Losing Abroad to Win at Home
A dangerous disconnect exists in the minds of many Americans. It seems preposterous that the men and women we send to Washington are inexplicably blinded to the obvious truth that this nation is at war; that there is an enemy out there who wish to destroy what America is… To kill what America has traditionally stood for. It seems impossible that just five years after 9.11 our elected representatives cannot see the forces arrayed against them, weapons in hand, firing at will, with impunity and the willing support of traitors.
Yes, I said ‘traitors’.
Radical Islam has been at war with America since November 4, 1979 (if not earlier). It’s understandable that President Carter didn’t recognize the opening salvo. It’s equally understandable that President Reagan didn’t recognize the first strike in 1983 at the Marine Barracks in Beirut, but the attacks kept coming, and in increasing number and frequency. Someone should have recognized we were at war by the Clinton administration, but no one thought to view the perpetrators of these ‘crimes’ as the enemies of the America, for they hardly fit that particular bill; they wore no uniforms, they neither belonged nor owed allegiance to any one nation or national leader, yet they all took aim at America, without fear of reprisal.
Now we are embroiled in a war against those who use terror; namely, the fascist ideology of Islamic extremism. And again, many Americans seem incapable of recognizing this struggle as a war that needs to be both fought and won—decisively.
It would be easy to go on from here and castigate liberals and democrats for owning defeat in Iraq—they do. It would be easy to point out their duplicitous rhetoric—it is. But at this point my aim is not to speak specifically to the evils of Liberalism and its wantonly perverse desire to see America less safe—I did say specifically. Instead I’m here to rail against Republicans in general, and Republican leaders specifically. The fact that Democrats and the ‘evils of Liberalism’ are mentioned at all is only partly due to their overt complicity in the defeat of America—If only that were their only crime against this nation! The truth is Liberalism, and Democrats by extension, are just as much purveyors of terror within the United States of America as was al-Qaeda on 9.11.
So here we are today, the Spring of 2007, embroiled in a war on three fronts: Afghanistan, Iraq, and Washington D.C., the last of which will, when the dust settles and a clear victor stands victorious, determine whether the other fronts are ultimately successes or defeats.
“Now that we have our outer vestments in hand”
--Willy Wonka
The problem we face now as a nation is one of misperception. It is the same problem that allowed 9.11 to leave us all dumbfounded and wondering ‘What the hell just happened!?’ I remember being dismissed from classes at the local community college and going into the station. We ran wall-to-wall coverage of 9.11 for three days, initially preempting even our own local news broadcasts. I was in complete awe of what I was witnessing. We all were.
Our bank of monitors were all tuned to network, and at one point that afternoon the camera shifted to across the river where it ran unedited, and uncensored. When the first tower began to fall there was a woman’s shrill scream off camera, “OH MY F—KING G-D!!!!” …On national television, no less! It was visceral; as naked as a dead dog with its entrails spread out across five feet of asphalt. It was perhaps the biggest kick in the crotch I’ve ever experienced. And yet it was something I needed to see… something we all needed to see. Everyone… even the most die-hard pacifist had to have understood that this nation was officially at war. All that remained was to determine who the enemy was.
“We have seen the enemy, and he is us”
--Pogo
As if 9.11 weren’t enough of a wake-up call (it wasn’t), the fact that America’s greatest enemy is itself seems to have struck no chord at all; partly due to a sense of national apathy fueled and perpetuated by media induced ignorance, and an unhealthy belief that America—despite 9.11—is somehow invulnerable.
Democrats and Liberals (and Media) have, for the better part of four years, trotted out the dead-horse comparison to Vietnam when describing Iraq and America’s involvement in that conflict. And yet the two are as different as night and day.
For example: Despite the obvious similarities of media coverage, one-sided and agenda driven, and Congress’ desire to micro-manage the war-effort, the fact that this nation is at war hardly registers in most minds. There are simply too many distractions to hold the average American’s attention than gleefully delivered nightly body-counts. American Idol commands a huge audience, as does the continuing saga of Britney Spears, and Anna Nicole. Naomi Campbell arrives for community service wear fur and followed by a bodyguard—Imagine the irony in that! Oprah Winfrey has discovered ‘The Secret’ and wants the entire nation to see the light of this new truth…
What little news most people get is hardly straight-forward ‘just the facts’ news. Anchors today interject their own opinions into the telling of the news; forgetting, it seems, that it’s their job to tell the news, not editorialize—let the opinion makers make the opinions, news anchors should read the news… at least, that’s how it used to be. These days everyone who sits in front of a camera is a star in their own right; their words and opinions carry weight! But if Al Gore is now a ‘movie star’ (straight from the lips of several talking heads in media) how much more so those who tell us the news?
This is perhaps one of the biggest delusions suffered by Media and her worshippers; namely liberals. How news became a vehicle for personal stardom is no mystery; the desire for attention is part and parcel with what it means to be human. Ratings are synonymous with relevance to these people, ratings determines how much face time with the camera each anchor gets, or how long their show runs. At least that’s how it works with sitcoms or dramas; the same cannot be said for news shows. ‘Countdown’ with Keith Olbermann is one of the lowest rated shows in cable news yet the rest of media reward him with renewal, relevance, and a quick defense for any untoward comment regarding Nazis and a certain other higher-rated cable news rival.
And then there are the ‘entertaining’ news shows, like HBO’s ‘Real Time with Bill Maher, and the only slightly easier to digest ‘The View’ starring Rosie O’Donnell—featuring 3 other women of lesser relevance. Both of these seek to entertain as well as shock their viewers; which they do on a regular basis.
But the sad truth of all this is most people take what these talking heads say as the ‘gospel’ truth. After all, none of these people have any reason to lie or stretch or hide the truth by embellishment or omission. Most Americans believe every word that comes out of their mouths.
If you were to listen to the likes of these you’d think the enemy wore gray and performed tricks at the circus under the stage name of 'Ellie Phant'. Every ill in America and around the world can be laid at the rather conservative doorstep of Republicans. But because these paragons of journalistic integrity have no reason whatsoever to lie, most people swallow it all without question—hook, line and sinker. These media ‘elites’ can say, with complete impunity, whatever they wish and millions of Americans will believe. And there is great power in this.
The same can also be said of politicians, though to a lesser degree depending solely on their political affiliation. They run to microphones after every meeting—even if it were simply for coffee and scones—and make grand pronouncements. Some of what they have to say is truly relevant; most is not. Some seek to inform the public on issues that, as the true power in the nation, the Public should be aware. Everyone, however, has an agenda. Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Republican, but it’s Media who decides what agenda gets play. There is great power in this—the fact of which they are well aware.
With the advent of the personal computer and the Internet, Media has lost some of its market share—for a time, but it has adapted and has managed to regain much of what it once possessed in terms of human minds, or Mind Share. Mind Share is a valuable commodity, more so now than at any time before. In the sixties Cronkite all but single handedly lost the Vietnam War for America. Without the people who watched, respected, and hung on every word that came from his lips as the ‘gospel’ truth, this nation lost the hearts and minds of the American people. Vietnam perfectly illustrates the maxim that “All wars are won or lost at home” —especially in America. America doesn’t win wars by superior firepower, technology, or training, America wins by public opinion; not on some distant battlefield, but in every pair of eyes tuned to a news channel… channels that peddle ideologies cleverly disguised as ‘News’.
This is why the battle here is far more important that the one being waged in Iraq or Afghanistan.
“Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”
--Ronald Reagan
With every war there are battles, battlefields, winners, losers, and the rare draw. There are generals, soldiers, and noncombatants. And there are at least two opposing sides. The war America is engaged in is one of ideology, both here and abroad—but especially here, in America. The major combatants are Liberalism and Conservatism. Each are engaged in a struggle within its own ranks for control, and extremism is giving each combatant a run for its money.
One side naively imagines a nation ruled by biblical tenets, the other sees America ruled by science and compassion, both diametrically opposing motivations—the former insists on logic, and verifiable and repeatable data, while the latter strives for a Utopian ideal akin to the vision of Marx and Engels. Neither of these motivations are within reach of men, who are conceived in sin, and born striving for personal gain, be it promotion, pay, or a scrap of food.
But that doesn’t keep Media from using our every weakness against us to carve out their own corporate hegemonies, and personal and private Idahos. They want what they want—they’re only human. And this wouldn’t be so troublesome except for what Liberalism wants.
Those who preach the party line will tell anyone who’ll listen that Liberalism seeks to make sure everyone is afforded the ‘right’ to decent affordable housing, fair wages, the ability to feed oneself and ones family—that no one go hungry, everyone is assured medical care, and has leaders who will see to it that everyone is afforded their inalienable rights as American citizens to receive all these things and more. Conservatism seeks to ensure everyone is afforded the ‘opportunity’ to decent affordable housing, fair wages, the ability to feed oneself and ones family—no one going hungry, assured access to medical care, and leaders who will see to it that everyone is afforded equal opportunity under the Constitution to seek their dreams unfettered by racism or prejudice, and achieve all these things through self-determining and meaningful work. The difference between the two is one of responsibility: Liberalism says it is Governments’ responsibility to give the people everything they need to live and lead healthy, productive and prosperous lives, while Conservatism says it is the peoples responsibility to achieve these things for themselves; Governments’ duty is to ensure equal access to goods and services, including education and healthcare, taking on the role as judge in civil disputes. This is where the distilled notion of “Liberalism is Big Government and Conservatism is Small Government” comes from. Democrats today still hold to the idea that Government exists to provide for every want and need of the people, but Republicans seem to have lost hold of Small, unobtrusive and non-intrusive government.
Yet despite this, war continues in the House, Senate, the airwaves, and in every American heart.
“History is the only laboratory we have in which to test the consequences of thought.”
--Etienne Gilson
Yes, it’s true. A battle is being waged for the hearts and minds of the people. Not just in Baghdad, but here on the streets of America and in the corridors of its powerful. It is a defining struggle, for what this nation will look like for generations to come, but more importantly it is an ideological struggle. Win the ideological battle and the future will take care of itself. Those who worship at the altar of Liberalism understand this. Those across the street at the Church of Conservatism apparently don’t.
Liberalism has seized control of our schools, and through our schools are reshaping our history, our sense of civic duty, and the standard by which judge morality.
Christopher Columbus did not come to the Americas in an effort to spread the gospel; bringing light, salvation, and Christian liberty to the pagan natives. Enlightened Liberalism now knows, and teaches our children, that Columbus came to take slaves, steal land, and in the process committed genocide.
Liberalism assures us that Jamestown, now celebrating it’s 400th anniversary, was not founded by Christians to spread the Gospel, and bringing with it the light of Salvation and Christian liberty to the pagan nations of native America. Jamestown was founded for commerce, despite her Charter that exists to this day, on display. And tour guides at Jamestown are not allowed to talk about the town’s Christian heritage.
[The new history of] Jamestown is a fiction. It is a pretend story that American schoolchildren are being spoon-fed by revisionist historians and special interest groups as part of the highly politicized events surrounding the quadricentennial.
Example: Boys and girls attending the state-sponsored Jamestown commemoration (and please don't call it a "celebration," for this phrase has been officially removed) may attend signature events where they can listen to speeches like "The Ecology of Jamestown – Origin of Environmental Injustice in America," or watch panel discussions including the Rev.'s Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Otis Moss, the latter of which boldly declared the Jamestown settlers to be guilty of a "holocaust" and "lynchings."
Students can even log on to the official Colonial Williamsburg site for articles that insist that Pocahontas was "forcibly converted" to Christ and that the Jamestown settlers were predisposed toward cannibalism because they craved human flesh.
The message of the Jamestown revisionists is clear: Christian settlers were vicious savages, genocidal murderers and environmental terrorists. In contrast, native pagans were noble, civilized and peace-loving. The providential history of America's founding is a national embarrassment. Children should hate their forefathers.
But there is another Jamestown that American boys and girls can remember for their 400th birthday party. It is the same Jamestown that has been honored and remembered on historic jubilee and centennial celebrations spanning the last 200 years.
It is the real Jamestown – the story of imperfect but remarkable men who were instruments of a sovereign Creator to establish a nation of law and liberty under God.
What is the Christian legacy of Jamestown?
That story really begins in the 16th century with a visionary named Richard Hakluyt. A prolific author, cartographer and ordained minister, Hakluyt is the man primarily responsible for persuading the monarchy and a generation of explorers that Virginia was the best place for carrying out the Great Commission. His vision of discipleship and dominion was formally enshrined in the Virginia Charter of 1606.
The men who arrived at Jamestown inaugurated their settlement with the planting of a cross, thanksgivings to God and followed with daily prayers. They would build the first church in American history, disciple the first Indian converts and perform the first Christian baptisms.
Jamestown is the spot of America's first "interracial" marriage based on the Christian faith. In his eloquent letter to the governor of Jamestown, John Rolfe would argue for the legitimacy of marriage, regardless of skin color or national origin, where the couple was united by faith in Christ. His theological argument won the day and established a legal precedent that endured for more than half a century.
The Jamestown settlers gave the Holy Scriptures a permanent home in America. This is perhaps the most enduring legacy of Jamestown. The coming of the Bible to America fundamentally changed the history of the North American continent. It was the Bible that communicated the hope of personal redemption and the basis for stable civilization.
This is one reason why Jamestown would become the first permanent settlement to establish a legal system based directly on the moral law of God and the applicable principles found in the case laws of Holy Scripture. This Christian "common law" was later incorporated by direct reference into our United States Constitution. Jamestown also gave us our first experiment in republican representative government, a model that finds its origins in the Hebrew Republic of the Old Testament, and was formally adopted by the Founding Fathers of a later generation.
While the legacy of Christian Europeans at Jamestown is not without its bumps and warts, the lasting influence of the settlement would change the world – and dramatically for the better! Before the arrival of these Protestant Christians and the successful planting of the first permanent English settlement, North America was dominated by warring tribes engaged in demonic activities like paganism, cannibalism and ritual torture.
Other revisions being made are assertions that George Washington, our first president, along with Thomas Jefferson and other great movers, shakers, and thinkers of the time, were Deists, despite evidence to the contrary.
Liberalisms effort to sanitize this nations' history has spawned a kind of ‘Neo-History’ where Christianity has been removed from this her humble beginnings-the effort has been largely successful because a great many people could not see that an alien ideology had declared war upon Faith in America. And the result has been a great falling away from truth in this nation—the truth that America was founded on Biblical… Christian… principles. Many people believe, having never read the Constitution, that the phrase ‘Separation of Church and State’ is in the Constitution. It’s what they’ve been taught in school.
And this is where Liberalism wins the war: in the public school system. Societies, like great hulking vessels do not turn quickly or easily, it takes time and patience. And Liberalism has had a fair measure of both over the last four decades.
Because of Liberal Academia, we have abortion on demand—the slaughter of forty-five million children since Roe because the law of the land. Promiscuity rampant. Sexually transmitted diseases, some of which are both incurable and deadly, not just here at home but abroad as well. We are to blame for that as well.
Children are taught today that morality is an individual and personal understanding, not universal. They are taught that they must decide for themselves what is right and wrong, never mind the fact that this nations' laws clearly define what is right (what is allowable in a civilized society) and what is wrong (what is not allowable).
Television plays a big role in this as well. The average child witnesses somewhere in the neighbor hood of 20 murders a week on television. Sex and talk of sex are glamorized and trivialized in almost every show that makes air. Drugs are glamorized, Smoking is glamorized, Sex is glamorized, Murder is glamorized, even horror is made tame by the frequency of slaughter and mayhem.
Music has gone from simple and relatively clean to being filled sexual innuendo, violence against women, the glorification of self and the pursuits of self, i.e., “fame, and fortune, and everything that goes with it…”
But for all the pleasures and freedoms Liberalism has sought to ring in with their Revolution for a New Morality, the state of the nation has instead steadily sunk lower into a pit with slippery walls of filth and degradation. Getting out of this hole into which Liberalism has flung us will not be easy, or painless… it might, in fact, be impossible. Impossible, because too few people are willing to stand up, grab the helm, and lean into the wheel—this ship must be turned or America will cease to be ‘America’.
Republicans are asleep at the wheel. They gained power, and in 12 short years grew complacent and desirous of the things Democrats love—power and a secure seat in the houses of power. They forgot that they work for the people. Democrats have long forgotten this, but Republicans, whose very party was founded on the idea of Democratic opposition in the fight for the abolition of slavery, have forgotten their roots. They gained power and promptly set to work to maintain that power rather than do the work of the People.
“The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it.”
--George Orwell
The divisions and level of distrust in America might as well be insurmountable considering the very slim odds that Washington and Media will recognize what they've done to this nation, and seek to make honest amends and reparations to the people they have brutalized. The hate and vitriol half of this nation feels for the other is as palpable and stomach-churning as the coppery taste of blood—Instinct says to spit it out, yet many revel in its cloying headiness.
Both sides claim moral superiority but in truth only one side, if any, can claim Truth walks among its ranks. Truth cares nothing for ideology, but it does define one. Everyone claims exclusive intimacy with Truth but few actually do.
Truth doesn’t slander the president in the vilest language possible, on television. It doesn’t wish the vice-president dead. It doesn’t claim to love and support its military forces while bending over backward to pull the financial rug out from under them. It doesn’t claim to support the troops while simultaneously seeking to abandon them in time for the next election cycle. It doesn’t win the recent round of elections claiming moral superiority only to commit the same crimes of excess for which it castigated its opponent mere months before. But that is exactly where Liberalism is today.
The Republican Party was the party of corruption, and democrats are embroiled in their own scandals and choosing not to investigate. Their hypocrisy lies in the fact that to do so might mean losing seats in the House or Senate. Their hypocrisy lies in their feigned outrage over fabricated scandals. Their hypocrisy lies in Senator Schumer words, ‘the template is this: investigation after investigation after investigation’. Not because of illegalities but because of their unbalanced and irrational hatred of George W. Bush.
Liberals wish to loose this war in Iraq, and Republicans have sat quietly by allow ing them the stage and microphone to level whatever charges they choose… without opposition. Rarely have Republicans challenged such charges. Also, Liberals have engaged in heinous sophistry to discredit the war in Iraq, with little defense from the President and Republican leaders.
It has been said that ‘Democrats own defeat in Iraq.’ But I would add ‘Media’ to that. Media has gleefully, in somber tones, celebrated every milestone of American casualties—500, 1000, 2000, 3000. Three-thousand deaths is too high a price to pay to win the hearts and minds of a people who have been brutalized by a fascist murderous dictator. Media has bent over backward to portray American soldiers as war criminals, branding them murderers without the benefit of due process, trying them instead in the court of public opinion—A public, I might add, that is as ignorant of the exigencies and hardships of war as is Media, despite losing some of their own in the conflict. (One bright spot in all this, is the embed program. A vast majority of journalists who spend time with military units in the field, come to respect and understand the mission… and the need for American soldiers in the far-flung corners of the world.)
Republicans are not only losing the battle for Iraq, and the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people through their poor defense of the war against the mostly baseless charges made by Liberals against them, but they are also losing the war for America, and for the very same reason.
The Democratic Party isn’t interested in bi-partisanship, and, quite frankly, neither are Republicans—each having their own agenda to push, both of which are diametrically opposed to one another. But the truly horrific aspect of this strangely familiar new front in the War on Terror is that Liberalism has managed to mirror Iran’s efforts to foment sectarian violence among Sunni and Shi’a, here at home between democrat and republican… liberal and conservative. The Mullah’s of Media have directed the flow of arms and aided the sectarian violence; championing Liberalism over Conservatism.
There is no actual blood running in the streets, no physical IED’s placed in the highways and hedges of America, but the violence is real. Men like Bill Maher, Sean Penn, John Murtha, and too many more to count, are all guilty of lobbing grenades into crowded marketplaces… and of whom blame President Bush for the resultant chaos. But what do Republicans do to counter these attacks? Nothing. They, like pre 9.11 America, refuse to believe they are at war with an enemy that wishes to see them dead—in a manner of speaking.
Democrats are choosing to win the war at home by losing the war abroad. They are cowards. And republicans aren’t much better as blind fools. We are at war… here in America! And this is where the decisive battle will be fought. Not on some distant foreign shore, but here.
If we lose the war here, we lose far more than the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. We lose the very heart and soul of American. There is a lot wrong with this country, much of it lying at the foot of Liberalism. But there is still some good left as well. And I happen to believe it's worth fighting for.
----
This post has kept me up at night for the better part of three weeks and is a long read for that very reason.
42 Comments:
This nation is at war with itself, from hooks to pins, from top to bottom, from the inside out, and that's what's reflected in Washington. Don't minimize that fact by blaming it all on Democratic lawmakers. In my view, most of this country's proiblems would be solved if every Republican was sent packing. You believe the opposite. That ain't a Washington problem; It's genuine, gut-wrenching difference in world view and in opinion of this nation's role in the world. Your side is ruining this country and a threat to the rest of the world, IMHO. And you think oppositely.
EL you make emotion driven decisions. I have emails and news reports and scientific studies and timelines and all sorts of other things to dispute many of the assertions in your above post. But I don't need to link to them because, none of them would give you the emotional impetus to change your viewpoint.
I'm just sad that you think I am actively trying to destroy america. Isn't that the entire point of your rant? LIBERALS SCHEME TO DESTROY AMERICA!!!!! Me and Marian and Al Franken.
Where did you get the article about Jamestown revisionist history? You don't provide a source. Is that because it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny? Also where did you get your schumer quote? I couldn't find it anywhere else.
"Instead I’m here to rail against Republicans in general, and Republican leaders specifically. I love how you stay on focus.
"Republicans are not only losing the battle for Iraq, and the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people through their poor defense of the war against the mostly baseless charges made by Liberals against them, but they are also losing the war for America, and for the very same reason."
Of all you wrote, this is the line that I agree with.
But they aren't losing the battle (and the Dems in power certainly aren't winning the battle) because the majority of our fellow citizens are dumb sheep gladly following evil advice. They're losing it (and the Republicans had control for a good number of years practically unoppposed - so they had the chance to pretty much whatever they want) because their policies failed.
We, the people, are not perfect, but we're not willing to suffer foolish policy unendingly.
Eric, as an aside, I generally like your writing. You have talent.
This piece, though, is over the top, as if written by a fevered imagination. Are you okay?
I don't think you're 'actively' trying to destroy America... Passively, perhaps, like Democrats and Republicans alike, across the broad spectrum of American society, but not 'actively'. Nor do I exclude myself in that. What am I doing other than expressing my beliefs to an increasingly hostile crowd?
No one's listening to me but my own private merry band of hecklers.
Let's go through and pick out the slanders:
1. "Yes, I said ‘traitors’."
2. "Carter didn’t recognize the opening salvo."
3. "President Reagan didn’t recognize the first strike"
4. "Someone should have recognized we were at war by the Clinton administration"
5. "castigate liberals and democrats for owning defeat in Iraq—they do."
6. "Liberalism and its wantonly perverse desire to see America less safe"
7. "The fact that Democrats and the ‘evils of Liberalism’ are mentioned at all is only partly due to their overt complicity in the defeat of America"
8. "Liberalism, and Democrats by extension, are just as much purveyors of terror within the United States of America as was al-Qaeda on 9.11."
9. "Anchors today interject their own opinions"
10. "This is perhaps one of the biggest delusions suffered by Media and her worshippers; namely liberals."
11. "Most Americans believe every word that comes out of their mouths."
12. "most people swallow it all without question—hook, line and sinker."
13. "Cronkite all but single handedly lost the Vietnam War for America."
14. "latter strives for a Utopian ideal akin to the vision of Marx and Engels."
15. "keep Media from using our every weakness against us to carve out their own corporate hegemonies, and personal and private Idahos."
16. Those who worship at the altar of Liberalism understand this."
17. "Those across the street at the Church of Conservatism apparently don’t."
18. "Liberalism has seized control of our schools, and through our schools are reshaping our history,"
19. "It is a pretend story that American schoolchildren are being spoon-fed by revisionist historians "
20. "message of the Jamestown revisionists is clear: Christian settlers were vicious savages, genocidal murderers and environmental terrorists."
21. "North America was dominated by warring tribes engaged in demonic activities like paganism,"
22. "many people could not see that an alien ideology had declared war upon Faith in America."
23. "Because of Liberal Academia, we have abortion on demand"
24. "Getting out of this hole into which Liberalism has flung us will not be easy, or painless"
25. "this ship must be turned or America will cease to be ‘America’."
26. "Republicans are asleep at the wheel."
27. "They gained power, and in 12 short years grew complacent and desirous"
28. "the things Democrats love—power and a secure seat in the houses of power."
29. "They forgot that they work for the people."
30. "Democrats have long forgotten this,"
31. "Republicans, ... have forgotten their roots."
32. "Washington and Media will recognize what they've done to this nation, and seek to make honest amends and reparations to the people they have brutalized."
33. "Truth doesn’t slander the president ... It doesn’t wish the vice-president dead. ... support its military ... pull the financial rug out from under them. ... But that is exactly where Liberalism is today."
34. "The Republican Party was the party of corruption"
35. "Their hypocrisy lies in their feigned outrage over fabricated scandals. because of their unbalanced and irrational hatred of George W. Bush."
36. "Liberals wish to loose this war in Iraq"
37. "Republicans have sat quietly by allowing them the stage"
38. "Rarely have Republicans challenged such charges."
39. "Liberals have engaged in heinous sophistry to discredit the war in Iraq"
40. "with little defense from the President and Republican leaders."
41. "It has been said that ‘Democrats own defeat in Iraq.’ But I would add ‘Media’ to that."
42. "Media has gleefully, in somber tones, celebrated every milestone of American casualties"
43. "Media has bent over backward to portray American soldiers as war criminals,"
44. "A public, I might add, that is as ignorant of the exigencies and hardships of war as is Media,"
45. "Republicans are not only losing the battle for Iraq, ... but they are also losing the war for America,"
46. "Democratic Party isn’t interested in bi-partisanship"
47. "neither are Republicans"
48. "Liberalism has managed to mirror Iran’s efforts to foment sectarian violence among Sunni and Shi’a,"
49. "The Mullah’s of Media ... championing Liberalism over Conservatism."
50. "Men like Bill Maher, Sean Penn, John Murtha, and too many more to count, are all guilty of lobbing grenades into crowded marketplaces"
51. "what do Republicans do to counter these attacks? Nothing."
52. "Democrats are choosing to win the war at home by losing the war abroad. They are cowards."
53. "And republicans aren’t much better as blind fools."
54. "We lose the very heart and soul of American."
55. "There is a lot wrong with this country, much of it lying at the foot of Liberalism."
I wanted a list of all the generalizations and unfounded assertions. I wanted you to see how you unleash a tide of vitriol at your foes.
I wanted you to see all these lines that you have taken in from conservative talking heads and assimilated into your viewpoint. You wanted to learn to think critically when you began this blog. That was your opening declaration. Well to do that you have to question your own thoughts and personal biases.
You wonder El why no one agrees with you? It's because you have excluded almost the entirety of humanity from your pinnacle of excellence.
You have four basic unfounded biases that denigrate almost everyone else in the world.
1. Christians are right, all other faiths are wrong.
2. Americans are right, all other nationalities are wrong.
3. ULTRA-Conservatives are right, all other ideologies are wrong.
4. ULTRA-Christians are right, all other faiths are wrong.
There is only a very small percentage of the population that agree with you. That's why you're surrounded by hecklers.
"You wanted to learn to think critically when you began this blog... to do that you have to question your own thoughts and personal biases."
You obviously assume I haven't done that.
I have no intention of arguing with any of you on this. I know what I believe, and why I believe it. Unless you can show incontovertible evidence that this is not so, I'm entitled to my beliefs every bit as much as you are to yours.
ER has it right, though: "...and you think oppositely." ER at least recognizes our ideological impasse for what it is... an impediment to meaningful dialog. And THAT'S what's wrong with America. It's you, and it's me, at an ideological impasse.
One difference though, Eric, is that you perceive Us to be out to destroy America. At least that's what your quotes say that Ben nicely repeated for us.
That is, you're saying, "Liberals wish to loose this war in Iraq"...NOT that "Liberals - who no doubt love our country and are trying to work for the best - are nonetheless making these mistakes..."
You seem to be assuming that everyone who doesn't agree with you is cowardly, hoping for terrorists to win, rejoicing in evil, etc.
While I suppose that I and the others here think you certainly love America and your God and are simply wrong on a few points.
There is no Us and Them thinking in that mentality and, as long as we remember we're one people, that is a step in the right direction. When we create Us/Them dichotomies (and all "sides" do it), then that is the foundation for war, not communion.
If They are intent on destroying the world, then They must be destroyed, right? If, on the other hand, They are simply wrong, then there is reason to believe we can find common ground.
I think I can sum up EL's anger and angst thusly:
(EL speaking): "If they'd just put me in charge for *one* term!"
I think the same thing.
:-)
"I've read enough of Ben T. and Dan's posts to see how hopelessly biased and blind they are. Although they accuse you as if you had no compassion, it is hard to see anything but a very strong harshness and judgmental attitude coming from them."
I will, as always, offer to humbly apologize if you will but be so kind as to point me to my sin.
That is, where have I accused Eric of having no compassion? The only thing I can find that I said directly about Eric was that I had no doubt that he loved God and country. I also asked out of concern if Eric were okay because his writing here has a feverish feel to it.
Is that so ghastly?
Where have I been biased? Biased towards whom or against whom?
Although there are certainly times for harshness (I will harshly yell at a friend to watch out if they're stepping in front of a car, for instance; I will harshly and rudely interfere if I saw someone abusing another), in what way have I been harsh?
Honestly, mom2, help me out here. I'm telling you the truth that all three posts now that I've made on this comment have, in my mind, been quite level-headed, calm, non-harsh and non-judgemental, refering instead directly to what Eric has written, paying him compliments on at least a couple of occasions. Where have I gone wrong??
I ask because I think this is sometimes at the root of our peoples' disagreements is that we sometimes see something in the others' words that is not their in intent. And that is why I honestly want to know where you see me being biased, harsh and accusing E or having no compassion.
...the guilty dogs tend to bark when you throw a stone at them, don't they, EL?
Neither of these three individuals are worthy of being called "American".
IMHO.
But D, they're merely exercizing what lies at the very heart of "being American". While you and I have fundamentally different points of view from these others, they can easily, as is their right as autonomous thinkers, think the same of us.
!!!They'd be wrong... :-D !!! but there it is nonetheless. Besides which, How do we define who is and who is not 'worthy'. It would be nice if they all just sat down and shut up, but that's not going to happen.
I also agree with you, Eric. When the media and the liberals insist that Bush is an evil terrorists and the terrorists are "freedom fighters", they are traitors.
And it's shameful that the Republican leaders in the house and senate do so little about that.
"Since you have such a "thin" skin and raise up and start barking every time you get criticized"
Actually, I have no problem at all with criticism. All I ask for my fellow Christians that, if they have a problem with me, that they identify that problem. This is the biblical command on how to deal with problems between believers.
And, I ask for that direct confrontation with factual data for a second reason: Too many people - christians sadly included - are making baseless accusations towards perceived enemies. This is what, probably more than anything else, will contribute to us losing the war at home.
If we can't discuss matters openly like adults, but instead resort to misrepresentations of others beliefs, we're sorta screwed.
So, I ask for you to please directly confront me with my sin not because I have a thin skin (I'm not sure that even makes sense), but because it's how we ought to do things as citizens and as Christians.
Well, I AM an adult, and I have some very adult questions for you...
Why is it the party that howled so loudly last year about Pork-Barrel spending, vowing to put an end to it once they took the reins, just yesterday passed a bill that tacked on more than 20 BILLION dollars worth of agriculture "Pork" to an Iraq War 'Supplimental' appropriations bill?
If, as Senator Reid said yesterday, the effort in Iraq was not worth one more drop of American blood, why have he and his approved a bill that establishes a pull out date of EARLY NEXT YEAR !!!??? If not one more drop of American blood is worth spilling, why not vote to cut off funding altogether like the MOVEON.ORGer's want?
Don't bother, I'll answer that...
Because it IS worth more American blood spilled if the pull-out begins in the midst of a presidential election, closing in on the Democratic National Convention!!!
Harry Reid WANTS to see more Americans die, otherwise he'd and his nasty crew would pull all funding immediately.
Furthermore! Let's call the pork by its REAL name.... Bribes. Pelosi and Reid has to bribe their own members to get the required votes to pass that abomination they're calling a responsible approach to ending the Iraq war. More than a few of those who voted FOR the measure AND, consequently, the pull out, publically avowed just prior to last falls election, that they would not vote for an 'artificial timeline' for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.
This Democratic congress are-- especially Pelosi and Reid -- Hypocrites... Plain and simple. They want America to lose the war, and they want Americans to die, and they want it all to continue right up to their Convention and the Election itself. They are playing politics with the lives of every soldier deployed in Iraq.
Why? Because they do not CARE about our military. History has amply demonstrated this, and it's being borne out yet again. They are playing politics with the lives of American troops... and they do not care.
As to Eric's accusation that the Democrats in Congress do not care about our troops, I'll only repeat what I said earlier:
If we can't discuss matters openly like adults, but instead resort to misrepresentations of others beliefs, we're sorta screwed.
This is despicable. If you truly believe this, then you need to be in a straitjacket:
"They want America to lose the war, and they want Americans to die, and they want it all to continue right up to their Convention and the Election itself."
What I find sickening-- disturbing, even --is your inability to see the politics being played with American lives. If, as Reid stated, this war is not worth one more drop of American blood, then he should bring them home TODAY... To tack pork on an appropriations bill, and a deadline for withdrawal suspiciously close to the Democratic Convention, and conveniently timed during the heat of the presidential election is, to borrow your word, 'Despicable', and the act of a liar and moral coward.
That you can't see the hypocrisy here is more than disturbing, it proves the point of my entire post.
And for that, I thank you.
The main hypocrisy I see is in ANY Republican or supposed conservative *daring* to even utter the word "hypocrisy."
I do reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks.
Re, "They want America to lose the war ..."
It is a fact that some on the fringes of the Left believe that this country has what's coming to it, for its past and current national sins against the indigenous peoples on this continent, as well as everyday people in other countries who are pawns of U.S. interests.
It is also a fact that some more mainstream liberals believe there is no shame in "losing" a war that was uncalled-for and immoral in the first place.
And, it is a fact that there are many people, left and right, who believe the war in Iraq is unwinnable, in any way that most people envision "victory," and that it is inevitable that the false "nation" of Iraq eventually will break up along its natural ethnic and religious lines -- and the sooner the better for all concerned.
Re, " ... and they want Americans to die ..."
No revision. This is utterly despicable.
Re, " ... and they want it all to continue right up to their Convention and the Election itself."
Not despicable, but too cynical and bitter. The House and Senaate, in Dem hands, are doing exactly what they were elected to do regarding Iraq. It's your president who will stubbornly hold on until "the last dog dies" and create the timing you fear.
Perhaps *that* is the source of your bitterness: George W. Bush has used the religious right, and traditional conservative Republicans, every single day of his presidency, and it looks like he will continue to do so until the bitter, bitter, bloody, bloody end.
You confuse bitterness with outrage and disbelief.
Outrage at your precious NeoCrat's blatant hypocrisy and cold-blooded disdain for the American soldier. That you champion-- by virtue of the fact you list them off as examples of nobility and patriotism --those who believe America is getting what she deserves, wishes to see her lose in Iraq, and desire to see every drop of blood spilled thus far wasted at the collapse of the new Iraq... well.... These people do not deserve to call themselves Americans. They are traitors. They deserve every woe promised the godless, for that is what they are.
Would that we could strip them of citizenship and set them adrift in international waters; preferably half a world away.
Let them walk through the terminal while TRUE Americans spit and heap scorn upon them. Let them suffer the public humiliation of being physically accosted by TRUE citizens of this country; the soldiers they so despise.
Let them eat coal and ashes.
Let them cry out to God for forgiveness with a true heart, and may he give them the gift of the Holy Ghost. Until then they are accursed and not my fellow Americans. Because I sit here right now before the monitor, reading your words, and I am stunned with disbelief that you and others of like mind and faith want Americans to die, because that is what you're asking for by insisting America must lose this war... for WHATEVER reason.
Politics have been played on both sides over the years, but only Democrats have actively sought to distort American history, distort American values, and reshape American culture into some Wellsian-style abomination... calling good evil, and evil good, with the equivalent moral high-ground of Dr. Moreau. Only Democrats have actively sought to subvert the Constitution, and to a great extent succeeding. It is Liberalism that has spawned generations of cultural and intellectual idiots... mind-numbed robotic fools.
For your information Jesus is not a liberal. He is not a conservative. He is not Democrat. He is not Republican. He is the Son of God, ABOVE the fray, and the more I hear from you the surer I become that you sir, are not one of His. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
BenT say's I'm a fanatic... as dangerous as muslim extremists, but that's the argument of one who has LOST the argument. You too, sir, have lost.
If I am a fanatic, so what!? I'm not among those who want Cheney dead. If I'm a fanatic, so what!? I'm not among those who cheered to hear of Tony Snow's recurrence of Cancer. If I'm a fanatic, so what!?
If I'm a fanatic, what does that say about you and those you champion?
A STANDARD POLICY of mine dictates that whatever I've posted, stays posted, however much I regret what I've posted.
The policy is, simply, "No Backspacing"
Having said that, I must iterate that my regret extends only to the fact that I allowed anger to click the 'Publish Your Comment' button. I don't regret, at this time, the content of what I've posted...
Today, it's what I believe.
The fact that you think you could even know, or even intelligently guess -- "the surer I become that you sir, are not one of His" -- makes me want to think the same of you.
But I wouldn't dare, and I honestly can't fathom how you would.
And, whether you meant to push "publish" or not, you, again -- again! again! -- put words in my mouth, just like you do Dan, just like you do Ben, just like you do everyone you disagree with! That's not opinion, or what you believe --it's just weird and tiresome.
You get so mad you can't think, or see!
Mom2, I am, in fact, praying for Tony Snow, because that, of course, is more important, to him right now, than the fact that I think he's working for the biggest failure of a president in my lifetime, with the most corrupt since Grant's.
Calm down. What I wrote about what some believe about the war in Iraq was called analysis. It most certainly was not: "champion(ing) ... by virtue of the fact you list them off as examples of nobility and patriotism -- those who believe America is getting what she deserves, wishes to see her lose in Iraq, and desire to see every drop of blood spilled thus far wasted at the collapse of the new Iraq."
Amazing. I called them neither noble nor patriotic. I do call them honest, and I do declare that this whole country needs to take such assertions seriously.
This country has gotten where it has by God's blessings on individuals on one hand, and by collectively raping, pillaging, burning and murdering on the other. Facts, man.
As for the waste of blood in Iraq: The credit for that falls at the feet of George W. Bush, those who voted him in for the second term -- and the Democratic Party if it doesn't at least try to impeach him and the vice president. This, I believe.
Traitor...what does that word mean?
One who has abandoned their country. One who does not deserve to be called an American.
Mom2, Re, "You can say it is his policies, but that's an excuse for your own behavior."
You're just wrong. I've met the man, have shaken his hand, and was part of a very-small-group discussion with him, twice. He's a likeable guy. And he, is a menace to the country. His party is increasingly ineffectual, so I have hope.
Oh, and Mom2, I'd prefver that if you have remarks, snide or otherwise, about what I write on my blog, that you have the minimal guts it would require to leave the comments there, where they belong.
And, EL, I missed this the first time: "Only Democrats have actively sought to subvert the Constitution." That's just wack.
Anger crafted that particular statement ER.
Exercising my right to 'revise and extend' it should read:
It is the Democrats/Liberals who have sought in recent decades, and are presently trying, to subvert and/or destroy the Constitution, i.e., the whole 'church and state' folderol, and Roe spring immediately to mind.
...Including the recent Kelo decision rewriting 'eminent domain' and butchering individual property rights.
Why in the Sam Hill would you think the ERs are "upper crust"? Wow. I'm flabbergasted. Guess what? Ph.D's don't come cheap. They cost as much as a house. I'm not kidding. So, whatever income we have above the mean, trust me, out outgo is higher. Which is why I've been freaking out about this pendign move to Colorado! "Upper crust"! LOLOL. Where *did* you get that idea???
EL, there is nothing more Southern, or Baptist, or conservative, or old-style FUNDAMENTALIST, than a vocal, unapologetic and strict adherence to the separation of church and state in this country!
EL, put this in yer dadgum faux-fundy, nonconservative pipe and smoke it. :-)
Don't make me drive down there and learn you some church history! :-)
Friday, June 29 -- 8 a.m. Baptist Unity Rally for Religious Freedom on the U.S. Capitol grounds
In May 1920, George W. Truett, a Baptist preacher from Dallas, Texas, climbed the east steps of the U.S. Capitol to address a throng of some 10,000 onlookers. His purpose in addressing the crowd was to rally support for religious liberty and its CONSTITUTIONAL corollary, the SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. Religious, political and educational leaders will celebrate our Baptist heritage by reading excerpts of Truett’s speech.
Oh, and Kelo was wack, but to call it a liberal decision, when virtually every eminent doman case aids BUSINESS, that's wack, too.
The phrase 'Separation of Church and State' appears no where in the constitution. It does appear, however, in Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut and has no force of law. Some like to point to that letter as confirmation of Jefferson's 'Deist' creds, but were that so, can someone please tell me why Jefferson went to church as president, and did so in the House of Representatives? This man who supposedly believed in an eternal wall of separation between church and state regularly attended church services inside Congress, which were presided over by every Protestant denomination. Jefferson's idea of 'separation of church and state' meant there should be no establishment of a 'state sect'.
In 1774, while serving in the Virginia Assembly, Jefferson personally introduced a resolution calling for a day of fasting and prayer.
In 1779, as governor of Virginia, Jefferson decreed a day of "public and solemn thanksgiving and prayer to Almighty God."
As president, Jefferson signed bills that appropriated financial support for chaplains in Congress and the armed services.
On March 4, 1805, President Jefferson offered "A National Prayer for Peace, " which petitioned "Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen."
Jefferson was no deist.
It was not the intention of Jefferson or the founders to build a wall of separation between church and state. The late U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in a 1985 ruling in Wallace v. Jaffree: "It is impossible to build sound constitutional doctrine upon a mistaken understanding of Constitutional history... The establishment clause had been expressly freighted with Jefferson's misleading metaphor for nearly forty years... There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the framers intended to build a wall of separation [between church and state]... The recent court decisions are in no way based on either the language or intent of the framers."
This is perhaps the biggest lie being foisted upon the American people by Liberalism in General, and Democrats, and Media, and the American education system specifically. That the average American can read the First Amendment and see in it such a separation points to yet another failure of Liberal theology, and that is the inability of its victims to read and understand the english language; specifically, their inability to decipher meaning from the words and their usage, as determined by the structure of sentence, and arrive at an overall meaning/intent.
However much you paid for your PhD,... you were cheated if you genuinely believe our Constitution has embodied within its substance a designed and intended Separation of Church and State.
This nation would do well to abandon Public Educations' current curriculum and return to classical education, namely, the Trivium; the 'Liberal' arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric. Were this to happen, it is my firm and sincerest belief that 'Liberalism' would die out in a single generation... That generation would see Liberalism for the lie it is.
Mom2, read some history.
El, I'm not the one with the Ph.D.
And you are simply blind to the history of this country. You dare to call liberals the revisionists!
The Father of Liberalism is Tho. Jefferson, who was, in fact, a Deist -- and he dismissed most of the Scripture as unimportant, and even detrimental, to the Gospel itself. As. Do. I. He did not worship the Bible. Nor do I.
You pick and chose your precious quotes from the Founging Fathers just like you pick your faves from the Bible. LOL.
Yer no fanatic. You don't know enough about your own religious history to be considered a fanatic.
By the way, anyone interested can get a copy of Sister Miriam Joseph's book 'The Trivium' here.
Fair warning, it's difficult to digest, but well worth the effort. Learn to grasp the principles of Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric and you'll never need to rely on 'Talking Heads' to tell what's 'really' happening, and you'll be able to see through the political bulls**t... You'll be able to figure it all out for yourself.
And THAT is how one learns to think for ones self.
All of which simply means we are back to the aforementioned impasse.
You think I'm ignorant of History... I KNOW you're ignorant of History.
And a spoon-fed, brain-washed, lemming.
"[Jefferson] dismissed most of the Scripture as unimportant, and even detrimental, to the Gospel itself. As. Do. I."
And there you have it... You're a deist, not a Christian. Jefferson, however, was no deist, but you apparently are.
And therein lies another uncrossable bridge: You think I'm a dupe. I think you're a dupe.
The only answer, for those who represent us, is COMPROMISE.
For us, however, I expect no quarter from you, And you should expect none from me. On politics.
And on the Really Important Things, we meet at the foot of the Cross. The Cross. Only the Cross -- not doctrine, not interpretation, not even the Bible itself! Not anything else but the Cross and our mutual surrender to it.
Which I bring up only because in the heat of anger you sillily found reason in our political disagreements to bring it up.
Just stop. You are as stuck with me as a brother in Christ as I am stuck with you! Bw-ahahahaha.
(Oh, and, really, Jesus IS a liberal. Not a Dem, for God's sake. But a liberal -- although in 1861-1865, he mighta even been thought of temporarily as a Repub. Because he is always on the side of the least of those amongst us, as well as the least amongst our neighbors. Al. Ways.)
Re, "You're a deist, not a Christian."
Damn you, Sir. Damn your eyes. Damn you for pretending to be God. Damn you for so sullying the name of Christ I want to puke. If I were not a Christian and you were the only example before me, I would run from the Cross, and you would answer for it.
Damn you and your meanness, masquerading as clever ability with words. And damn you for judging me and others -- because you ARE being judged. Right now.
I'm curious, Eric, what you do with scholarly works that claim that Jefferson was a Deist and his Jefferson Bible?
Not a debate I really want to get in to, as it's tangential to the point here, except inasmuch as coming to grip with sources seems to be part of the beginning points of some disagreements between the so-called Left and Right.
These people do not deserve to call themselves Americans. They are traitors. They deserve every woe promised the godless, for that is what they are.
Would that we could strip them of citizenship and set them adrift in international waters; preferably half a world away.
Let them walk through the terminal while TRUE Americans spit and heap scorn upon them. Let them suffer the public humiliation of being physically accosted by TRUE citizens of this country; the soldiers they so despise.
Ah, I wondered what you meant by "freedom." Now it's so clear! Beatings and exile for people who don't show sufficient respect for your leaders and their military. You are not so homeless in this modern world as i once feared: have you considered emigrating to Zimbabwe?
Dan-- your question assumes my sources are less than scholarly, and I guess that's fair since I too question the scholarship of those sources that claim Jefferson to be something his very public acts speak to the otherwise.
If he was a deist, so wht? The very fact that he went to church... regularly... within the House of Representatives, and publically called for national days of fasting, prayer, thanksgiving, and in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, as well as appropriating monies for congressional and military chaplains, demonstrates that to HIS mind at least, there was no conflict with the 1st Amendment in doing so... No constitutional 'Separation of Churhc and State' existed. Why 'supposedly' intelligent and scholarly men today believe otherwise is a mystery. The fact that many do is proof enough to me and others of like mind that their deception, intentional or otherwise, has been detrimental to the comity in Amerian politics and society as a whole-- currently, none exists.
I'd have more to say, but I have to get to work.
And thank you Mom, those were the good ol' days-- not mine! --but not too far removed... sadly.
ER! We will never agree on matters of doctrine so why do you egg me on, and why do we always seem to arrive at such bitter grouds? I wish it were not so. Believe it or not I do appreciate much of what you have to say.
Stockmann-- It was an illustration... a reversal of fortunes for those who currently treat our soldiers in just such a manner. I certainly do not advocate violence. The stripping of citizenship however....?
Well... I haven't decided yet.
"a reversal of fortunes for those who currently treat our soldiers in just such a manner."
And who amongst the Left is advocating the beating, stripping of citizenship and exile of our soldiers? Or would it be fair to say that this is a mischaracterization of those who are opposed to this war?
To some extent perhaps, but I'm speaking more of spitting and beating than the other. There have been numerous examples of Lefties spitting upon our soldiers AND physically accosting them. They have been picketed at Walter Reed, and called baby killers... warmongers... and any number of other epithets.
Opposition to the war is one thing but these liberals delight in humiliating and degrading the very ones who sacrifice their own hopes and dreams for the future to ensure the same for these ingrates.
For the rest I readily admit I was inspired by Edward Everett Hale's 'A Man Without a Country'. (For those not familiar with the reference they can find it at Project Gutenberg. It's a free download-- your choice of format)
My point being, most of these people have no idea what it cost this country to be the 'bastion of freedom' it is today. Anyone who wishes to say otherwise should go and live in another country and try to order their lives there as they do here. What they would soon discover is a serious curtailing of their personal freedoms. America is by no means perfect, but at present she's the best bet there is.
The America these ingrates are fighting for is so far off the mark in terms of what our Constitution describes... far more off the mark than our America today, which is also far from what our Constitution describes. America has lost her way, and Liberalism has played no small part in its errors... Liberalism and the false doctrine it preaches.
And the Education System has been primarily instumental in America's deviation from the Constitution, and the ideals and truths it both set forth on paper, and represented in the hearts and minds of its Framers. JFK would likely not recognize today's Democratic Party; so terribly far it has fallen in a mere 40 years.
Every empire that has ever risen has, in time, fallen. America will be no different. She is already markedly different from the fledgling that rejected the comfort and protection of its mother's wings. Babylon fell, Persia fell, the Mede's fell, Rome fell, the Catholic Church has fallen, France, Britain, Spain-- all fallen down. America will be no different.
Already the cracks are beginning to show in this great facade we have built. America cannot be held to her word. She is, as bin Laden and others have declared, a 'Paper Tiger', despite the fact that we are capable of leveling any country we choose to rubble without even sending in a single unit of infantry. America is reduced to bickering amongst its many factions, one of which-- that being Liberalism --seems intent on destroying America, brick by brick, to reshape it as a kinder, gentler, nation in a world that is neither kind, NOR gentle.
Who will pay for all those social and wealth redistribution programs, when America falls? What will Liberalism do to then? What will Liberalism have to say then? What will Liberalism do when, as is sure to happen, a nuclear device is detonated in New York... or D.C.? Will they say, 'Woe is us! We should have listened to Conservatism!'??? Of course not! It will say, 'This is all Bush's fault! A pox on him and his whole house! A pox on conservatives and their weak sentimentalities! A pox on everyone who didn't support our effette policies of appeasement and surrender! Damn Bush and everyone who ever spoke good of him!'
Liberalism is a disease... a mental disorder. From which nothing good can come.
But that's just one man's opinion.
Post a Comment
<< Home