a gun fight?”
A gun fight? Whuh? Calm down. Imagine if Tyson thought that being a dirtier fighter would bring him back to glory in the ring! We’d all laugh at him and say he took too many blows to the head.
Should we torture the dems or not? That is the question. The answer is only when we have to.
I agree with many of the comments already made, ie, we have to learn how to argue well, educate ourselves so we can defend and present our ideas and, when possible, throw in some humor. Character assassination is easy, mastering debate requires a learning curve and for some of us that may be quite steep. But hey, we’re trying to save western civilization.
What drove me crazy with Mc Cain was his insistence on being above it all without arguing conservative ideals well. He frequently resorted to tired old cliches or silence.
Clifford did a bang up job and we would do well to learn from it.
TO: All
RE: Herb
Is ANY rational person here surprised by Herb’s response here….
Naturally, Herb, and his ilk, would not like to have the weapons of mass distraction employed by the so-called ‘progressives’ unleashed in retaliation on this field of conflict. They’d likely see some serious loss of potential/effectiveness.
I mean….their techniques have proven to be effective. So, if they’ve decided to drop any sort of civility and stoop to ad homs in order to cover their lack of any rationality….
….why shouldn’t their opponents use the same successful techniques?
Or is there something MORE important at ‘play’ here? Something you’re not addressing?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Show & Tell Time, kiddies....]
Please, by all means play nice. It worked so well for you for the first 8 years of the decade. Continue being gentlemen, and I’ll continue to wish kidney disease on you. K?
As long as there is jihad against “the philosophy of the logos” or “the rta”, or “the ma’at”, or “the tao”, or “the torah”, or Jesus Christ (all but two of these examples come from “The Way”, which is the middle essay of “The Abolition of man” by C.S. Lewis), any change in politics is as useless as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Like it or not, no singular person, or group, has enough gravitas to successfully be the centre of the universe.
TO: Clarendon, et al.
RE: An Additional Thought
Is that ENOUGH ‘Hearts and Minds’ to avoid total self-destruction?
In other words….
….a ‘few good men and women’ is not going to be particularly effective, in this particualr ‘venue’.
So tell US all, what you think is REALLY necessary to roll back this tide of stupidity.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[I am an escapee of a political correction facility.]
“18. Chuck Pelto:
…retaliation on this field of conflict.”
Spare me the war metaphors, Chuck. You’re not a soldier in the great jihad against leftism. Opinions aren’t weapons. Beliefs aren’t bombs. Hyperbole has never won a battle.
Your fellow Americans are not the enemy because they disagree with you politically.
They are the opposition, and if you want to beat them, then –as the kids say– you have to come correct. We’re not talking about bringing a gun to a knife fight. We’re talking about getting your message straight.
And if your message is, “We’re being overrun by a bunch of lefties and the MSM,” then don’t expect a whole lot of people to be too receptive.
This old counter-insurgency fighter just had an idea. We’ve all been moaning about the mainstream media but I haven’t seen any ideas on how to hurt them. How about financially? Are there enough of us to boycott the products of the sponsors of the MSM news programs?
We might need a little leadership and administrative staff to coordinate the boycott and communicate with the networks and sponsors. If we get enough participants we could non-violently do some serious damage to somebody’s bottom line and send a real message.
Would you be willing to give up your favorite brand of peanut butter to hear the truth on NBC?
Arise fellow patriots! The battle has begun!
“To them, the Democrats aren’t an opposition party. They’re the enemy.”
And they’re right. Liberals are ugly, hate-filled, lying bastards who are doing their damnedest to destroy our Republic.
No mercy. No remorse.
Telling the truth about opponents is not fighting ‘dirty’. Although of course the rats will say it is. It is a forgone conclusion that Juan McCain’s refusal to tell America just who and what the community organizer was helped defeat him. However the greater negative in this past election equation was the thoroughly corrupt pubbie party and its pirate masters in business. Floating all that phony paper was bad, very bad.
We are not going to be able to revive conservatism and the free market until we purge ourselves of the public’s perception that we are the pirate party. I don’t see this happening. Not now. Not ever.
new utopian: I’m afraid you’ve nailed it. But that doesn’t leave many options. And if it’s true that the country is full of asses (and I think it is true) then it shouldn’t be too difficult getting them to stand in line for something else…esp. if it’s “free”.
The liberals are appealing to emotion, more particularly negative emotions, with a pretense of reason through strange concoctions straight from the kitchen of expedited logic. They get good mileage out of it because the sugar does not need any medecine to go down.
The conservatives are appealing to reason, not a pretense of logic by accelerated process, and positive emotions like the pride of individual accomplishment.
The conservatives cannot use the fast talking and denial of human nature so dear to the liberals. You cannot “package” effort, duty and honor to make it more palatable to the cynics. These values are taught by example and reference to the morality we inherited from the judeo-christian ethics. Precisely what the “progressives” profess to have rendered obsolete.
Let the liberals make the mistake of offering cooperation where it’s not possible, unless you don’t even consider the injury to the principles that have made America great.
“Herb” #16, Oh the hypocrisy! Doesn’t “Bushitler” ring a bell?!? Go play with broken glass, loser.
TO: Herb
RE: Try….
….not to be a total ass.
Nor ignore the last General Election.
RE: Hyperbole, Anyone?
Ever here the term, “Yes we can”?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Contrary to your hope that I’m NOT a ‘soldier’, you are so sadly mistaken….again…..
Herb
How about a few more?
Bush lied, people died
Cheney = Darth Vader
General Betrayus
I doesn’t mean that conservatives shouldn’t take a more mature approach than the Left, but we’re not buying a history rewrite here either. Try again.
#12 vb: “We aren’t trying to win the committed leftists. We are trying to win the middle of the roaders who fell for the MSM line.”
Exactly. And this is why we aren’t trying to win the hard-core liberals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
For a look at the difference between calm reason and frothing emotionalism, check out this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1IYeuBQFUQ
And just for shites and giggles, I highly recommend viewing the words of this calm, wise old fella (the opening credits are goofy, but the content of this interview is priceless): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfdRpyfEmBE
a href=”http://strongerthandeathhq.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/saying-the-n-word-is-worse-then-911/”>We have an obligation to slam these people for their evil intent, their bloated arrogance, and their bigotry.Trying to remain above the fray has only kept us out of it!
We have an obligation to slam these people for their evil intent, their bloated arrogance, and their bigotry.Trying to remain above the fray has only kept us out of it!
“It takes great aplomb to hear the insults and ignore them. In the days of our nation’s founding, it was one of the most recognizable attributes of a gentleman.”
Now, I’m not arguing that conservatives should turn shrill, bitchy, whiny, etc. etc. etc. on the left. But do you really believe this? Didn’t your history studies in school have anything to say about Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton? Duels to defend one’s honor against a defamer were quite common even up to modern days (albeit usually with fisticuffs and not pistols). Frankin sustaining a tounge lashing at the hands of a government agent is more a matter of restraint in pursuit of self-preservation than endeavoring to persevere.
“24. Bill:
Liberals are ugly, hate-filled, lying bastards who are doing their damnedest to destroy our Republic.”
Ya know, Bill, after writing that sentence, you really have no room to complain about anyone else being an “ugly, hate-filled, lying bastard.” You ever met a liberal, Bill? You have any in your family? Are you willing to call them an “ugly, hate-filled, lying bastard” to their face or do you just use the quadruple insult in the comments section of PJM?
Like I said before, hyperbole never won a battle. But that won’t keep the idiots from trying apparently…
“28. Ed Wallis:
“Herb” #16, Oh the hypocrisy! Doesn’t “Bushitler” ring a bell?!? Go play with broken glass, loser.”
I think you have me confused with someone else. The word “Bushitler” never fell from my lips. Go project somewhere else, Eddie.
“29. Chuck Pelto:
P.S. Contrary to your hope that I’m NOT a ’soldier’, you are so sadly mistaken….again…..”
No, Chuckle, you were a soldier. Now you’re a mensa genius making (as usual) no sense. (You still fighting for the release of Obama’s TRUE birth certificate, Chuckles?)
The thing that gets me, Chuckle, is that if you truly were a soldier (and for the record, I believe you) then you know the difference between war…real hot war with metal raining down and blood flowing…and the impotent cries of a bunch of political second-placers whining about how no one likes them anymore because the media is sooooo liberal.
My advice: Put up or shut up. You want war, then fire the first shot. And I’m not talking about another cutesy letter. Wars aren’t fought with cute little letters, Chucky. As a soldier, you should know that. Let the metal meet the meat, Chuck, or let the big mouth be exposed as nothing but talk.
“30. steeple:
Bush lied, people died
Cheney = Darth Vader
General Betrayus
I doesn’t mean that conservatives shouldn’t take a more mature approach than the Left, but we’re not buying a history rewrite here either.”
What’s your point? You don’t seem to be saying that “General Betrayus” justifies “Barack the Magic Negro,” which is nice because that’s a pretty juvenile thing to say. (We’ve all heard children say “B-b-but He did it too!!!” and been equally unimpressed.) But what are you saying? Is this another version of “Liberals are mean, so we must be mean too?”
Let me spell it out as clear as I can: That is stupid.
TO: Herb
RE: Heh
You’re more ignorant than I had originally thought.
In the first place, once you raise your hand and swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States as a soldier….
….you’re ALWAYS a soldier. Our rich Uncle Sam can call such a person back at ANY TIME. How do I know? Something to do with preparing the various states in the western third of the US in mobilization planning for ten years.
For example, on top of “Stop Loss” we have “Certain Sage” and a number of other programs in between. All designed to bring back into active service as many former military persons as are deemed necessary to meet a national emergency.
In the second place…..
….jealousy doesn’t look good on you.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Thanks for bringing all that up…..
“I think you have me confused with someone else. The word “Bushitler” never fell from my lips. Go project somewhere else, Eddie.”
Perhaps not that particular epithet Herb. But I have little doubt that your insane hostility to conservatives and/or christians has motivated similar sentiments.
Hence, you are a hypocrite. And, dishonest.
TO: Clarendon
RE: Uuuuuuhhhhh…..
….and you were counselling WHAT with these people?
Based on Herb’s comment, I get the distinct impression that he’s looking FOR ‘violence’. Not just looking for it, but demanding it of US.
Can you REALLY expect to have a ‘dialogue’ with this sort of mentality? I kind of doubt it.
Indeed. Today the Pope, God bless him, walked out on a similar sort of mentality.
In that act, he showed more backbone than all the heads of Europe put together.
While I won’t walk-out on Herb, as long has he insists on sticking his neck out to get his face ‘whacked’ in this venue, neither will I be the one to fire the ‘first shot’ in what appears to be, for all intents and purposes, a violent civil war waged by the Left against the Right.
But on the other hand, I’m quite capable of dealing with such a situation, should it the Left be so STUPID as to attempt it. Or maybe Herb has figured out how to weaponize bacon drippings. I know I can…..something I was taught at that ‘spa’ the Army runs out of Benning School for Boys.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Thanks Herb….
….for the heads-up AND, most especially, for paying to have me so well trained.
#35 Herb,
For you, it’s about “the Democrats”, those nasty Republicans, and “them”…
but no, NOOOOOOOOO, you’ve personally uttered anything like XYZ…
I get it: You’re shocked, SHOCKED! that someone would associate such phrases with a person who repeatzedly and mindlessly parrots the Leftist tripe du jour here at PJM.
YOU FRAUD.
Herb, my point is very simply that you seem stunned (“Whuh? Calm down…”) that Conservatives might still be angry over the manner in which the Bush administration was treated by the Left. So rather than feign mock horror, you might want to reflect on how the dialogue has gotten to the point it has.
There was a complete lack of respect accorded to both the President, the office and his administration, and it wasn’t just from some random comments from time to time. It was a systematic approach to smearing someone who made very difficult decisions that have ultimately kept citizens on American soil safe for the past 8 years. I don’t think anyone would have taken the bet that there would have been zero terrorist attacks on US soil on 9/12/01, but that apparently is not important to members of the Left. They would rather mock him because he can’t pronounce certain words to their level of approval.
Look, I didn’t agree with all of Pres Bush’s policies, actions, communication, etc… We could all have a long discussion about our views on his successes and failures. But he maintained the security of our nation during a very challenging time under a very challenging set of expectations around minimizing collateral damage. For those who have benefited from those same actions but choose instead to malign those who sacrificed protected us (the Betrayus campaign, which moveon.org most definitely aggressively pursued; this was not some one-off wing nut hurling invective around), I have nothing but disdain. I believe this goes beyond dissent and thus to treason. That’s how I personally connect the dots and come to consider certain members of the Left as enemy.
Hopefully this advances the debate more productively than any of the invective that you slung at the four posters you address above.
#35 Herb:
“My advice: Put up or shut up. You want war, then fire the first shot. And I’m not talking about another cutesy letter.”
If you are challenging what I suspect you are, then be advised that your passion has overcome your reason, sir, and you should get up, step away from the computer, and go take a very, very, long walk.
Maybe consider finding another hobby than emoting here.
“Wars aren’t fought with cute little letters, Chucky. As a soldier, you should know that.”
He does. Probably more than you will ever know. And you should, after that walk I recommended to you, drop to your knees and thank whatever god(s) you worship that you remain in the bliss of your personal ignorance on the subject.
“Let the metal meet the meat, Chuck,”
Do you have any kids, Herb?
Wars, especially “civil” ones, are a young man’s game…look carefully at some of the photographs of the dead from the War for Southern Independence…one especially comes to mind, a Confederate killed at Fredericksburg, with his Enfield draped across his chest. That corpse looked to be about 16 years old when it died.
http://www.anselm.edu/academic/history/hdubrulle/WarandRevolution/graphics/Paintings/Civil%20War%20Dead%20Fredericksburg.jpg
That’s the kind of “meat” that stops the “metal”, Herb. Would it change your tune if that stinking corpse turning into maggot-grub was your son?
It’s out there and it’s always listening…you DON’T call it down, you damned fool!
“38. Chuck Pelto:
Based on Herb’s comment, I get the distinct impression that he’s looking FOR ‘violence’. Not just looking for it, but demanding it of US.”
No, Chuck, I’m demanding that all the righteous warriors of the right stand up and fight for the cause instead of just fantasizing about it from the safety of your keyboards. Is that too much to ask of a righteous warrior? I think not.
Oh, I get it…it’s all just a metaphor. Well in that case, what I said before stands: Let the metal meet the meat, Chuck, or let the big mouth be exposed as nothing but talk.
I think you’ve just been exposed, Chuck.
As for this, “a violent civil war waged by the Left against the Right,” give me a break, Chuck. A violent civil war waged by anti-gun, anti-war bleeding hearts who won’t even eat meat because it causes “suffering?” The paranoid style does not become you. Here you are, big elephant Chuck Pelto, afraid of MICE!
“37. Ick:
Perhaps not that particular epithet Herb. But I have little doubt that your insane hostility to conservatives and/or christians has motivated similar sentiments.”
What counts as “similar sentiments,” Icky, ole buddy? Do you get to be the judge of that? If I said, “Bush was a horrible president,” would that qualify as a “similar sentiment” in your book? If so, consider me guilty as charged. I said something “similar” to “Bushitler” therefore I am, as you say, a dishonest hypocrite who might as well be guilty of calling Bush Hitler. Good job. You proved your case. Here’s your smiley face sticker.
“39. Ed Wallis:
YOU FRAUD.”
Ed, thank you for bringing this to my attention. I always thought I was something different, but now that I have your razor-sharp insight, I realize just how wrong I was…
40. steeple:
“So rather than feign mock horror, you might want to reflect on how the dialogue has gotten to the point it has.”
I have reflected on that, and I have concluded that there are some immature, unhelpful, and frankly ridiculous stuff coming from the right. I thought conservatives were supposed to be about personal responsibilty, but instead all you hear is “The Left does this, the Left does that.” So what? Other people’s actions should not dictate your own.
Remember that old trope of parenting. I’m sure everyone’s heard it a time or two. “If they jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?” It’s supposed to remind us to be independent, to avoid doing stupid things just because other people are doing them too.
And yet, here we are, with a similar question on our hands. “If the Left did something unconscionable, would you do it too?” and the answer is a resounding “YES!”
It’s a shame and I want no part of it.
As to this:
“Hopefully this advances the debate more productively than any of the invective that you slung at the four posters you address above.”
It’s funny you call my response “invective” when one of the guys I was replying to said the following: “Go play with broken glass, loser.”
Invective is as invective does, right? That’s how we’re doing things now, innit?
Oh, where to begin? We have two options here: on the one hand, we can continue to argue intelligently with children who scream epithets and insults at us. Or, we can call them names in return.
If we argue intelligently, our friends in the news media will objectively show how full of crap all of our points are, because of course all we’re really looking for is a TAX CUT FOR THE RICH. We’ll also be marginalized because everyone will discover that some of us have money, are prosperous, and of course should be envied, and have laws written specifically to take their wealth from us, because we’re not deserving.
If we lower ourselves to that of the other side, we then will be accused of being unfair. Movies about killing President Bush, hanging Sarah Palin in effigy, equating Dick Cheney with Darth Vader, and so forth, are OK of course. On the other hand, we will see the media mildly make fun of President Obama, ridicule Joe Biden’s gaffs (which have nothing to do with government policy, and actually provide a needed distraction), and whitewash scandals in Congress. The idea that there’s going to be anything like honest evaluation of anything we say, in our glorious news media (with NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, all claiming that they can be liberal because they’re balanced by Fox News, which everyone ridicules), well, the idea is silly.
The whole point is this: we have two bad choices. The public equates Republicans with wealth, employers, bankers, and investors. Never mind that some of what occurred economically the last six months or year is the direct result of Democratic policies: Obama’s statement that he’s the only one standing between the bankers and the pitchforks is largely true. Never mind he handed out the pitchforks: the only relevant thing is that he’s the one who can control them. Now we all know what Rahm Emmanuel meant by taking advantage of a good crisis.
Herb is a plant.
TO: Pee Wee Herman, Community Organizer
RE: Herb
How do you mean?
As in parsley? Or chive?
How about a ‘vegetable’? You know something that doesn’t think.
Perhaps as a noxious weed?
Or an agent mockateur?
I’d suspect possibility #3. But along the lines of a O-D-S sort. Hey! That’s Obama Derangement Syndrome at work.
It all works.
BRILLIANT work, that, Pee Wee.
And just to add sauce to this ratatouille, this was my mornings devotional….
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. -- Euripides]
TO: DavidN, et al.
RE: True
Take a look at today’s Day by Day cartoon.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. For an example of the truth to that item, look at Herb here….
Where’s Thoreau when you need him? Or maybe the Rumor Weed…
\|||/
(o o)
,—-ooO–(_)——-.
| Please |
| don’t feed the |
| TROLL’s ! |
‘————–Ooo–’
|__|__|
|| ||
ooO Ooo
TO: DNFTT
RE: Heh
I’m not feeding them.
I’m playing Whack-a-Troll.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.]
As an addendum to my last statement, I don’t really want to become like the Kennedys, but I fear that I/we will have to. There may be nowhere to turn.
I refer to Obama’s saying that he intends to close all the loop holes, including existing tax havens, as in the Cayman Islands. (I guess he thinks he’s the dictator of the world, too, not just here in the US.) While I’m not sure that he, or anyone, can dictate to another sovereign nation what its tax policy should be (Not that the Caymans are sovereign, as they are part of the UK. I only mention them because he did.), what if it turns out that he can muster enough of whatever he has to muster to do it? Then, there will be nowhere to go. Besides, we all can’t squeeze into the Caymans, though we could all move to Russia, where the flat tax rate is only 13%, or to China, where there are no capital-gains taxes, short- or long-term. (I wonder if Obama plans to dictate to either of those nations what their tax policies should be?)
So, if you’re not Russian or Chinese, I guess you’ll have to suffer like the rest of us. How ironic. The two grandest communist experiments have produced economic environments where Orwell’s famous line — “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal.” — has come to mean that the rest of the world will be all the other, less-equal animals, but in a way that Orwell could never have imagined.
One last tongue-in-cheek: Obama’s policies will make us all fall below the poverty level, and none of us will have to pay taxes; making the US a de facto tax haven.
herb#42;”anti-war,anti-gun,bleedng hearts?”you think the base of the left is comprised of these individuals?no need to answer a rhetorical question.of course you don’t,you cannot possibly be that dense.
i am not refering to ayers and his greenwich village modern art masterpiece,or any of the other well fed,tenured,wealthy ineffective has beens.
ever notice though,when one of them shows back up or gets out of prison,they are greeted warmly by their compatriats.hardly shunning their violent,bloody history.
i am talking about the newest crop of fanatical moonbats being fed a steady diet of the purest hate.maybe you failed to notice the g-20,g-8 summits or free palistine events.hmmmm.thousands of american leftists marching in soldarity with hamas,anarchists groups and just about every communist/anti-western group you could imagine.
the fact that they are calling for the destruction of a close ally and the only democracy in the middle east should be more than a little telling.
im sure those somber late night candle lit vigils and tear soaked articles of adoration and respect, written for could blooded killers about to be meeted out their punishment is to be dismissed as some new way to promote pacifism?
maybe you should stop and read the signs they’re carrying or maybe listen to some of their core beliefs they are so eagerly expressing.
yup,you were right,simply paranoia.
the squimish,veggie munching hoplophobes you spoke of are just considered useful idiots now and cannon fodder later.
the percieved back benchers are always the first on their list….so have fun.
“44. Pee Wee Herman, Community Organizer:
Herb is a plant.”
While it’s true that all herbs are plants, not all plants are herbs.
“49. Chuck Pelto:
I’m playing Whack-a-Troll.”
No, Chuck, you’re playing “Whacked-By-A-Troll.” The worst you can do is call me a vegetable, so I ask, how do you expect to win “this field of conflict” with harsh language?!
Exposed, Chuck, you’ve been exposed. (As you were before with that birth certificate nonsense.) Don’t you ever get tired of listening to yourself giggle?
“52. shaui-jan:”
I was going to read your comment, but you have to work on your writing skills, like using proper capitalization and punctuation, before you try and advance a completely unconvincing “argument” that all the bad things in this world is the fault of Leftists.
Let me guess: You were home-schooled, weren’t you?
TO: All
RE: SERIOUS….
….mental health issues with this poor soul. I can almost hear HIM ‘giggling’, like Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus in the padded cell, in The Return of the Pink Panther.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Show US the Birth Certificate!]
P.S. I’ll wager that he’d try to foist off on US a birth certificate for Barack Obama that he made with his own crayon….
TO: Clarendon
RE: Here’s Your Challenge
Use your ‘thoughtful conservatism’ to talk sense to Herb.
Let’s see how it works.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. In the meantime, we’ll be keeping the tight-fitting jacket with the extra long sleeves ready…..
TO ALL HERE:
Pastor of Muppets, LIKE vivo, LIKE Herb, LIKE sheesh, and I’m sure I’ve forgotten the names of other Axelrod-financed-ish trolls here, spend their time here ONLY to divide, disrupt and distract.
It is best to ignore, next best to deride, ANY of their efforts.
TO: Ed Wallis
RE: Those ‘People’
Good advice, from the Good Book.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The 'hits' just keep on coming!]
let me get this straight.you were able to understand ‘my unconvincing arguement’ that was put forth,from a comment you did not bother to read?
wow.amazing.please go now and use these special powers for the good of all mankind!
Its interesting to read the same arguments made about the right turned around and used about the left. Did the right really think that dragging a standing president through the mud the way they did Clinton, with the tone of the discourse set by Rush Limbaugh, would yield warm and fuzzy sentiment towards our “Loyal Opposition”?
A good first step is to own up to your own culpability and recognize the travesty the policies of George Bush and the conservative leadership has wrought upon this country. As long as your de-facto spokesmen are nasty, cynical demigogues that hiss the word “Liberal” as the source of all things evil, you will never earn the respect of a rational debate.
You are reaping what you have sown.
TO: Robert
RE: Soooo…..
…..tell us Robert, when did the Right show Clinton with the words “Snipers Wanted” on CBS, like The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn did on 4 August 2000 of then-Governor Bush?
Or at a big banquet wish that Clinton die of kidney failure and President Bush laughed at the ‘joke’?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]
“own up to your own culpability and recognize the travesty the policies of George Bush and the conservative leadership has wrought upon this country.”
No, we have to stand up and counter the spread of leftist lies like that. But over and over again we hear variations of “Bush shredded the Constitution! The worst economy since tyhe Great Depression!” Rubbish. It’s just the worst economy since *Jimmy Carter.*
How, pray tell, are conservatives to fight back with ‘reason’ against an establishment for whom, like Robert, lies and slander are their stock-in-trade?
Question from Bill #61: “How, pray tell, are conservatives to fight back with ‘reason’ against an establishment for whom, like Robert, lies and slander are their stock-in-trade?”
Kick them in the n*ts every chance you get.
Boy, it did not take long for the wingnuts to revert to form. Like snakes slithering from the pit. Entirely predictable
TO: All
RE: Heh
Look who’s talk’n.
’nuff said.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Good thing I keep all this traffic. It’ll come in handy later on…..
P.S. TO: Clarendon
Here’s another one for you to try your ‘thoughtful conservatism’ with.
Good luck…..
#55 robert.yeah,the left was real well mannered and polite before clinton.
they never burned presidental effigies,flags or called for members of an administration to be tried for war crimes.
it was right wing agitaters who started all those riots.
i was just old enough during reagans time to remember how sweet and nice they were to him.
shadow;you never fail to bring something of substance to the conversation do you?
HEY CHUCK #65!
I wonder if “Clarendon” (by the way, it’s the name of a “chic” neighborhood in Northern Virginia…ooh la la) has ever seen the original film “The Manchurian Candidate.”
It make you wonder what his “thoughtful conservatism” (…the descendant of “compassionate conservative”?!) would do with those GARDEN CLUB LADIES…much less with the Angela Lansbury character….
TO: Ed Wallis
RE: Clarendon
Well….
….in light of the continual ‘absence’ of ‘content’ after the initial article and all the calls for this character to back up their claims with something more ‘substantial’ than mere words….
…three guesses to my opinion of this ‘persona’…..
….first two don’t count.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]
P.S. I notice over on Eric Florack’s thread about Frustrated Conservatives, at least Eric Florack, engages in the discussion.
And the question here becomes, “Why doesn’t Clarendon?”
One gets the distinct impression that Clarendon is just another shill for the ‘progressives’.
Don’t you remember the republican party ran on compassionate conservatism and it ran it’s course into the ground-let social security become privatized in the stock market? Did that.
Promised so may things like not going to war?
You guys promised many things and didn’t get’R done.
You left us with out sourced jobs and a failed infrastructure, debt, and economic ruin. Think we will se ya again sometime soon? NO DUCK”N WAY!
TO: All
RE: Clarendon
I take it, that after a number of hours and Clarendon does not respond to my query in item #69, that Clarendon IS a ‘shill’.
Next time they provide any ‘traffic’ on PJM, I’ll be certain to point that out.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]
Compasionate conservatism is right to life without safety nets-like welfare?
Compassionate conservatism like save the unborn so you can send them to war.
Corporate welfare and bailing out banks, then leave the public with economic debt.
You won’t even be elected as dog catcher.
Republican economies never help the middle class, just the wealthy.