That gaping divide [Claymore]
Many have said that there’s a gaping divide in this country…but enough about Paris Hilton’s sex organs. I kid. I’m a kidder. Anyway, that gaping divide; nothing illustrates it better than lurking around left wing blogs and internet forums, and randomly reading some of their conversations. For instance, this little gem:
It’s the Democrats who improve education, and health care,etc. It’s the Republicans who take money out of educational programs, who don’t want health care for everyone, and who want to get rid of Social Security. I’ve always seen the Democrats as the builders of our country and the Republicans as the spoilers.
When I try to visualize what this country would be like if the Republicans got their way in everything, it wouldn’t be The United States of America anymore. It would be a rundown wasteland. I don’t get why Republican voters don’t get that. They shoot themselves in the foot (with the guns they keep toting around) every time they vote for a rethug.
Taken at face value, this has 90% of the standard bleeding heart talking points encapsulated in a single post. Education, health care (which I assume includes ripping babies out of wombs), Social Security and this person even got in some cheap name calling and stereotyping to boot, all of the hallmarks of what will go on to be a very popular thread on that forum. What is interesting is that in this “visualization” our little liberal engages in, they leave out anything remotely logical about this fantasy country they think Democrats are capable of building. In my little magical world, liberals would be forced to live in the constructs of their own making; take Detroit for instance. Please. Someone take it, because it resembles a freakin’ war zone after decades of social engineering and tinkering by a Democratic machine that’s more akin to a vampire than some champion of the poor. But, let me provide another beauty from that same thread:
Most Republicans are white and Christian. They view the Democratic party as only caring about “those people” i.e. non-whites and the poor. They view many Democrats as Atheists or Gays, or both, and the Democratic Party as the party of non-Christians.
The old 3G mantra of “God, Guns and Gays” has a great deal to do with their worldview.
And I say this even though I support the 2nd Amendment and the RKBA.
Truly they only care about 3 “rights”…
(1)RKBA
(2)Property rights
(3) The “right” to make money (aka the “right to steal”)
Starting to see a pattern? Yeah, I know it’s not exactly original, in fact we’ve seen it plastered all over the news these last few weeks. Sifting through that complete load of absolute crap could take someone days, but suffice it to say that I doubt the author of that amazing piece of shi’ite even knows a single Republican, much less ever engaged one face to face in a logical debate, as opposed to endless emotional posturing. I continue reading:
just got into a “debate” with several online. I am shocked at the hatred these people have for their fellow human beings. I believe that these are people who have such resentment and contempt for anyone they deem beneath them that so that is really all they care about. They are not thinking of the world they live in or the welfare of others – except the rich.
I believe these people truly enjoy experiencing the emotions fo hatred and resentment. When others suffer, they feel better about themselves.Pretty sickening.
Yes. That’s us, alright. Providing people with a path to self-sufficiency, reliance on themselves and giving them the bulk of the fruits of their labor is hateful. Clearly the solution is to drag everyone down so we’re all equally miserable. But I digress:
I knew there was no reasoning in 2008 when I saw McCain/Palin signs on the lawns of the only gay couple and the black family in my tiny, redneck republican town
Rut roh, Rorge. Now, let me be the first to say this; these types of posts embedded in an otherwise thoughtful echo chamber is usually denigrated as being some freeper lurker trying to drop a turd in their organic fruit punch. I’d venture a guess and say they’ll label this a fairy tale, but I’d risk confusing this post with the one on DADT. Let us continue:
The ability to connect the dots between action and consequence is a sign of higher intelligence. Not all are born with equal intelligence. People who vote Republican vote on a totally selfish basis. People who vote Democratic do so based on what is best for everyone. Republicans think in the ‘I’ mode while Democrats think in the ‘we’ mode. And contrary to ‘conventional wisdom’ these facts don’t make Democrats altruistic or Republicans practical. It’s just a matter of being able to intelligently connect the dots between action and consequence.
You don’t have to be an idealist and altruistic to see the larger picture as, for example, understanding that a better education for all people will make the country stronger in every aspect. In science, in innovation, in health, in leadership, in wealth and even in military might. There’s also no altruism in realizing that poverty has a deleterious effect on the country which would be turned around into a positive effect if people were lifted out of poverty and allowed to be an asset rather than a drain through no fault of their own. But that kind of thinking requires, well, actual thinking.
There’s a lot of basic truth in this person’s post. Where it falls to frickin’ pieces is thinking that using the power of the government to steal and pass around what it sees fit to those who are either unwilling or uninterested in providing for themselves is immoral. This more than anything typifies the Paris Hiltonesque vulvae chasm between the two major political schools of thought. While seemingly working toward the goal of lifting our fellow citizens up, and making this nation the best is can be, the paths couldn’t be any further from one another than what’s illustrated in these admittedly cherry picked comments. Rich, Jesus-loving whites with guns have ruined the nation, want to force rape victims to have unwanted children, think the earth is only 2000 years old, want to burn books, and are flag-waving brown people haters who believe Obama is from Alpha Centauri. Explain to me how to reason with someone who thinks like that.
Category: Liberals suck
“Explain to me how to reason with someone who thinks like that.”
You can’t. They are from a different worldview, if not from a different galaxy altogether. No common language for communication. The sounds coming out of their oral orifices sound familier, but there is no commonality of mental processes. The best you can do is to work around them, ignore them if possible, stop them if you can’t ignore them.
Claymore- excellent piece.
However extreme Michael Savage can be, he got it right when he said that liberalism is a disease.
I was chatting with one of the few friends I have left in the non-blog world and he put it this way…most people don’t give a rat’s ass about anything until it directly effects them.
They choose ignorance to that point and therefore, it is nice to be liberal because there are no tough choices to make. They can be all touchy-feely with what they *think* works, but they themselves cannot fathom what poor is.
I have said it before, but I learned conservatism from watching my mother be pushed down.
Single parent, goes to state for a leg up. Instead, she gets this: We’ll give you money for rent, you can get a job and only make “this much” and you cannot own a car.” My mother told the state and the neighbors (who turned her in for driving her father’s car to work, because God effing forbid she had something they didn’t!!) to stick it.
She got a roommate, and worked double shifts for years. She even gave her friends money for books for gas so they would go to school.
My mother is the smartest person I know.
Leftists, for the most part, haven’t a clue as to what the Constitution says, or how our government(s) were designed to function. They are still psychologically attached to their parents, they need (require) a parental unit to protect them keep them safe, provide a safety net to fall back upon, and when (if) they ever leave their parent;s basement, they simply use the Federal Government as a surrogate adult.
Leftists are almost always immature, adolescent and ignorant people (and often willfully ignorant) because it lets them live in a place where they don’t have to take any actual risks. If something goes wrong, they run screaming back to momma, or the government, to make things right again.
They depend upon others to take care of them, and those who take care of themselves, who provide for themselves and their families, scare the bejeesus out of leftists. Leftists are terrified at actually having to be responsible for themselves and their actions, rather than being perpetual victims, having someone else to blame for their personal (or group) misfortune.
In other words, conservatives are the adults, and leftists are their adolescent, special-needs children.
How do you reason with people like this? You can’t. They won’t see reason. Their entire philosphy is so connected to their own self worth that any time anything challenges those beliefs it forces them to realize that they are just not good people. They can’t handle that, so they won’t see the truth no matter how it’s presented.
What your dealing with here is people who are justifying theft by blaming the victims of that theft for making it necesary in the first place. They don’t produce, they don’t even try because they see failure as a “blow to their self image”.
Nothing wrong with trying and failing, but they don’t see it that way. So they never learn from their mistakes, and they never advance themselves in any meaningful way. Instead they simply live off the innovation, desire and hard work of others like a bunch of parasites.
What they can’t figure out is once they kill the host, theirs nothing left to feed on, and then they die too. Eventually we’ll either turn this country around and get back on the right track or we’ll have so many moochers, parasites and theives that the system will simply collapse.
Were reaching that point of decision very, very soon now. I only hope we can pull back from the brink.
I call it Bizzaro World, VDH calls it An Age of Untruth:
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/an-age-of-untruth/?singlepage=true
Great piece and comments.
Try living here in Oregon. I wake every morning to the kind of crap Claymore writes about.
If I didn’t love the state so much, I’d be living in Texas right now.
You can’t reason with them because logic has no place in their world. While, as the comments show, they think Republicans are ruled only by a practical, selfish viewpoint; liberals are ruled by and think only on a emotional level. The great example is healthcare. Liberals say everyone should have healthcare and if you don’t agree you are selfish and hate your fellow men. Logic dictactes that this is not possible….period. It cannot be done without making everyone suffer poor quality healthcare. But in their minds a crap sandwich for everyone is better than some people going without. Now this is where the logic really breaks down. It is a reality that by and large people who are conservative do a better job of taking care of their fellow men. They donate more to charity, donate more time to schools and mentoring programs and realize that they do a much better job of taking care of those in need in their community than the government…..all without having to redistribute wealth. Liberals, even in the face of facts cannot and will not face the fact that most of the problems that exist in communities exist because of interference from the federal government.
Defend USA – Make sure you send your Mom some flowers on Mother’s Day from all of us that appreciate that the hand that rocks the cradle forms the world view of the next generation for the better or the worse. It sounds like your Mom is a terrific lady.
“if the Republicans got their way in everything, it wouldn’t be The United States of America anymore. It would be a rundown wasteland.”
Yeah, if the Donks ran everything, we’d live in paradises like Detroit, Michigan & Gary, Indiana….
Most of the postings Claymore pasted in are true. Most conservatives live in a brutal, predatory world. They are like lions defending the predatory social order of the savannah – it’s good for me, so it must be good for everyone, even those lazy impalas who take government handouts. And it’s nature’s (god’s) plan!
Conservatives generally take a self-centered, me-based philosophy which they extend outward, where as liberals generally take a systems-based view. The conservatives on the other hand may not even realize they are part of a larger system with their narrow, “I am a rugged individualist just like John Wayne”, me-based philosophy. Almost infantile really. Conservatives are generally the party of “No!”. If conservatives ruled the world, we would still be living in feudal times, which they would then defend as the natural order of things. Almost every advancement that bettered the lot of mankind has come around due to liberal ideas. Conservatives end up getting dragged, kicking and screaming (like now) to the new norm, and the whole process starts over.
Psychologists have speculated about the impact of a new generation of narcissitic induviduals being raised in this country – their narcissism dovetails nicely with the conservative, me first, ideology. Throw in the fine tuning of corporate brainwashing techniques, and you have a perfect storm of idiocy.
Claymore is correct about the divide, and that’s why we lefties have to keep fighting to make this into a civilized country.
Joe,
Which is a liberal idea? Treating someone as an equal or treating someone unequally. Liberals rely on treating someone unequally. This runs contrary to what our country was founded on.
All people are equal and they all deserve equal protection. What applies to me applies to you. I break the law I pay the consequences and you break the law you pay the consequences.
Of course you can bring up the argument those who aren’t born within a certain spectrum of physical and mental abilities are not equal. Once again you run into that nasty little unequality thing.
I don’t see being a conservative as not having compassion, but treating people as equals. Liberals see the world full of people who are better than others and need to be treated as such.
Did you ever figure out the difference between Inductive and Deductive logic?
Yeah, JPJ, I’m better at induction….
I will put this in an inductive form for you…
When people are treated equally generally society is better.
JPJ,
Wow, a simplistic truism if I ever heard one. Like saying the more angels that can dance on the head of a pin, the better it is for society.
“Claymore is correct about the divide, and that’s why we lefties have to keep fighting to make this into a civilized country.”
*facepalm*
Um, have you looked to see how “civilized” most socialist/communist countries are? Yeah, not very civilized, unless an unbalanced ratio of government power (in the favor of the government) to citizen power is civilized.
The divide isn’t between greedy-gunhumping-wealthstealing-biblethumping-conservatives and selfeless-poorloving-lefties. It’s a divide between those who cannot operate without a safety net and those who don’t need one to operate. It’s a divide between those who can do and those who cannot. Conservative = producer, lefty = parasite. That’s the divide.
This claymore guy is a douche. Then again, considering his operating environment, was there any real question about it?
“The ability to connect the dots between action and consequence is a sign of higher intelligence. ”
Well, that leaves out the left, just by their default defense of an economic and social philosophy that has failed in an epic manner every time it has been foisted upon a people. EVERY TIME.
Again… *facepalm*
Joe,
WTF are you talking about? Are you trying to say a tautology? Since, you are so good with inductive logic then tell me what I need to add to my inductive argument?
I gave you a simple explaination as to my logic, but you cannot make an argument against it. So do you believe that people are not inherently equal? What is your logic?
JPJ,
The staement is so broad, nebulous and non-specific as to be meaningless.
I’ll dumb it down a bit for you.
Do you agree that all men are equal? Yes or no and why?
Kresh,
“It’s a divide between those who cannot operate without a safety net and those who don’t need one to operate”.
Yeah, like I said, the difference between the law of the jungle and civility.
I will put it as simple as I can Joe.
Do you believe that all people are equal?
“Do you agree that all men are equal?
It’s a nice platitude, JPJ, and perhaps a gold standard to which we should aspire, but it gives little guidance in solving real world problems. To answer the simple question without over anylyzing it, “are all men equal?”, of course not. They are not even created equal (? equally?). I mean we could spend hours even defining the term “equal”. Should they be equal? Should they have equal opportunites? Gets more complicated here.
I keep falling back on something Robert Wright wrote about 15 years ago in “The Moral Animal”. He wondered where we go from here, now that all the superstitions and religions have been proven to be utterly false and bankrupt. He started with one admittedly simple premise that could become a bedrock principle which you can expand upon. “Human happiness is preferable to human suffering”. Take it from there…….
Lets say I agree with you in that people are not equal. Do they deserve to be treated equal? Some be given advantages over others?
I never read the Moral Animal. Just from what you wrote it sounds like it is based on utilitarian ethics. Which in that case what matters more ends or means to an end?
Okay so I’ll grant you that all men are not equal. So do some men deserve to be treated differently than others?
So basically you start from the utilitarian premise of: What creates the most happiness for the most people is ethical. So would you say that the ends justify the means or the means justify the ends?
I was trying to hold a debate/conversation with someone from the Liberty Party, the group that endorsed that asshat Kokesh. Good luck with that. I checked out his website and 2cd paragraph launches into Bio-Warfare via contrails from unmarked planes. These types of people have no sense of balance in the world and its hard to talk to them. I have several good friends that are very liberal but are fine to talk with. Some are way over the line and can’t be reasoned with. Rush has it right: Those on the left that scream tolerance the loudest are the most intolerant.
I was trying to drive an answer out of you.
So if I grant you that all men are not equal, do some deserve unequal treatment?
I have never read that book, but based on what you wrote he starts with the simple utilitarian principle. So what would you say ends justify the means, or means justify the ends?
Justplainjason: God created man, Colonel Colt made them even.
Sorry about my double post my computer is being crazy.
I have to say, I think Paris Hilton’s crotch has more to contribute to society than some of the empty headed doublespeak I’m reading from our buddy Joe. Firstly, I happen to have direct experience with some of the narcissistic assholes in which you mention above, Joe. They’re typically called “Millennials” and here’s a little tip; all of the ones I’ve personally encountered are a bunch of vapid, selfish, self-centered, unmotivated, liberals…but I repeat myself. Many of the ones I’ve had the misfortune of hiring all had the potential to be exemplary…none of them rose to the occasion, instead they expected others to accommodate them and their whims. What’s ironic is that as soon as these people become a serious political force, they will essentially throw older “progressives” under the bus along with conservatives, who they already view as obstacles in their pursuit of personal gratification. Enjoy the tread marks, bubba.
“Human happiness is preferable to human suffering”.
And a handjob is preferable to a root canal. So what. You cannot provide “happiness” by denying others the fruits of their labor and gift it to those who are classified as victims. Nor can you instill self-worth, or lessen someone’s suffering by turning them into a slave to a system that robs their neighbor in order to make everyone equally miserable…but I think I already mentioned that, didn’t I.
Realx Claymore. They’re not gonna come and strip your house and sell everything and give it to the bum on the corner. But paying taxes is not the same as “denying others the fruits of their labor”. As FDR said, “Taxes, after all, are dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organized society.” JPJ, Started and restarted answering your question several times, huge topic, could go on for hours or days. In the end, I couldn’t make a categorical statement about ends vs. means to an end. I think some people need help. Some need more help than others. In fact, as social primates, we all need help, and many of us received it from a young age by an accident of birth. Having said that, there are some people you cannot help no matter how hard you try. The trick is to differentiate between those you can help and the hopeless cases. I think we are obliged to structure things so that there is a bare minimum standard for anyone willing to put in half an effort. In addtion, some people, due to upbringing, early experiences, etc., will need more help. This is in contrast to many conservatives who feel they are doing someone who has never been in the water a favor by throwing them off a pier to teach them how to swim. Some favor. Use the example of a young single mother in the inner city. She may never have been taught the dignity of work, never received much of an education, never had a single book in her house, if she had a house. Got pregnant young, she may have copped an attitude about working people. No jobs in the inner city, no day care. She had absolutely none of the advantages that you or I may have had, none. She may, unsurprisingly, be depressed. Is the best way to bring her into the workaday world to yank all her benefits, conservative style, and say “You and your kid figure it out for yourself”? That’s social darwinism at it’s worst. I… Read more »
You haven’t made an argument as to why the government has to be the mechanism. Liberals always assume that the government is the answer to the problem. How much evidence do you need that the government is the problem not the solution. Socialism ALWAYS fails. Forced beneficence is not beneficense.
Your argument about throwing someone in the water to teach them to swim is a bit off target. It is more if someone jumps off the pier the CHOICE to save them or not is important. If a person knows that everytime they jump off a pier someone will rescue them what is the motivation to not jump off the pier? Having the choice to help or not is better than being forced to help every time, just like that person who has the choice to not jump off the pier. Of course there will be times when someone gets blown off the pier and hopefully they have a plan for that eventuality. For some reason though those who are prepared don’t have as many problems.
The girl you speak of has many of the same benefits that we all do…and in some cases more. Chances are that she attended a public school, and choose not to take full advantage of the school. She is free to leave the inner city, but chooses to stay. Some people are happy in their ignorance, so why should the rest of us have to help them?
Please stop feeding the troll!!!
Thanks Susan, that’s the most common-sense response to our little Joey I’ve seen yet. I’m guilty of feeding the troll, too, but I think it’s time for the little guy to finally sink or swim on his own. Preferably back over and Kos or Du, where he gets his talking points.
This is in contrast to many conservatives who feel they are doing someone who has never been in the water a favor by throwing them off a pier to teach them how to swim.
Yes, it is much better to continue a cycle of dependency, preferably multi-generational, in order to secure a built-in political constituency. I mean, nothing says compassion and dignity like being a 4th generation Section 8 housing resident eating gummint cheese.
Is the best way to bring her into the workaday world to yank all her benefits, conservative style, and say “You and your kid figure it out for yourself”?
As opposed to handing your hypothetical charge an endless stream of “benefits” which deepens her situation of dependency upon the state, retards her ability to learn from her situation and ultimately lift her into the productive class whereby she can finally enjoy the rehabilitation of her dignity.
But more to the point, you mention social Darwinism, which is ironic considering the quasi-religious reverence those on the left give to Charlie’s little theory. Using Darwin, and by extrapolation, Progressive Era dogma, I beg the question; wouldn’t society be better off if your imaginary single mom was simply erased? Sanger would have sterilized her. Others of the period advocated euthanasia. Conservatism suggests that the best way to “erase” the problem is through giving people the tools for their own redemption, as painful as that process may be. Explain to me this; how is perpetual victimhood and virtual slavery somehow more compassionate than that?
Joe,
Just my 2 cents. RE: a statement from your #10, “Conservatives generally take a self-centered, me-based philosophy which they extend outward, “, you talk like that’s a bad thing.
Try reading, understanding and comprehending Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy. I’d rather follow her teachings then those of Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, et al.
And to further BW’s point, how can I possibly help my neighbor if my own house is in complete disarray? It’s difficult at best to extend a helping hand when they’re shackled with intrusive crap foisted on me by do-gooders who would rather the government seize my assets and dole them out as charity to assuage their liberal guilt.
Funny, but by both objective and subjective measures, the countries many of you refer to as socialist, leninist, communist, ad nauseum, have the highest quality of life. We’re talking Sweden, Belgium, Norway, Canada, the Netherlands. Whatever study you refer to, these countries always are at the top. How do you explain that?
B Woodman,
I think Ayn Rand was way off base – it’s a flawed model.
Joey, Joey, it’s noted that you have yet to address the points that Claymore made in #34 and #36. Would that be because you can’t?
WTF did anything Claymore said have to do with Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Canada or the Netherlands? It doesn’t, you just want to be like Barack and the rest, and take what doesn’t belong to you, or the gummint, and give it away to anyone who lines up for it. Because you have good intentions, and that’s all that counts.
On points #34 and #36
#34 – “Explain to me this; how is perpetual victimhood and virtual slavery somehow more compassionate than that?”
#36 – “It’s difficult at best to extend a helping hand when they’re shackled with intrusive crap foisted on me by do-gooders who would rather the government seize my assets and dole them out as charity to assuage their liberal guilt.”
I don’t accept your characterization of “virtual slavery” – that’s nonsense.
Here’s my reply: “Taxes, after all, are dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organized society.” — Franklin Delano Roosevelt
To which I’ll add:
“I like to pay taxes. It is purchasing civilization.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes
I don’t mind paying my fair share of taxes, either. You know, for the “common defence” and “promoting the general welfare, establishing justice and insure domestic tranquility. Where does it say I have to pay for Joe Shit the rag man’s health care?
As for liking to pay taxes, that’s nonsense. I pay mine, because I realize the “common defence” should be paid for. Not the Dept of Education or the Dept of Energy, or ACORN. Or travelling teleprompters.
Well I guess we disagree on what your fair share is. The three most commonly used words in the conservative vocabulary are: I, me, mine
Joe you remind me of one of my favorite sayings…
“build a man a fire and he will freeze to death,
set a man on fire and he will be warm the rest of his life.”
#43, typical liberal response, Joey boy. You have no idea what I pay, so how can you judge what my “fair share” is? You’re just a socialist ass, who thinks that no matter what someone has, you deserve a piece of it. So, why don’t you just admit it, you’re in love with the idea of stealing what others work for, just so it can be “redistributed” to those who won’t/don’t work.
The favorite words of a democrat/liberal:someone else has it, let’s steal it. And the only person overusing the word “I”, is your leader, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm mmm mmm.