We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, December 4. 2010
I know people usually do not feel that they have time to click on embedded videos, but this one captures so many conversations I have had, over the years, that I have to post it.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Homosexuals are born that way, it's not a choice. Isn't that creationism?
Evolution says that traits that make it harder for an organism to live will be bred out of the organism. Homosexuality makes it harder for the homosexual to reproduce. Evolution would mean homosexuality would decline and be non-existant.
Apparently, progressives are both creationists and evolutionists.
Nice props for Texas at ~6:15
Liberal: The Democrats are destined to win....in 40 years...
Conservative:Because in 40 years, the country will have the same demographics as [the mostly conservative State of] Texas does right now?
That world view [that gives birth to political correctness] is liberalism, the belief in equality and non-discrimination as the ruling principles of society. Liberalism attacks all the larger wholes—natural, social, and spiritual—that structure man’s existence, because those larger wholes create differences and distinctions which violate the rule of equality and non-discrimination. Liberalism attacks God, truth, religion, objective morality, standards of excellence, social traditions, the family, parental authority, sex differences, nation, ethnicity, and race. It aims at a world of liberated, equal human selves, with no God above them and no country or culture around them, free to interact on a basis of total freedom and equality with all other human selves on earth. To achieve this universal freedom and equality, the ability of actual peoples to define and govern themselves must be eliminated. Democratic and constitutional self-government must be replaced by the regime of the global elite, a regime that is beyond criticism and democratic accountability because it represents and embodies the very principle of liberal goodness: the equality of all.
That’s the liberal vision. Political correctness is one of the weapons by which this vision is imposed, it is not the vision itself.
I'm pretty sure political correctness springs from neo-Marxism and Gramsci's notions. They can't really corrupt the institutions without our consent. Sometimes we consent but a lot of times, we protest. They need to manufacture something that looks like consent. That's why they insist that even if it isn't legally wrong to speak up about some leftist atrocity you disagree with, that it's morally wrong to speak up or somehow unacceptable. It's not a home run for them (consent) if you say nothing, but it gets them to third base because they can say, "look, nobody disagrees with 'diversity,' global warming, _____, so if you were to disagree it'd be unacceptable."
They can't win if we don't consent and particularly if we speak up.
That was hilarious and so effective. It's too bad that 15 minute video isn't mandatory at every college campus.
Bomber Girl, You are right. I'll take it further. The video is a piece of crap.
Bomber Girl and Cilla, does this video counter your political leanings?
I thought it was pretty funny. Although I hope liberals don't watch it. It's still amazingly easy to flummox them with those arguments. They might actually prepare some better defenses if they were to get out of the chamber on occasion.
and the HAL reference at the end gave me a chuckle too.
I live in a college town. I can't tell you how many conversations like that I've had since I came here. Everyone assumes that you're a democrat. My favorite was when a woman told me that not only were republicans stupid, they were uneducable. She never bothered to ask what my politics were. I never bothered to be offended. Sticks and stones....
Big Al, no, I just prefer authentic discussion, even among those who disagree, over an assumption of stupidity and a lack of respect on either side. People have more nuanced points of view and labels often do them and our country a disservice.
People have more nuanced points of view and labels often do them and our country a disservice.
Perhaps you didn't pick up a nuance of the video: that it appears to have been done to illustrate some lib talking points- with effective counters to them. I see the theme of the video as "How to Defend Yourself in a Debate With a Lib." The counter-arguments are calm and logical. No one is claiming that all libs spout all of those talking points at all times, which appears to be your assumption when you state that "People have more nuanced points of view." Of course they do. But the odds are that in an exchange with a lib, a wingnut will encounter at least one of the lib talking points expressed in this video.
Big Al, no, I just prefer authentic discussion, even among those who disagree, over an assumption of stupidity and a lack of respect on either side.
Do libs claim that those who disagree with them are, e.g., stupid and/or ignorant and/or bigoted? I will not claim that all libs do it all the time, but on numerous occasions I have been accused of all of those things for having the temerity to disagree with a lib. IMHO, this is one of the main lib talking points: we libs are brighter/better educated/more enlightened etc. than those wingnuts. I call libs doing this playing the Adlai card, as they have been doing it at least that long. ["Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"] It also might be called playing the Folk Song Army card.Given the long-time lib view of wingnuts, I find your statement rather interesting.
What is being skewered in this video is sloppy thinking. By and large the video is not saying to the lib, "You are stupid," but rather "Your argument is self-contradictory," or some such statement.
I speak as a Post Liberal born and raised in bluest libland.
Gringo did a pretty good job of replying, Bomber Girl. I'm appreciative, because I'm cooking a whole 'nother Thanksgiving dinner today, thus limited time!
Not realistic, the liberal girl showed too much charm & personality.
Yes! Self-righteous rudeness would have spilled through within 2 minutes. Then high-pitched professed sympathy for all the suffering whoever’s. Name-calling calling and shouting are the closers in lib debate.
Thanks for your reply, Gringo, but I still find the tone of the clip condescending and as if they were speaking to someone who is brain dead. I imagine, based on certain comments made above, that some may consider liberals to be brain dead as a matter of course but I have friends all over the political spectrum and for me this is not a productive "dialogue."
I will agree with you on a point (I think I get your point), Bomber Girl:
I could send this video out to a thousand of my liberal friends, and not one of them will be anything other than offended, nor will they find it persuasive in any way.
What is to be done? I don't even know how I was ever influenced one way or the other, or how and what ever woke me up to the truth.
This isn't an argument with you, BTW... just me beating my head against the wall, trying to make sense of life.
(Thanksgiving 2.0 was really good, BTW!)
Like it or not, the video accurately describes some lib talking points.
From the video: “Liberal elites are the brightest and best people to make decisions for everyone else.” [at the beginning] This is a very common lib talking point. Had I money for each time some lib said it to me, I would be rich.
From a family friend’s Xmas message in 2008: We start the New Year with great hope that our President elect with his vast intelligence and a cadre of the best around him can pull the Country out of this abyss we find ourselves in.
Halberstram’s “The Best and Brightest.”
Recall all the campaign claims about Obama’s high IQ, without any documentary evidence.
Need I find more quotes ?
As the video points out, this talking point contradicts another lib talking point: the Democrats are the “party of the people.” I call this the Lake Wobegon paradox. Libs claim that they are of the elite, that Democrats are brighter than average.Yet by definition, “the people” are average. Do you object to this contradiction being pointed out?
From the video: “Everyone would be a liberal if only America weren’t so dumb.” [last 1-2 minutes]
The above talking point from the video bears some resemblance to the following quotes.
The POTUS: “Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now, and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time, is because we’re hard-wired not to always think clearly when we’re scared. And the country is scared, and they have good reason to be.”
Senator Kerry: “Facts, science, truth seem to be significantly absent from what we call our political dialogue.”
The implication here is that Senator Kerry and the POTUS have “facts and science” on their side, while those who disagree with them do not. If all people were only as smart as the Senator and the POTUS, so they could marshall facts and science….[BTW, did either the Senator or the POTUS take any math or science courses in college?]
The video accurately describes some lib talking points. I fail to see what your objection is to that. Granted, not all libs will profess all of these talking points all the time. As I see it, your objection is that lib talking points are effectively skewered.
It is difficult to skewer arguments and NOT be condescending. What do you consider a nice way of stating, “Your claim is not consistent with fact X?” In addition, many libs find the mere existence of Post Liberals to be condescending to them. “I used to be a lib, but upon close examination of the facts, I decided to become a wingnut.” Neoneocon has written on this. That has also been my experience. [Given the decades-long condescending attitudes of libs towards those who disagree with them, my reply to any lib who finds the video condescending is as follows: heist on your own petard.]
With regard to treatment of the Indians and female suffrage, I am not sure that the video is correct . IMHO, there is about equal blame with regard to Indians. For example, it was Andrew Jackson who forced Indians from the Southeast US to go to Oklahoma. Most of the Indian Wars after the Civil War took place under Republican administrations. However, I doubt that Democrats greatly dissented from government policy at the time. Regarding womens' suffrage, I have no idea.
OTOH, the video is spot on that the Democratic Party was the party of slavery, secession, and segregation. These facts are conveniently absent from the Democratic Party website.
Well Big Al, if you had everything in life figured out, it might get dull. But a good Thanksgiving meal (or two) is a good place to start.